From: Smigrodzki, Rafal (SmigrodzkiR@msx.upmc.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 05 2002 - 09:46:55 MST
Dave Sill [mailto:extropians@dave.sill.org] wrote:
Are you willing to ignore some Principles (5 and 6) in the pursuit of
others?
### Whenever you have more than one principle, you *will* encounter
situations where choices have to be made. Do you want to have absolute
liberty? Well, you might have to cut back on progress.
As it is, I am amazed that so many Extropians seem uncomfortable with the
(relatively) small imposition that the taxes used for research are, but
somehow nobody addresses the brutal, arrogant attack on liberty that goes on
every day on almost all roads - the highway speed limits, imposed primarily
as a source of income and employment for the enforcers. Such limits grossly
infringe on the right for self-direction, imposing arbitrary limits in the
name of "safety". Whose safety is it, if 95% of all motorists seem not to
care? Yet, instead of rising in righteous anger, they flinch at the sight of
a lurking cop, and lamely beg him for mercy.
Just a little private rant here - I'm one of the victims of the latest
funding drive on the local highway. And I did go to court.
------
This implies that there's a smorgasbord of countries to choose from,
and that people can simply choose the one that best meets their
needs. In reality, many people are stuck with the country they're born
in--and the alternatives aren't very attractive.
### This is incorrect - I am one living example that you can choose your
country. If you are truly unhappy with yours, you can almost always leave,
and even establish a country of your own (all you need is a bit of real
estate, like an old oil platform).
-----
How about the Open Society (#5)? "Preferring...exchange over
compulsion". If citizens are compelled to support the Master Plan run
by the wise and rational Benevolent Dictator, who, after all, just
wants to make things better for everyone, I don't think that's
consistent with Open Society.
### Write your congressman. Organize an anti-science PAC. Run for office.
This is not Russia, 1953. Nobody will send you to the Gulag.
------
> And even then I'd likely consider them to be irrational -- they
> would be playing russian roulette with their life because their
> hazard function is significantly increased by choosing to live
> outside the society I've just described.
Because your plan is obviously best. Uh huh. And since you deem them
irrational, it'd probably be OK to expel them or round them up and,
er, recycle their components, maybe? To tolerate irrationals would be
downright irrational.
### No, luckily most of the time it's best to ignore them.
-------
I don't think the goal is race toward Extropia as fast as possible,
damn the consequences, ignore the collateral damage, etc.
### My goal is not absolute liberty, regardless of the collateral damage
(=innocent lives lost).
-------
I think we
should proceed deliberately and gradually, following the Principles as
much as possible along the way.
### I think we should proceed as quickly as reasonably possible, because
this best serves my first principle -
"An innocent life wish may not be thwarted".
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:15 MST