Charles D Hixson wrote:
>
> On Saturday 04 August 2001 09:38 pm, you wrote:
> > Eric writes
> >
> > ...
> >
> > We can agree on rules of logic. We can even agree on what
> > constitutes evidence and what are strong and weak arguments. We
> > perhaps cannot agree on values.
> >
> > >...
> Actually, I feel that it is relatively certain that we cannot agree
> (perfectly) on values. This goes all the way back to the point
> that if two children have access to a piece of candy, only one of
> them can eat it. They may be friends, but each will value most
> highly the outcome that benefits them. There is no logical way
> around this. Now how severe the conflict is will depend on
> several things, for example, how hungry each is. But that the
> valuations will be different is inescapable. They aren't using the
> same sensory organs. The candy that I taste isn't tasted by you.
>
This is scarcity thinking. It is part of what we must move
beyond if we are going to have a future we want to arrive at.
In a world of MNT there is not much reason for physical
scarcity.
> I'm not even bringing in the social conflicts: "I'm not hungry
> now, but if I don't eat it, then she will eat it, and I won't be
> able to eat it later, when I would want to, so I'll eat it now."
> (Were you to ask me if that was rational, I'd be forced to say no,
> but I almost remember thinking that and making that decision. It
> was accompanied by a feel of defiance... that isn't the decision
> that my mother would want me to make.)
>
Your mother is of course irrelevant. If I don't need it now and
she does then why shouldn't I enjoy her happiness?
> And this was with me sister. This was with the person I
> occasionally risked physical injury to defend. Not some stranger,
> with whom I wouldn't have the shared "family"ness. I was less
> willing to share with strangers. (I find myself quite convinced by
> Dawkins "The Selfish Gene" ... the predictions that it makes seem
> to match those that I have been able to observe around me. And the
> arguments aren't unreasonable... they merely require a different
> point of view than was standard in school.)
This may match our default programming but we are not limited to
our default programming unless we choose to be.
How will you hack yourself today?
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:03 MDT