Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [existlist] Could a World Government act unselfishly for the benefit of all?

Expand Messages
  • Herman
    Hi Tom, ... I am happy for you to have your beliefs. In writing that, the word Imagine came to mind. The guy who penned that famous song was murdered by a
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 14, 2010
      Hi Tom,

      On 15 February 2010 10:43, tom <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
      > Polly,
      >
      > I certainly dont see wisdom in a multitude of counselors
      >
      > U wrote
      >
      > We have previously agreed that there is wisdom in a multitude of councilors.
      >
      > But how do you ensure anything at all, anything at all, I underscore,
      > any thing at all, about what kind of offspring you produce? You don't.
      > Full Stop. Yet you find this total stab in the dark approach to human
      > life perfectly acceptable. I think that is astounding beyond reason.
      >
      > Polly
      >
      > The world u r proposing might happen, but I consider that as bad an outcome as the catastrophies u believe will be averted by it.As a matter of fact, I believe in the long run worse;because most other catastrophies might result in many deaths, but that itself might be a necesary adjustment. But a powerful collective imposing its will on everyone, might very well be what Orwell described as man's future,"A human face being crushed by a boot for all eternity". I much prefer human freedom, and a belief in the possibility of mother nature and individual human creativity to any group think subordinating the rest of us to being cogs in some massive, mediocre monstrosity.
      >

      I am happy for you to have your beliefs.

      In writing that, the word "Imagine" came to mind. The guy who penned
      that famous song was murdered by a nutcase.

      Polly


      > Peace,
      > 'Tom
      >  ----- Original Message -----
      >  From: Herman
      >  To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      >  Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 4:31 PM
      >  Subject: Re: [existlist] Could a World Government act unselfishly for the benefit of all?
      >
      >
      >
      >  Hi Jim,
      >
      >  On 14 February 2010 22:36, Jim <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
      >  > Hi Polly,
      >  >
      >  > Let me take up another stand in your plethora of challenging and interesting arguments and viewpoints. In your post 50903, you wrote:
      >  >
      >  > "You work on the premise that humans pursue goals that have their origin in reason, which is demonstrably false. Human reason is in service of the passions, genetically. People do not deliberate about what to want next, they deliberate on how to get what they want."
      >  >
      >  > This pessimistic view of humanity
      >
      >  I'm happy for you to see that as being pessimistic, but I see it as
      >  being quite realistic. It is descriptive only, as far as I am
      >  concerned.
      >
      >  > seems to be in tension with your idea of a World Government of Reason. Recall your sterilisation solution depends on such a governing authority:
      >  >
      >  > "The solution: like-minded people must act to reach such a critical mass, that it will become possible to sterilise everyone at birth. This will allow the reason of a world group to become the pre-eminent agent of selection, as opposed to the ability of the individual to play genetic lotteries." (50838)
      >  >
      >  > How is this world group going to act purely on the basis of reason for the good of all, given, that even for these `like-minded people', "human reason is in service of the passions, genetically"?
      >  >
      >
      >  What is being juxtaposed is the reason of the genetic lottery with the
      >  reason of problem solving. I imagine that if a consensus was reached
      >  on adopting a plan to sterilise everyone, there would be a consensus
      >  that humanity faces enormous problems. A joint finding that human
      >  existence in it's present form is a problem is an instance of passion,
      >  not reason. A joint working out a solution is an instance of reason.
      >
      >  Simply buying another ticket in the genetic lottery, on the other
      >  hand, would be an instance of the greatest stupidity and negligence.
      >
      >  > It seems that Tom's criticism that the world group would be just as much evil bastards as the rest of us, is supported by what you write about human reason answering to our hormones and not to anything higher like compassion or altruism, or idealism.
      >  >
      >  > How would you ensure that the world group acted from the highest motives and for the good of all, and did not act on their own genetic self-interests?
      >  >
      >
      >  We have previously agreed that there is wisdom in a multitude of councilors.
      >
      >  But how do you ensure anything at all, anything at all, I underscore,
      >  any thing at all, about what kind of offspring you produce? You don't.
      >  Full Stop. Yet you find this total stab in the dark approach to human
      >  life perfectly acceptable. I think that is astounding beyond reason.
      >
      >  Polly
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!
      >
      > Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.