Will: thought you meant rational as applied to the system builder :P
Consistency of systems is overrated, as far as I am concerned.
Consistency is only important if it ever the lack becomes exploited. A
system that alter itself to be consistent after the fact is
sufficient.
Do you remember when I wrote this?
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg07233.html
What parts of it suggest a fixed and totalitarian system to you?
WIll,
I didn't & still don't quite understand your ideas there. You need to give
some examples of how they might apply to particular problems.The fact that a
program/set of programs can change v. radically - and even engage opposite
POV's - doesn't necessarily mean it isn't still a totalitarian system.
What you call "addiction" is a central example of how humans are a
conflicted system - all our lives we are torn between urges to consume
gluttonously and urges to consume abstemiously/moderately, right across
multiple appetites. At a basic level, this conflict never changes. Ditto
your conflicts between activity and passivity. You aren't designed to
finally resolve these conflicts in any particular way, like falling into
permanent addiction. You are designed to be permanently conflicted - just
like a democratic political system.
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
