From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Tue Dec 21 1999 - 18:44:41 MST
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Bryan Moss wrote:
> Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>
> > b) Now, now, now, now Bryan... I give you one degree of
> > freedom and suddenly you want three or four. You may
> > be what you want to be but not if that interferes with
> > what other people want to be unless you are "being" in
> > a VR.
>
> But Robert, surely people like yourself, in not wanting to
> be raped, are interfering with what *I* want to be.
>
Bryan, you're extrapolating what I say without "due process".
I didn't say that *I* didn't want to be raped. On odd days
if I get out of the "far side" of the bed, I might be in
an existentialist/experientialist mood sufficiently that
I might relish the prospect. Unlike many individuals I do
realize that the choice of how you experience things is
entirely self-generated. I put rape in a category slightly
below triple-black-diamond ski slopes in that under most
circumstances it is probably survivable. Now, if you had
said that to be what you want to be, you want to "torture,
and eventually kill me", then I would strongly object.
My statements were however intended to shelter those individuals
who have less separation between their experience and who
they perceive themselves to be. I view raping an average
individual in the category with beating children. The
activities are unproductive and unextropian. It would
seem that common result of these circumstances would be to
force an individual into viewing society as taking advantage
of oneself, in which case they will probably be willing to return
little to society.
Individuals who take away their productivity or creativity
from society, in effect, hurt us all. Can you make an argument
that hurting us all is justified by your personal benefit
in raping individuals?
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:10 MST