From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Sat Jun 02 2001 - 20:38:19 MDT
In a message dated 6/2/2001 4:33:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lcorbin@ricochet.net writes:
<< Oh, for sure. Even many people not normally considered bright.
I would be rather disappointed too. To think of all humankind's
exalted triumphs as having no permanent place in the universe,
that the happy story had a tragic end. Alas..... Um, by the way,
what's for dinner? >>
Jack Handey would say: "Sometimes, I feel the worlds has gone mad! Then I
say, Aw! the heck with it! Then I say, Hey! what's for dinner?" I am guessing
that the world begin to diminish economic activity, and thing would go
retrograde technically. The L-5' ers would attempt to set up a Mars Colony
and fail to be able to purchase Russian Protons, and not have the cash, or
barter goods.
<<Nonsense! Most people would get used to it in a few
weeks, far more easily than they get used to the loss
of a loved one. If America turned totally socialist
on the same day that it was announced that the world
had to end in a century, then Socialists would be
happier on the whole than they were the day before.
(Same for Libertarians, or anyone else. Again---this
is for a majority of them, not all of us by any means.
A century is a long long long time for most people;
besides, they were planning to be dead anyway, even
their children.) >>
All politics and economics would within 20 years become local. Most
airflights would cease, because, what's the point? The USA would become a
regional, and perhaps, mostly rural society. The growth of opium would
flourish as painkillers and perhaps methadone labs. It might be Hippy Heaven
or Jesus land. In Europe, I suspect that people there would be fighting over
scarce resources. Asian-the same, Latin America?
<<Zo ees good news for you vhen zhere vill be less progress, ja?
Hmm. Very strange. Tell me more about your fauter...>>
Well, Dr. Freud, Confucius say: Never slam your head through a brick wall
unless your head can come through the other side. Fauter didn't give a shit
about da futur.
<<Hey, Mike Perry also thinks that getting frozen is the second
dumbest thing in the world to do. But I still don't understand
the despair you're trying to describe. Because of existential
problems? What like "why does anything exist" or instead ones
along the lines of Sartre's or Camus's? (not that I know
anything about them)
Lee>>
Despair expresses itself because there is nothing but eternal death, and
therefore dying is more important (by weight) then living. Also, whatever
tragedies, unfairness, disease, misery, is therefore having the last word, so
close the book now, forever.
Mitch
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:55 MST