>THIS, I think, is the axiom over which we most disagree. *I* would say
>that if a person desired to listen and thereby have their fundamentals
>destroyed, and they did so, then they would actually be BETTER off as a
>result, because they got what they desired. (By axiom A2.2.) I would go
>on to say that since your axiom does not seem to take this into account,
>you have an entirely different system of moral value than I do. As you may
>have already noticed, I am a utilitarian, and believe utility to be
>intrisically valuable. What, precisely, is your theory of morality?
Oh, how much room do I get? Basically, high-quality information is "good",
low-quality information is "bad", but there are several criteria for
quality, one of which is the context in which the information is presented,
and if the context is that you're talking to a fundamentalist lunatic and
you know that the information you present can harm this person, the quality
of your information is not optimal, because you would have to present it in
small, digestable chunks instead of revealing everything at once.
I suggest we cease discussion about the fundamental principles of Extropian
beliefs for now (regarding the definition and evidence for faithfulness), I
will do a in-depth analysis of the Principles as soon as my time allows it,
and it is better to discuss on such a basis than to simply exchange
opinions. And probably less annoying to the rest of the audience.
Regards,
Erik Moeller