From: Nathanael Allison (jubungalord@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 23 2003 - 15:00:58 MST
I am beginning to think that this* common belief is affecting the way people
view the Iraq war.
*That a continuous upgraded net mind will make humans be able to control
their instincts until eventually there is no more violence.*
Such a statement is extremely theoretical. Although genetic changes or even
IA might give us that ability I am doubtful that our instincts can be kept
in check otherwise.
1. Many anti-war activists believe that this* is possible and that war
should be avoided.
2. Many war activists believe that this* is possible and that war is
progressing globalization and thereby causing this to happen sooner.
The other belief is that this is not possible. If this is not possible,
given our technology at this time, than these instincts for power and
violence will always be present in society.
*That these instincts can’t be controlled and have to be kept in check*
Then the argument is what systems are best at keeping these instincts in
check? The best systems would be ones that have the smallest percentage of
people that need to be kept in check. Stopping the problem before it starts.
So then the argument is what is the best propaganda to send people so that
they have very little ability to revert to these instincts. There may be
better forms of control than propaganda but these systems will never be
100%. That is until a method of control such as genetic changes or IA can be
used.
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 15:08:04 MST