From: xgl (xli03@emory.edu)
Date: Tue May 01 2001 - 20:52:34 MDT
i don't know, this discussion (which i take as the justification
of personal preservation, or the lack thereof) just seems moot to me. i
mean, how does one justify something without a context? if everyone here
has a clear, concrete supergoal, then we can just say "i need to be
preserved because it serves my supergoal" ... but we (well, most of us
anyway) don't have clear goal systems. of course, we could come to
concensus about a common intermediate goal, but i have not seen this here.
my point is that i can't see the question "why?" as leading to anything
but a subjective, cuz-i-feel-like-it, kind of answer -- unless it is asked
in the context of some goal.
well, i want (in the strictest present tense) to live forever, and
i can't justify it in any meaningful way -- i just feel like it. so, if no
one stops me, i'll probably try my best toward that end. i know what i'm
willing to sacrifice (risk my life, in a vague sense) and what i'm not
willing to sacrifice (lives of others, for example) -- more than that,
what could i possibly say?
-x
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:25 MST