From: Samael (Samael@dial.pipex.com)
Date: Tue Jan 12 1999 - 02:52:40 MST
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick.Gray@bull.com <Dick.Gray@bull.com>
To: extropians@extropy.com <extropians@extropy.com>
Date: 11 January 1999 23:54
Subject: Re: Property and life
>OK, let's not quibble over intangibles; how about your body then? Would you
>at least agree that your body is your property? If so, then doesn't your
>property right in your body entail a right to keep that body alive (using
>your own resources)?
I don't have a right to live. I have a very strong 'wish' to live. I want
to live and will do (almost) anything in my power to continue living. At a
very basic level, I've dimissed morality as a creation with no validity and
based my actions around aesthetics - ie what I liek and dislike. And I like
living. And I like having access to things. And I like other people to be
nice to me, so I tend to treat them in a way which will cause them to do so.
>I wrote:
>>Since property includes life itself, there can be no higher good than
>>protection of property.
>
>Samael rejoins:
>>Since carbon compunds include life itself, there van be no higher good
>than
>>the protection of carbon compunds.
>
>Huh? In what possible sense do carbon compounds "include" life? Certain
>types of compounds make life as we know it possible, but saying they
>*include* life is as sensible as saying that the electromagnetic spectrum
>"includes" _Deep Space Nine_. Can't you think of a real analogy?
Life is almost entirely Carbon Hydrogen and Oxygen, with a few trace
elements.
Samael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:02:47 MST