RE: Merely Human? was Re: ethnocentrism and extropianism?

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Tue Jun 04 2002 - 08:52:20 MDT


Samantha writes

> > Those of us in the "in group", whether it be Extropians, fighters
> > for racial equality, parents, corporate developers, or humans often
> > look down our noses at those we think of as unenlightened, or stupid,
> > or immature, or violent, non-sentient. Sometimes I approve of us
> > doing that, sometimes I don't.
>
> So when do you approve of it? It is certainly possible to
> believe you have found the best way or the most valid stance
> without looking down on others who disagree or disparage you and
> those like you. When do you think it is of value to look down
> on others?

Pardon the ambiguity of "looking down our noses". I should have
taken the time to attempt a little more precision; after all,
that phrase is used almost exclusively when people are criticizing
discrimination.

Here are some examples of when I approve of looking down upon
others as inferior and expendable: bacteria in my kitchen; rats
and other vermin, especially in human dwellings; programs lacking
awareness and sentience (so far as we understand those terms).

Likewise, I could come up with a list of those we routinely
disparage or discriminate against: people who are inarticulate,
stupid, or not well-informed. (Cf. Olga's posts about George Bush.)

You write
 
> It is certainly possible to believe you have found the best way...

above. No, it is not possible. That's my whole point: there can
be no such thing as "the best way" or "the most valid stance".
When one makes the mistake of thinking that there can be, then
an intolerance of the views of others arises---an intolerance
that, unlike some intolerances, is false to facts. I say that
one should only *approve* or *disapprove* of, say, Sati, the
act of widows in India killing themselves jumping into the
funeral pyre (or being thrown). You should not, in my opinion,
enter into a discussion with people about issues which depend on
values, with any intent of *proving* them logically incorrect
or irrational.

Lee



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:35 MST