Re: ExI principles: people left behind?

From: John B (discwuzit@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Jul 19 2003 - 12:14:52 MDT

  • Next message: Reason: "RE: so here's what I think this list needs..."

    [quote from: Samantha on 2003-07-17 at 16:52:19]
    On Wednesday 16 July 2003 19:49, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
    -snip-

    > Ok, I *know* you are going to rake me over the coals again.
    > Don't bother (been there done that) -- I'd rather see strong
    > arguments that justify a suboptimal extropic vector (perhaps
    > one has to sacrifice optimal paths to practical considerations).

    Optimal must be defined in terms of what is, not what may be if there is to
    be
    any sort of optimal path from *here* to any *there* we might dream of.

    Samantha -

    IMO, you're definition is more right than wrong - but the wrong you may be
    calling for here is quite dangerous. If everything must be defined in PRESENT
    terms, then there's no reason to accept any risk for potential future gain.

    -John B 

    ----
This message was posted by John B to the Extropians 2003 board on ExI BBS.
<http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=67;action=display;threadid=56511>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 19 2003 - 12:24:20 MDT