X-Message-Number: 18133
From: 
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:39:41 EST
Subject: Number One

George Smith (#18131) writes in part about the divide between self-centered 
motivation and social-centered perceived ethics.

As a few of those few who are interested may recall, I agree (along with a 
minority of philosophers ancient and modern) that long term self interest is 
the only rational orientation--and in fact, in an important sense, self 
interest is the only motivation that is physically possible. 

But even for those who share this very simple insight, there are many 
difficulties in applying it. "Looking out for No. 1" not only has bad public 
connotations and automatically raises hackles, but there are unresolved 
problems in physics and biology that leave uncertainty--primarily the nature 
of time and the biophysics of the "self circuit." 

The upshot is that no one can say with certainty where ultimate truth lies, 
but any calm look at the evidence leads to a very clear conclusion that your 
best bet is to do your utmost to maximize your long term 
satisfaction--although even if you have made this strategic decision, the 
short term tactics may remain difficult to handle.

It is perfectly clear that sometimes your interests diverge from those of 
your society or your nation or even your family. It is equally clear that 
usually your interests and theirs are rather closely tied. Furthermore, you 
usually cannot make a radical and sudden break with your previous orientation 
without severe psychological consequences.

As to one of the immediate tactical questions mentioned--support of current 
American anti-terrorist policies or opposition--it's easy. Support of strong 
anti-terrorist policies is advantageous on all counts.

Thanks to Mr. Smith for the books cited, of which I had not been aware.

Robert Ettinger

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=18133