X-Message-Number: 17230
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 04:08:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Louis Epstein <>
Subject: Replies to CryoNet #17216 - #17222

On 8 Aug 2001, CryoNet wrote:

> Message #17216 From: "Gary Tripp" <>
> Subject: anarchy is bad?
>
> Louis Epstein responds in Cryonet Catchup July 29-Aug 1:
>
>     #17148: Re: Nanotech and Diversity [Gary Tripp]
>
> >>Diversity, of course, is intimately bound to our sense of identity and
> >>hopefully we will retain memories of our history but my speculation is
> >>informed by an abstract view of the essential philosophical underpinning
> >>that animates our behaviour. Without doubt, the insane banter of new age
> >>spiritualists will be found to be either inconsistent or untenable. The
> >>influence of nanotechnology will be devolutionary in the extreme and
> >>will preside over an era that will be pretty close to anarchy.
>
> >A very serious danger of it.
>
> Why should anarchy necessarily be a bad thing?

Chaos is the antithesis of meaningfulness.

> History is replete with examples that demonstrate the fact that central
> authority has, more often than not, been a most prolific source of evil.
> Witness the demise of communism and the rise of free market reforms
> throughout the world. These are good proxies for central authority vs
> anarchy.

Your life would ordinarily be safer there
than on the streets of Beirut,Belfast,or
Vukovar,at multiple recent times...central
authority should be used sparingly...but
only if it is not questioned can it be
withheld in normal circumstances.

> Morally speaking, what group of individuals has the right to tell
> me how to conduct my own affairs as long as I don't encroach upon
> the freedom of others.

I'm a monarchist,I think authority should flow
from one person who attains office preferably
by inheritance.But your needs are more important
than your desires.Act responsibly,and you won't
need to be governed.

> >>In such an environment diversity will take [CARE] of itself. I anticipate
> >>and look forward to a point in our future that will be tantamount to an
> >>explosion of diversity.
>
> >Something better anticipated with dread
> and strategies for prevention.
>
> The nature of life is that it should proliferate with wild and reckless
> abandon.

How many people think untouched wilderness
is an attractive garden?

> This is to be encouraged

I think it can be improved upon.

> in spite of the fact that in an abstract sense many explorations of
> diversity will be subsumed by more general forms or some excursions may
> lead to an evolutionary cul-de sac. My speculation that the number of
> logically consistent frameworks may be very few in number should not be
> construed to imply that somehow diversity is bad; rather, it the only
> way that can lead to progress.

Diversity is a fact of life that needs
to be faced and contained.Letting things
run riot is the path to entropy and decay.
Jeremy Rifkin's way,not the immortalist
way.

> -----------------------------------------------------
> Message #17221 From:  (Rick Potvin)
>
> Cryonics Consortium's "Missile Base TimeTunnel"
> http://network54.com/forum/145221
>
> This is discussion forum that will focus on the idea of buying  the
> missile base "Kansas Atlas E Site" for use by cryonicists for storage of
> patients and as a back-up survival shelter in case of civilizational
> disasters. $750,000 is the purchase price.

How does it compare to existing cryonic
facilities in capacity,accessibility,etc?
Or spending the money on something like
the formworksbuilding.com designs Trygve
suggested?

(Cheaper than Timeship,at any rate)

> "I intend to live forever-- So far, so good."

Same here,I think the sentiment is
common...

> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Message #17222 From: "john grigg" <>
>
> Louis Epstein wrote:
> I don't think it's accurate to characterize my philosophical positions
> as religious dogma.As for technological growth,you can't let present
> acceleration blind you to inevitable deceleration.And strength is measured
> by staying constant in the face of change.If inflexible definitions do
> not survive,what can survive?(end)
>
> It is possible researchers might run into walls where Moore's law is
> concerned, but I think they will find other avenues(light, DNA, etc.) to
> keep the ball rolling.  There were critics who thought by now we would have
> already hit the wall, and they were wrong...

I'm talking about the absolute walls,though.
Not the limits of particular technologies in
use,but the impossibility of storing a gigabit
in an electron.Try extending Moore's Law out
to the next century and you'll see there are
NO answers to take it indefinitely.

> I wrote:
> >I would find it a fascinating thought that some spirits are born here >on
> >earth as A.I. instead of human beings.
>
> you replied:
> >I would find it both ridiculous and terrifying.
> >Keep your ghosts out of my machines!
>
> Then keep your peanut butter out of my chocolate!

A mixture I can't stand,incidentally...

> Hey, this is simply the  "gospel according to John Grigg!" lol  I don't
> really see my "theory"  becoming a reality.  I do see future new age
> cults saying how their A.I. is the reincarnation of Uncle Charlie or
> Napoleon!

As I said...
"both ridiculous and terrifying"!

> #17166: a new role-playing game about transhumans! [john grigg]
>
> I wrote:
> >I love Steve Jackson's GURPs rpg system, and am very excited about what
> >he will be releasing later this year!
>
> you wrote:
> I haven't tried it.Trouble is,I hate having an incomplete
> collection of rulebooks.
> (end)
>
> It has been years since I actually PLAYED roleplaying games. lol!

Pretty much the same here.
I got the D&D books in 1977,
and ignore all later editions
in enhancing for my own purposes,
but I VERY rarely find players
to run with!

> you wrote:
> Of course some religions say not joining them has the same consequences.
> (If I understand the LDS position correctly,if you live virtuously
> without hearing their message,you might go to the second class heaven.
> (end)
>
> No, they will have the opportunity of going on to exaltation, which is
> Godhood at the highest level of heaven.

WITHOUT ever hearing the LDS message?
As I understand it,as I said,WITHOUT the elders knocking on
your door you have a chance at Heaven #2...once they have
said their piece to you it's either #1 if you convert,or
at best #3 if you don't.

> They will have glorious resurrected bodies and with an eternal mate
> continue on worlds without end.  Their is a quote by Lorenzo
> Snow(deceased church president) which describes this with
> powerfully touching words, but I sadly could not find it on the net.

And of course J.F. Smith Sr.'s vision of Christ healing
the spirit dead in the D&C...where he identified all his
predecessors except Snow as having been such resurrected
"choice spirits".(A guy I met online years ago sent me
a Triple Combination).

> you wrote:
> Once you've heard it,you can go to the first if you convert,but can do
> no better than the third if you don't.And explicitly denying that their
> claims are true condemns you to Outer Darkness). (end)
>
> Those who not only hear it, but feel the spirit of God but reject it still,
> they will not have a chance after death to go on to exaltation.
> To be condemned to Outer Darkness(Mormon concept of hell which is a very
> dark and cold place) a person must have had a sure and total witness of God
> where faith was no longer even necessary, and yet hardened their heart and
> denied their knowledge out of fear or sin.  The average Mormon could not
> commit this sin.

As I read the LDS scripture,all that's needed to
condemn you to O.D. is that you've been told the
LDS message is true,and continue to insist that
it isn't.Maybe you need to sit through a few
testimony meetings at a ward,but if you go on
saying it ain't so,you're...

...hey,do they have cryonics facilities in the
O.D.?

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17230