In article , Kirk Gordon wrote:
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.
....
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

hmmm, did KG, in the last century _really_ mean "book", or did he
mis-speak? if yes, _what_ did he mean...., and.... my great grand-
kids can't wait. --Loren