Lee Corbin wrote:
> Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> > I believe that [Fred Reed's essay] violates many of the list
> > rules and should not be on this list. Only the fact that it
> > was not aimed at specific list members has prevented me from
> > seeking a ban on this topic and the posters who distributed
> > this garbage.
> Oh great. Here we have an issue that taxes the emotional
> control and objectivity even of extropians and... sure
> enough, someone wants to ban it. Do you not wonder then,
> that people want to ban cloning and everything else that
> makes them feel uncomfortable?
What makes you think we don't have better things to do than have
our emotional control and objectivity taxed at the moment? Do
really think that no one would want to forgo things like the
post on here for some other reason beyond just being
Where is your objectivity when it comes to a balanced view of
list siblings? Are you the pot calling the kettle black when it
comes to failing in objectivity and assuming the worse about
when they don't want to play?
> The worst thing that I can say about the act of *posting*
> such an article is that it is in poor taste insofar as
> many of the lurkers are concerned. (I'll defend that thesis
> some other time.) But for extropians, it is obviously
> exactly what is needed, and the 800 lurkers have to gear
> up to the level of perspicacious analysis plain speaking
> that often occurs here.
You might believe it is exactly waht is needed but many here
disagree. I think that it is a pretty ham-fisted way of
the problems of objectivity in discussions if that is your
> If we cannot learn how to be objective and calm with
> ideas that disturb *us*, then how are we to approach
> telling others about Jupiter brains, uploading, and
> the singularity?
One can be utterly objective and calm and still say, "I am not
interested in discussing thus and such subject right now or in
endless analysis of the motivations and sub-motivations of what
made the discussion to date what it was or was not."
> Nonsense. This is yet another symptom of the fact that
> you are made very uncomfortable by the possibility that
> while not literally correct, the essay delves into "areas
> that people were not meant to discuss". One instance
> of the reposting was done as a rather humorous comeback
> to someone who had written
Lee, you need a vacation. Seriously. Nothing is more boringly
needlesome than a rehash of a contentious disagreement.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:03 MDT