Mark Winlund wrote:
"Kirk Gordon" wrote

Heinlein was good at asking provocative questions, and at providing
answers which, I believe, were intended to be extreme rather than
accurate. Rather than a true sage or philosopher, IMHO, he was
more like an extremely interesting mega-troll.

You do realize this is sacrilege?

Certainly! And I'm thinking Heinlein would approve of sacrilege, if
it's for a good and noble purpose.

You may recall that Heinlien had an answer to all these problems.
In "Stranger In A Strange Book"

Though it *was* a strange book, I think it was "Stranger in a Strange
Land".

Strange book... Strange land... Strange ideas... It all runs
together in my mind.

My marital skills are certainly ineffective around guns... I am
quite docile when the better half starts packing....

If she needs to pack heat, then you're not nearly docile enough.
Mine just gives me a look, and I don't need any more persuasion than
that to act nice.

Heinlein was an optimist - even to the point of being irresponsibly
optimistic about human nature, and about the homogeneity of
motivations that drive six billion individual people.

Yes he was.... Arthur C. Clarke was another.

Excellent post, Kirk. You are one of the better thinkers in this
group.

laughing NOW who's the optimist? Thank you very much for such a
compliment; but I suspect that my own thoughts, like Heinlein's and
Clark's, will be easier to evaluate (if anyone cares to) in retrospect.
Fortunately for all concerned, I'll be dead and gone by then, and
won't be able to argue anymore.

KG
--
I'm sick of spam.
The 2 in my address doesn't belong there.