From: Philip Goetz (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jan 24 2006 - 22:07:16 MST
On 1/24/06, Russell Wallace <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 1/24/06, Philip Goetz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > If you don't give lower organisms autonomy, and if you micromanage the
> > entire environment, then you are going to end up organizing everything
> > towards your ends. It would make no sense to preserve any lower
> > species at all. Whatever they were naturally, you could redesign them
> > in a way that would be more directed towards your goals. None of this
> > "we're going to keep lions in a simulation!" crap. Either lower
> > organisms have some autonomy, some rights to resources, or we vaporize
> > them and turn Earth into a Jupiter brain, and There Can Be Only One.
> Not at all. I don't believe lower organisms (by which I mean everything
> currently known to exist other than humans) have rights, but I believe
> humans have rights, and many humans place value on said lower organisms and
> their ecologies, and they're entitled to preserve these things; that's
> sufficient grounds for me to be opposed to vaporizing Earth.
Look - I also do not want to vaporize Earth. The debate is not between
those in favor of vaporizing the Earth and those against. I was trying to
argue that there is no real middle ground between giving other animals
some autonomy, freedom, and resources, and accepting that whoever
is highest in the food chain, wins and takes all.
- Phil Goetz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT