From: ABlainey@aol.com
Date: Thu Sep 05 2002 - 19:57:06 MDT
I have to agree with Samantha on just about all her points. I wish I could
argue/debate half as well as most of the people on the list. My intention was
not an argument, just mearly to say that I feel that discussions of such
issues are valid. It is a real shame that they always seem to end in flame
wars, But I always get a new perspective and insight from other peoples
posts.
These issues do have a place on the list. They are obstacles that Wont
just go away with the advent of the singularity. If anything I think they may
even get worse. I don't feel they are off topic and at the end of the day. If
you have said all that you want to say on a subject, you don't have to be
drawn in to the same arguments time and again. Just leave it for someone
else. I hope you don't, because I usually learn something new from your posts
and greatly respect and agree with most of your views.
Alex
In a message dated 05/09/02 21:15:40 GMT Daylight Time,
samantha@objectent.com writes:
Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> On Thursday, September 5, 2002, at 01:43 pm, ABlainey@aol.com wrote:
>
>> I agree that these issues are very dangerous, but don't feel that the
>> discussion of them on the list should never be censored. I think you
>> would probably disagree with me there.
>
>
> I think someone flooding the list with spam should be stopped. It's not
> censorship to declare some materials off-topic. It is not that we are
> "afraid" to discuss it or can't logically refute it, we just don't want
> our mailboxes clogged with off-topic garbage. If people want to discuss
> other topics, let them do it on their own lists.
>
> Just like spam, I want it blocked. I don't consider it censorship to
> block it. I don't want to debate it scientifically or have a debate on
> the merit of every spam that comes in. I don't want to have to prove
> what's wrong with spam every time on every post. I simply want to
> discuss real extropian and transhuman topics here.
Transforming humans has to include the effects of, merits and
demerits of, various aspects of the human condition and how they
may be transformed. Else it is in danger of being a goofy
geek out that never really accomplishes much of anything.
>
> I don't want to discuss politics.
Yet you have and I value what you have said in this area a lot.
> I don't want to discuss religion.
Yet it is a very strong meme structure that must be understood
and dealt with somehow if one is in the business of advocating
human transformation.
> I
> don't want to discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I
> don't want to discuss whether the soul survives cryonics. I don't want
> to discuss a million issues that could be discussed. I especially don't
> want to discuss topics that cannot and will not be resolved here. They
> only cause flame-wars and have no chance of resolution. Examples would be:
>
Understood. But learning to discuss without flame-wars would be
of considerable value.
> - Are guns good or bad?
> - Are gays born or made?
> - Are some races inherently brighter than others?
> - Are some religions inherently more violent than others?
> - Are some political parties inherently more trustworthy than others?
>
> There are flame-bait topics that will never be resolved and are not
> required for extropy or transhumanism to be discussed.
Questions about politics and religion could be highly germane to
the nuts and bolts of what we individually and/or collectively
work to strengthen, avoid, or influence in order to further
transhuman/extropian goals. I don't think we can get there just
by tinkering in our garages and a few foundations and
well-funded startups.
> I consider
> anybody who repeatedly brings up these topics to be a troll or an
> idiot. I am not scared, angry or unjustified in these areas. I am
> merely tired.
I sure get that!
> The same points are made and the discussion goes round
> and round with no resolution. I consider these to be infinite-loops
> hardwired into our culture. Even if the discussion should be valid, its
> execution will never end. It is a denial-of-service attack on the
> entire list and does nothing but reduce list usefulness in all other areas.
>
You probably have that right largely also. Yet if we cannot
break out of these infinite-loops but only can avoid touching
them I don't find that a particularly strong position.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:46 MST