From: Jef Allbright (Groups@jefallbright.com)
Date: Sat Jun 22 2002 - 16:30:39 MDT
Lee writes
> ... I don't buy this "wanting to make the world a better
> place". I think that you are rationalizing. By hypothesis,
> this waitress will never affect you again. If the world is
> indeed a "better place", it won't affect you. So why exactly
> do you want to make the world a better place?
I have a vested interest in the world (simulated or not) that I inhabit and
expect to continue to inhabit indefinitely, therefore I contribute to
improving it. That world is a complex network of entities and multiple
feedback loops. No one exists in isolation. When I provide a bit of
positive feedback in response to desired behavior of one node, I believe
there is a good chance of non-linear propagation to other nodes with future
benefits likely to outweigh my small investment of time or a couple of
bucks. We all stand to benefit by it. There was a popular book (a little
sappy) followed by a lower quality movie, called Pay It Forward, that
promotes this idea and makes sense to me.
> Likewise for the "awe" you refer to. Our circuits for
> awe came before anyone ever heard of God IMO.
I think we generally agree on the human capability for morality and awe,
independent of the existence of a higher power. Specifically, my point was
that many abstract qualities (morality, altruism, love, awe, niceness,
ninceness,...) , are popularly and facilely attributed to causes such as
God, evolution, upbringing, etc., but may be more fully understood as
emergent properties of the complex network within which we operate.
- Jef
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:58 MST