From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Fri Aug 01 2003 - 12:03:36 MDT
Samantha wrote
> > > I don't need every spare bit of matter to be thinking beings.
(Note that this itself is hardly a *logical* argument.
She is saying what she prefers.)
> > Well, I hope that you and I are *both* grateful that the atoms
> > making you up was converted from inert to thinking matter. And
> > after some of us (somewhere) are successful in getting more
> > matter to think, I will leave it to you to explain to those
> > entities how the universe would be just as well off without them.
>
> Sigh. You are presupposing the goodness of what you prefer and then arguing
> from that supposition that my not having that preference is wrong or perhaps
> even immoral. This is a pretty boring game.
I am arguing nothing. I am painting a picture that either
will appeal to you more than does a volume containing dead
and inert matter, or it will not. Apparently it does not.
> I would not consider converting a Jupiter size mass into the equivalent mass
> of current humanity to be a net gain. That large a mass of that limited a
> set of squabbling sentients would create such a tangle that nothing could
> could come of it. It would probably implode through the super concentration
> of cussedness. :-)
One can only hope that you are indeed joking, because if the solar
system is indeed better off without a Jupiter sized mass of cussedness,
then it might well be better off more locally without an Earth sized
mass similarly distasteful.
I highly recommend reading Roman history. Consider the finest century
of the Republic that you can find, and if that doesn't make you proud of
what humanity has accomplished since, nothing will.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 01 2003 - 12:12:51 MDT