Robert J. Bradbury wrote:>
> This does of course raise very *interesting* questions as to whether,
> in the future, when humans have much higher inter-individual communication
> bandwidths, they will choose to operate more as collectives (e.g. the
borg)
> and less as rugged individuals.
Why do we have to wait for brain transplants wirelessly connect through the
Internet? We have had this for 10s of thousands of years. It is called
language,
culture, mythology, science, art, common sense.............
> I cannot help but conclude that in the light of rational thought and
> the experiences on which those thoughts are based, we are as one.
> Only if you have different experiences or think irrationally can
> you be an "individual".
I would agree with that with qualifications. First, any new experiences will
be
interpreted and understood within the framework of collective experience, if
it is that new, at least to serve as a foundation. Second, in thinking
irrationally,
that has to be qualified. Even people who think irrationally do so with well
established logic base to support it. Whether we agree or not, or provide
evidence to undercut key premises of their logic structure is another
matter.
If it is instead driven by mental illness or psychological trama, we do not
qualify that as individual expression. Except in the past when there lacked
the understanding of what mental illness is.
Robert Wasley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:44 MDT