From: Avatar Polymorph (avatarpolymorph@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Nov 25 2002 - 00:39:30 MST
Avatar:"If you believe in the imminence of extreme lifespan extension
and immortality, the issue of forgiveness will become more
important."
Lee: "I think that *that* may be putting it a little too strongly.
As John Clark (who is not so forgiving as that other J.C.)
put it, forgiving these sadistic beasts not very high on
the to-do list.
I do favor cryonically suspending people instead of executing
them, and will until it no longer becomes a deterrent. If a
person can be converted into a social creature by just a few
little tweaks later when more is understood, then I agree,
why kill them? Just cut off their heads and freeze 'em.
But I hardly have to forgive them to be in favor of doing that."
Avatar:
I am only in favour of recommended rehabilitation, not thought conversion
through force.
I can see that some extropians, including the vice-president of the Extropy
Institute, want to participate in force systems, if only potentially.
It is hard to understand the concept of non-force, which must include system
adjustments. It becomes easier to understand the more immortalism sinks in.
As Christianity failed as a pacifist movement (insofar as it was one for a
while from the 60s at least (as illustrated by the Didache)) I suspect many
regard forgiveness as a failed concept linked to absolute pacifism (turn the
other cheek).
I do not believe in a Christian God. My sole justification for forgiveness
is love and empathy. However, though I will not react to violence with
further violence, wherever possible, I will attempt to institute systems of
protective shielding. Notions of punishment, offense, and offense as the
best defence are mortal notions which will inevitably disappear for those
who do not wish to participate in them.
The closer we approach the mid-moment of the Singularity (which closely
follows on full-fledged nanotech) the more inappropriate non-consensual
force seems to me, especially the killing of fully sentient beings such as
military personnel. Thankfully the US HAS moved towards minimizing the loss
of human life in combat in the former Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. The last
major US infliction of loss of life was allegedly around 100,000 Iraqi
troops firebombed to death with fuel-air explosives during the final fleeing
retreat from Kuwait. As we approach the first longevity extensions in a
direct sense (for example through laser dna surgery on own-stem cells) I
begin to be less and less impressed by arguments or excuses for the taking
of human life that may be appropriate in mortal situations but are not in
immortal situations. As I have mentioned previously, an execution shortens a
life under mortal conditions, but under mortal conditions ALL beings die. An
execution under immortal conditions is doubly incorrect, in that it not only
takes away the impermanent experience of the joy of life but attempts to
take away the permanent experience of the joy of life.
How can anyone believe in protective shielding as a concept? The first step
is to test the waters. This becomes more possible as we approach the
assembler level, when resource production (base level) is freed up. In the
meantime, there are things one can do. Issue all police with heavy armour
and stun guns only, for example. Ensure cockpit doors in airplanes are
armoured (now done in some countries). Etc..
Towards Ascension
Avatar Polymorph
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:22 MST