I will try to answer your question better. Modern men evolved
technologically from cave men. Mental affluence and cognition were
required to do that. Since this forum seems to be about BETTERMENT of
the human race, making a correlation between increased thinking and
advancement might be appropriate.
Our lives are quite far removed from the elements of nature compared to
cave men. I think of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Where are we on that
hierarchy? We do not worry about food so much as what type of food. We
do not worry about air so much as the quality of air. Each of these are
valuations. We live in a world of ongoing valuations, discriminations,
preferences, and choice. Sooooooooo, resubjecting this all back to
realism again is somewhat naive.
Some valuations can be taken for granted. Some of these valuations
involve human potential. Hey, we're talking about CHOICE anyway, right,
and the virtual world we live in is based on prevailing valuations, so
how are thoughts of human potential NOT simply another valuation? Well
they are, but it also matters who is making the valuations and forcing
others to accept them.
I hope I have answered your question to your satisfaction.
>From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin@tsoft.com>
>Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:18:05 -0700
>
>David McDivitt writes another rejoinder without addressing
>*any* of the questions that I asked, exactly as he did the
>time before. Well... that's one form
>of dialog: we just make short speeches to each other. But
>I don't like it so much.
>
>Lee
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-extropians@extropy.org
>> [mailto:owner-extropians@extropy.org]On Behalf Of David G. McDivitt
>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 10:50 PM
>> To: extropians@extropy.org
>> Subject: Re: Nominalism
>>
>>
>> You seem to be making solipsistic arguments. But I like solipsism.
>>
>> I see each person as having individual discreet realities, rather than
>> there being one external reality. Community happens when individual
>> people choose to place their separate realities in sync. If a fireball
>> crosses the sky it is not one head which turns but many heads. Each
>> person sees, but there are as many fireballs as there are people, with
>> each representing an entire process going from stimulus to recognition.
>>
>> With all the protocols existent in science today regarding publishing
>> and duplication of results, I fail to see why people cannot acknowledge
>> authority and societal factors in truth and knowledge.
>>
>> I've changed, actually. There was a time when I sought to reduce as much
>> as possible, and I still pride myself on that ability. I used to always
>> break things down to the smallest possible terms, but realized one day
>> the cognition required to facilitate so much detail at once is immense,
>> and I conceded to not keep up. It was a good lesson for me. There is so
>> much more power in abstraction.
>>
>> >From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin@tsoft.com>
>> >Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:45:16 -0700
>> >
>> >Why are you more certain that you live in a world of language,
>> >objectification, and mental abstractions, than you live in a
>> >world of earth, air, fire, and water? Such things as language
>> >could not exist were they not evolved in matter creatures, nor
>> >could mental abstractions. You are choosing to build up your
>> >model of what the world is on top of very shaky ideas that you
>> >can't even know that other people possess, because you can't
>> >even know that there are other people.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >How do you know that there is a "we"? I suggest that your inference
>> >that there are other people is much weaker than your inference that
>> >there is a 3-D world outside your skin.
-- http://www.geocities.com/dmcdivitt_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:20 MDT