From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Fri Apr 04 2003 - 17:36:20 MST
--- Brent Allsop <allsop@extropy.org> wrote:
> This is a variation of the "God is impotent"
> theodicy.
>
> This is the one I use to justify me not spending 90%
> of my resources to help
> starving people in 3rd world countries and such.
> But, I do spend some
> amount of my resources to help, as I am able. For
> me to do nothing at all
> would be irrational and illogical if you ask me. I
> believe the more
> intelligence a being has, the more empathy they are
> able to feel, and hence
> the more motivated they are to help others in need.
Hmm. When I go down the same thought path, I don't
just see 3rd world countries in need, but all human
beings presently alive, anywhere. If medical science
were to permanently halt today, we would all suffer
aging, and then death. The intellectual resources we
can each individually tap is still comparable to what
the scholars of ancient eras could. There is not now
any backup in case a certain specific few who style
themselves leaders of countries allow their intellects
to fail and commence actions that render Earth
uninhabitable (though at least these individuals would
technically achieve their goals of eradicating their
perceived enemies). And so forth.
This does not compel me to extend any aid specifically
to 3rd world countries, but rather to devote the
majority of my efforts towards the end of uplifting
all people. Moreso, because I would personally
benefit, being one of the people aided by this end.
Strange how the same logic can lead to such different
actions, no?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 04 2003 - 17:43:33 MST