RE: `twisted ethics prevalent on the extropy board' (was RE: [WAR] amazing new photo history)

From: matus@matus1976.com
Date: Sun Jun 08 2003 - 23:38:02 MDT

  • Next message: Doug Skrecky: "91'st update on fly longevity experiments"

    > At 01:41 AM 6/8/03 -0400, matus@matus1976.com wrote:
    >
    > >Afraid you might alienate
    > >members of this board who helped to bring about that enslavement[?]
    > [...]
    > >Absurd, this is the kind of twisted ethics prevalent on the extropy board
    > >that alienates me.
    > [...]
    > >Yet again I find myself
    > >feeling deep visceral disgust to an extropian's concept of ethics.
    >
    > Personal clarification:
    >
    > I am not an extropian.

    Then what are you doing here?

    > I am not, therefore, on Extropy's board, but I certainly don't find the
    > ethics of those who are `twisted'. If I did, I'd get my cut-price drinks
    > elsewhere.
    >

    Must one be on Extropy's board to call themselves an extropian? If that is
    the case, perhaps the extropian board should define some of thier ethical
    principles. Or is an extropian different to each person, but having a
    definition tending to share such common values as using technology to better
    human lives (at least their own life)

    > If you feel `deep visceral disgust to an extropian's concept of ethics',
    > what are you doing here? (Just wondering.)
    >

    I was referring to your ethics and previously to Emlyn's ethics, or at least
    the statement you have made that hinted toward your ethical principles. I
    have not found these particular ethical concepts of 'it is more immoral the
    more it effects me' and 'removing a murderous tyrant is morally as bad as
    being a murderous tyrant' prevelant on this board, however I have found
    seemingly questionable ethical principles more prevalent than reasonable
    ones. I may be mistaken, and would invite extropians to present their
    ethical foundations.

    Many of the members I have conversed with off list and on actually seem to
    acknowledge that murderous oppresive regimes are bad, and indeed more bad
    than 'regimes' that imprison members of its population in relatively
    comfortable prisons for victimless actions, such as smoking pot.

    However, some do not, some suggest that the good guys won in vietnam (much
    to of the dismay of the millions of enslaved and murdered indochinese
    people) Some actively supported the abandonment of said persons, and still
    feel such abandonment as just, some others suggest the US is immorral for
    killing Iraqi civilians in a war to remove a murderous dictator, but scoff
    at the immorrality of leaving impoverished and enslaved people to suffer and
    die, more of the 'if it doesnt bother me, its not immorral' system of ethics
    you seem to endorse.

    However, I point out, you did not specify your moral position on such a
    question, as I previously asked you and you did not include an answer in
    your response. I shall ask again

    Damien said:
    > When I hear that Saddam and his sons and regime tortured and murdered
    > people, I am horrified; when I hear that US jails contain a
    > million or more
    > prisoners many of them incarcerated for using marijuana and subjected in
    > prison to rampant rape and brutality, I am horrified as well.

    ...but are you equally horrified? !!!!!!!!

    Are you seriously suggesting it is equally deplorable that humans beings are
    being raped, murdered, and tortured as you find human beings spending a few
    months in climate controlled prison watching survivor, weight lifting and
    reading Playboy in a post industrialized west nation living longer healther
    better lives than perhaps 3/4's of the world?

    So, which is it, is it more wrong to rape and murder someone (albiet,
    someone you dont know) or more wrong to toss a pot smoking youth in jail?

    Accordingly, which are you morally required to voice objections to? The one
    you have more control over, or the one that is more wrong (if, indeed, you
    feel one is actually more wrong than the other)

    Further, is Saddam Hussain morally culpable for the deaths of the civilians
    in the Coalition lead effort to remove said murderous tyrant from power, or
    is the coalition morally culpable?

    Regards,

    Michael Dickey



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 08 2003 - 23:32:55 MDT