From: "Technotranscendence" <neptune@mars.superlink.net>
> The problem here is that this might lead to a confusion of words with
> concepts.
Yes, I agree. That's why I think it's dishonest to use the word "mind" to
indicate something akin to "soul." The ghost in the machine, or the homunculus
in the brain, or the phlogiston in the flame, are all useless hypotheses, and
un-extropian wastes of time.
From: <Lucylou98@aol.com>
> Do they actually deny the differences exist, or like me, do they think said
> differences are not a factor in leadership abilities?
If they're not a factor in leadership abilities, then they should not be a
factor in criminal tendencies. But they are... in both cases, IMO.
From: "Chris Hibbert" <chris@pancrit.org>
> I
> want our government (little as I want a government) to act in ways that
> are allowed by the laws, and consistently with freedom.
That will require getting rid of the socialists in the US government.
(Socialists are the ones who think government can fix everything.)
From: "Kai Becker" <kmb@kai-m-becker.de>
> Oh, I'm sorry. It's so easy then. Just raid the offices of Al'Qaeda in the
> US and get their member lists...
I don't think you're sorry, you're just misinformed. It's not easy at all to
find terrorist groups in the US, because of the civil liberties that US
residents enjoy.
> I repeat: Who _exactly_ are "they"? What are the criteria? Which of the 276
> mio. persons in the US are "members of their group"? What about the
> "presumption of innocence"?
Who they are is a really good question (and a very obvious one) to which FBI,
CIA, etc., would definitely like to know the answer. The criteria will have to
be left up to those whose job it is to find the terrorists. The same applies
to deciding who are members of terrorist groups. Yes, what about "presumption
of innocence"? Mothers Against Drunk Drivers disposed of that presumption
years ago. Just the fact that someone has a tiny amount of alcohol in their
blood is sufficient grounds for conviction and incarceration, even when no
person or property has been harmed in any way, and no crime has been
committed. Have you ever complained about that insidious destruction of civil
rights? People who complain about erosion of civil liberties because of the
treatment of one tenth of one percent of Arabs/Muslims in the US are much too
late and often motivated by personal ulterior agendas, IMO.
AFAIC, religious fanatics are far, far more dangerous than any number of drunk
drivers.
If you would like to start a campaign against religious fanatics, I'll help.
--- --- --- --- ---
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego, human values, scientific relinquishment, malevolent AI,
non-sensory experience, SETI
We move into a better future in proportion as science displaces superstition.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:29 MDT