> >And if too many make the boat it's going to be crowded. If
> >posthumanity is going to be a highly competitive place to live, why
> >not get a head start? Cull the herd.
>
> Well, if this approach fascinates you (it repels me) you'll probably
enjoy
> Greg Bear's new novel Slant. He even cites Extropians by name as
respected
> in one respect by the group in the book that thinks along the lines
you're
> suggesting. (I know you're not necessarily advocating these means.)
There
> will be a review of Slant in Extropy Online very soon.
Why does it repel you? Extropy is about rational thought, so what
rational reason have you got against human culling, genocide or
general murder? Of course, you could argue that culling people is a
bad idea because maybe you'll accidentally kill someone who would have
been useful, etc. But I'm talking about the act, what I want to know
is for what rational reason does this *idea* repel you?
I ask this not just because it's a difficult question, but because
Extropy has rationality at its core. Now it's possible to think of
rational reasons for war, genocide, culling or anything else you care
to mention, but when a reason against it is called for we tend to fall
back on morality, ethics, and right and wrong. These IMHO are weak
arguments against raw and unrelenting rationality, so what defenses do
we have against someone who's taken a very different slant on Extropy?
--Wax
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com