I don't think it makes much sense to search the origin of the supernatural fables in a world of minuscule - even natural - knowledge. Did the Spaniards have better support for their (religious?) actions than the Aztecs? Or the Jews? Or anyone in any religion? (Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. -Lucius Annaeus Seneca - VERY long time ago)
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > On 12/28/2015 2:53 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 12/27/2015 3:56 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Brent Meeker < <meeke...@verizon.net> >> meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 12/23/2015 1:12 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 6:31 PM, John Clark < <johnkcl...@gmail.com> >>> johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 Telmo Menezes < <te...@telmomenezes.com> >>>> te...@telmomenezes.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and their land is not your land. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I do not have the same faith in the divine right of inherited wealth >>>>>> as you do. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> Nice dodge. Yes, let's put all in the same bag, Wall Street trust fund >>>>> kids and remote tribes wanting to keep living their way in *the place they >>>>> were born in*. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not a big fan of >>>> >>>> Wall Street trust fund kids >>>> >>>> either, and if one of them owned one of the 3 places on the planet >>>> where a thirty meter telescope could be built and refused to let it be used >>>> for that purpose I would be in favor of using the law of eminent domain to >>>> force the brat to sell it. And by the way, no native Hawaiian or anybody >>>> else was ever born atop Mauna Kea, there is nothing living up there except >>>> for a few astronomers, and if native Hawaiians >>>> >>>> get there way soon there won't even be that, they want to remove all >>>> telescopes from the mountain including the world class ones that have been >>>> there for decades. Why do you defend these people? >>>> >>> >>> I don't defend them. I think they should not interfere with the >>> construction of the telescope. All I am saying is that ramming things down >>> people's throats isn't working out so well. I am suggesting that something >>> like the "prime directive" is probably a good idea. It would be nice to put >>> a telescope in a certain mountain, but it's not our mountain, so tough shit. >>> >>> >>> ?? Why isn't it our mountain? The Hawaiians didn't create it. The >>> ownership of land is a concept invented and enforced by the U.S. and >>> Hawaiian state government. There's no ownership of land apart from the >>> society that enforces it. In this case the state of Hawaii owns the land >>> and they approved the use of the land for astronomy. >>> >> >> This is the usual confusion between lawful and ethical. >> The desire and need to have some control over one's environment already >> existed in biological species much more ancient than the Homo Sapeins. >> >> >> But among social animals it was joint ownership...which is exactly the >> kind of ownership the government exercises over. The Hawaiians are like a >> small fraction of the tribe who wants to have exclusive control of a part >> of the joint territory because they have supernatural myths they tell about >> it. >> > > Suppose that centuries from now we are capable of traveling to inhabited > planets in other star systems. We come across a planet populated by > humanoids who are roughly in the middle ages. They are terribly afraid of > us and regard us as the demons of some ancient prophecy of their religion. > Do we see them as part of our tribe, take over the planet and impose our > values and technology for the greater good? Or do we try to remain > benevolently distant until they are ready? And if we chose the first, isn't > it true that they were right to consider us demons to being with? > > > The ethical choice is number one. And the answer is no. > > > This is not so different from the situation native Hawaiians found > themselves in when the Europeans arrived. > > > Or when the Spaniards arrived in Mexico. Do you suggest that the > Spaniards should have just waited until the Aztecs "were ready" to stop > sacrificing slaves everyday to make the sun rise? Do you think they > should have waited until the tribes subjugated by the Aztecs "were ready" > to stop providing sacrifices? > > Brent > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
