Samantha Atkins wrote:
> Safe? No. But if we don't develop some better technology that
> increases our reasoning and communicative power (perhaps
> supplanting it with AI), then we will be pretty well done for in
> my opinion. We cannot sit where we are or survive our current
> limitations for long without some major stress destroying us.
>
> Risky as it is, I honestly believe our only hope lies in going
> forward.
That's exactly the set of insights which made me part with
the Green mindset as an early twen.
> That said I don't believe that technology is all we need by any
> means. We need a vision of where we wish to go and a unified,
> rational ethics really badly if we are going to increase the
> odds of our not only surviving but thriving.
Whatever it is, it needs to be darn obvious and to pay of itself
at each step along the way. Ethics shouldn't be there because it's
the nice thing to do, but because it's the smart thing to do.
Because otherwise ethics has got no mandate, appeals to the heart
purely are going to fizzle.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:06 MDT