From: Eric Watt Forste (arkuat@factory.net)
Date: Fri Sep 27 1996 - 19:35:31 MDT
Sarah Marr wrote:
>At 15:17 26/09/96 -0700, Hara Ra wrote:
>>Back to basics, folks. Every country which has a good standard of
>>living, where survival in one's old age is not dependent on the
>>number of one's offspring, has had a slowing of population growth.
>>In the USA, we would see a population decrease if there were no
>>immigration. If the Extropian vision is a positive one, the goal will
>>be increased quality of life for one's children, which will always
>>be costly, and increasingly so.
>
>But I don't have any children. I don't plan to have any children. Surely
>you're not suggesting I have no reason to embrace Extropianism?
If one includes ones own future self within the set designated by "ones
children" then one can interpret Hara's remarks as they would apply to
someone who has no gametic offspring, and they still make sense.
Deathists tend to identify with their genetic offspring (and sometimes, as
in the case of Nietzsche, with their memetic offspring) because they are
convinced of their own mortality. Since you disagree with them about that
conviction, you might as well adjust their terms for them accordingly when
you are trying to interpret and make sense of what they say. I'm not saying
Hara is a deathist (I know better than that!), but we have these
assumptions built into our language still, and it will take a while for
them to vestigiate.
Eric Watt Forste <arkuat@pobox.com> http://www.c2.org/~arkuat/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:46 MST