From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Mon Jan 07 2002 - 01:55:55 MST
In a message dated 1/6/02 11:26:08 AM, bradbury@aeiveos.com writes:
>Sure -- it is true -- we perceive actions by individuals that
>cause deaths (proactive deathists) as more heinous than a lack
>of action that causes deaths (passive deathists) which are
>worse than "natural" deaths (the underlying natural hazard
>function -- ranging from heart disease & cancer to earthquakes
>and asteroid impacts). *But*, feeling my ears grow into sharpened
>points, *is* that logical?
>
>Are not these distinctions "artificial"? Aren't they driven
>by genetic programming in humans? {e.g. Identify your enemies
>and eliminate them before they eliminate you.
No, there's an important distinction - you can fix problems due
to passive deathists without changing those people. Active deathists
must be stopped. They're a much more serious problem as you have
fewer options. In addition, humans are very nasty enemies as they
are hard to stop with simple measures like dams, frame houses, etc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:33 MST