Text 816, 201 rader
Skriven 2006-05-26 19:14:00 av Robert E Starr JR (1262.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Do we need artificial
=================================
* * * This message was from Dennis \(Icarus\) to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * *
*
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <a9069$447759b9$18d64cf6$2793@KNOLOGY.NET>
@REPLY: <NeCdnVYxKP-1zu3ZRVnyvw@bt.com>
"Arlen Roy Kundert" <arkofthekundert@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1148612414.486741.100720@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Dennis (Icarus) wrote:
> > >
> > >      As we "advanced" technologically as a people, we have not
> > > taken care to develop a sense of responsibility for the power that has
> > > come with each new paradigm in technology. By way of example take
> > > gunpowder. Gunpowder can be used to help with mining, preparing to
> > > build a dam, many other non-lethal uses. However it is no secret what
> > > gunpowder is most often used for, guns.
> >
> > Guns which can be used for criminal activity, and....more importabtly,
to
> > defend oneself from criminals as well.
>
> That is completely true, guns can be used to defend oneself from
> criminals or even hunt for food. How does that nullify my argument that
> gunpowder is most often used for guns and my obvious implication that
> guns are misused?

Just pointing out they can be a useful tool.
Anything can be misused. Heck, for a time folks were arguing abut long
kitchen knives being misused.

>
> But let ask you then since you brought the point of contrasting guns
> being used for criminal activity vs. being used for defend oneself from
> criminals. Which do you feel happens more often (be it in your nick of
> the woods or world wide) are guns used more for good, or more for evil?

More for good - both in my neck of the woods and, I believe, worldwide.

> >
> > >
> > >      The real problem is that mankind's moral technological
> > > advancements devolved in advance of our moral evolution. To make a
> > > point for comparison, we are like a three year old child with our
> > > father's hand gun. No where is this more true then in the misuse of
> > > the internet.
> > >
> > >      The internet has allowed for the most unacceptable abuse of
> > > children that we as a people have ever seen. Once child pornography
was
> > > something that extremely hard and dangerous to get a hold of. Now with
> > > the misuse of the internet the most depraved people can get access to
> > > it with a great deal of anonymity. This has provided a new venue for
an
> > > already out of control problem.
> >
> > So it'd seem that the kids were already being abused.
> > Since these images, movies, etc apperar just as bytes (information) to
the
> > Internet, how can one have a medium for free exchange of information,
yet
> > restrict this?
>
> You make a 100% fair question. You will note that this was a report
> about "The Impact of Technology on Society". I have no idea how to fix
> this problem I *never* claimed to have a solution to the problem, nor
> do I now. I wish with Heaven as my witness that I did. I don't.

Thanks - In my view, the problem is not with the technology - its with the
people involved.
Any technical means to try to eliminate, say, child porn from the Internet
could then be used
to eliminate other unwelcome videos, pictures, discussion groups, etc.
China, I'm sure, would just love something like that.

I'd be willing to wager that we've always had the same percentage (of the
genreral population) of sick folks invlved in molesting kids. Its just
becoming much more visible.

> >
> > >
> > >      My argument is not that technology is in of itself evil, we have
> > > just have gone too far, too fast, whereas our morals are just now
> > > leaving the gate. We need to slow down and learn accountability for
> > > where we are as a people.
> >
> > And I think the vast majority of people have greater morals than you're
> > giving 'em credit for.
>
> Fair enough, deliver some evidence to the effect that what you see on
> the world scene gives you reason to think that we as a world wide (or
> even in your nick of the woods) are equal in moral accountability to
> where we are technologically.

And this brings us back to definitions - how do you equate "moral
accountability" to where we are technologically?

>
> Please, (and I don't mean this rhetorically) show me somthing, anything
> that indicates that we, mankind are becoming morally responable for
> what we doing to ourselves, and not just in ways that involve the
> rhetoric we hear from Washington every time some jerk want to gain
> points in the pulls. How are "we" making genuine progress? Please,
> something.

http://www.cleanairprogress.org/clean-air-pollution/air-pollution-statistics.asp


<snip>
>
> Because we have a GREAT sense of personal accountability about what
> cars, the products we buy, what we throw away do to the world and
> mankind on the whole.
>
> You say: "I think the vast majority of people have greater morals than
> you're giving 'em credit for." There is such a mistake that is made by
> so many people that think "as long as I'm not hurting someone, or
> breaking a law, I'm doing good". Inaction is one of the worst things
> that running through every level of society today. Inaction is (and I'm
> NOT saying subjectively) is immoral. And I'm not saying that I feel I'm
> not guilty of this myself.

And you know these folks are not takinga ction because....?

>
> If "the vast majority of people have greater morals than *I'm* giving
> 'em credit for" why is world so rife with problems? Might it be there
> is a great sense of complacency and apathy in the world we live in?

Or because many of these problems have been with us since we were roaming
the African plains?

> >
> > >
> > >      It is because of this (our technological advancement vs. our
moral
> > > advancement) that I believe we are really less advanced then our
> > > ancestors. They had ignorance as an excuse, what do we have? Also
> > > remember, the most important question of all have not found any real
> > > answers through technology: Who are we? Why are we here? Where do we
> > > come from? Where are we going?<<
> >
> > What do you want? (oops...not supposed to ask that question)
> > Do you have anything worth living for?
> >
> > <snip>
> > >
> > > First, the idea of putting a man on Mars is a very romantic notion,
> > > it's almost as romantic  as Christopher Columbus going to America (and
> > > I'm not trying to play the straw man game, I know the "Christopher
> > > Columbus" parallele is my making, not yours). But what is gained from
a
> > > man being on Mars right now?
> >
> > Think of it as a unifying goal.
> > One value of the ISS is that it does nicely demonstrate the cooperation
> > between countries.
> > After all, when the shuttle fleet was grounded....who's been providing
> > supplies?
> > Russia, via the Soyuz capsules.
>
> You know, that's a very good point. One which I will concede to.

Thank you.

<snip>
> >
> > And we have done, are doing, and will continue to do something about the
> > suffering of the impovrished.
>
> Yep, because the problem is soooo getting better. I ask you, do you
> really feel things are getting better?

Yep - sure do.

>
> >
> > >
> > > How can we with a clear conscience feel that we are advancing as
humans
> > > because we are reaching to the stars when men, women, and children die
> > > every day simply because they don't have enough food?
> >
> > How  many do you think died of the same cause during the development of,
> > say, the Internet?
> >
>
> A whole bloodly lot.
>
> How does that in any possible context nullify what I said?
>
>
>
so do you feel guilty using the Internet?
I mean, presuming you're paying for connectivity, that's money which could
go elsewhere, right?

Dennis
            
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)