O n Sun, Jan 3, 2016 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> but that is not to say I think ethics are unimportant, far from it, I >> think subjectivity is vastly more important than objectivity. >> > > > > I am a bit surprised to read this from you. > Subjectivity, especially my subjectivity, is the most important thing in the universe; or at least it is in my opinion. > >> >> >> the culture that existed in Hawaii when Captain Cook landed there is long >> gone, the people who live in Hawaii today live in the same culture you and >> I do regardless of who their ancestors were 300 years ago. But in any >> culture you're going to have individuals that are particularly stupid and >> ignorant and these elements were allowed to destroy the Thirty Meter >> Telescope which would have enriched the entire human race. >> > > > > Perhaps you are right, > Perhaps? Perhaps! In the pro versus anti telescope matter are you REALLY uncertain about which side represents the forces of enlightenment and which side represents the forces of darkness? > > > Almost every time I travel somewhere new I discover that I was fed > misconceptions and gross simplifications from the mainstream media > The mainstream media has not reported on the issue and probably doesn't even know it exists, and if they did would side with the barbarians or at least make excuses for them just as you do. If they ever do something on it I can easily visualize a puff piece on the Noble Hawaiians and their colorful belief in Mother Earth and Father Sky. You and the mainstream media would get along fine. > >> >> >> a small minority of people destroyed the >> Thirty Meter Telescope >> because they found that they could, and because they discovered that >> power is fun, and >> >> because destruction is so much easier than construction. >> > > > > But if you know these things and you don't practice them, then surely > there's something else at play? You know that power is fun yet you are > above such games. > There is indeed something else at play, knowledge. 29% of the people in the USA can't find the Pacific Ocean on a globe, the largest geological feature on the planet. To those people the Thirty Meter Telescope would have just been a big building. However I am not part of that 29%, I believe I could find the Pacific Ocean on a map if I tried real hard and I believe I could have recognized the beauty in the things the Thirty Meter Telescope would have found, but people that don't even know what the Pacific Ocean is could not. But, I hear you say, that means if I was as ignorant as they are I'd oppose the telescope too. Well yes it's true I would, but I'm not so I don't. And I don't think its moral to defend ignorance or make excuses for ignorance or patronize ignorance, I think its moral to oppose it. >> >> Building the >> Thirty Meter Telescope >> would have been ethical, in fact it would have been a wonderful >> monument to humanity; if that >> advanced >> alien >> civilization >> you talk about asked me for one reason why humanity was worth saving and >> should not be destroyed I would have shown them the telescope. >> > > > > You can still show them the Large Hadron Collider, or the Hubble > Telescope, or the International Space Station, > T he International Space Station is by far the most expensive "scientific" instrument ever made and is also close to useless and a particle accelerator has't found anything surprising in nearly half a century but telescopes certainly have and the thirty meter telescope could have seen t hings 156 times dimmer than what the Hubble can see and WHY DO YOU DEFEND THESE PEOPLE? I don't get it. > >> >> Only the ethics of the powerful matter, >> > > The powerful individuals in a society do not arrive in space ships. They > are created within that society. > Yes and liberals gave them the power to destroy because they believed they deserved it due to who their ancestors were. I do not have that belief so I guess I'm no longer a liberal. > >> >> in this case we let a small group of ignoramuses have the power >> > > > > And this reads like a contradiction of the above sentence. First you > define this class of "the powerful", but then you render it meaningless by > stating that even a group of ignoramuses can obtain that power. > If history has taught us anything it's that being a ignorant person and being a powerful person is not a contradiction. And the Hawaiians of native descent have power only because liberals feel they must give power to any vocal minority no matter how ignorant if they claim they are somehow victims of a injustice that happened many centuries before they were born. For decades I called myself a liberal until I ran into too many white liberals with knee jerk guilt reactions over things that happened centuries before their grandparents were born. I don't feel the slightest bit guilty over bad stuff my great great great great grandfather may or may not have done and if that diminishes my liberal credentials then so be it. >> >> If they have the technology for a interstellar invasion fleet then they'd >> already have nanotechnology and >> >> von Neumann probes >> >> and could build a >> >> Dyson Sphere around their sun; hell we'll have the technology to do that >> in >> >> less than a century, probably less than 50 years. Earth has nothing >> unique to offer them that they couldn't obtain with >> >> nanotechnology >> with a lot less trouble. >> > > > > Sounds reasonable, but what about preventing us from becoming a threat? > I works both ways, ET's home planet has nothing (other than information) to offer us, if we need more living space we can just send a von Neumann probe to Jupiter and program it to dismantle the planet and use the matter to build a Dyson Sphere. Who needs a tiny planet a thousand light years away? > In my life I have been labeled as "too left-wing", "too right-wing", "too > intellectual", "pseudo-intellectual", "anti-intellectual", "progressive", > "conservative", etc, etc. I long ago realized that these labels are > meaningless > I like labels because coherent thought would be impossible without them. So I make no apology for pinning the label "anti-intellectual barbarian" to those who destroyed the telescope nor do I apologize for pinning the label "knee jerk liberal" on those who feel it is their duty to make excuses for them. I have some other labels I could use too but you probably don't want to hear about those. > > > > are only useful in identifying the tribe that the person who utters them > identifies with. > I identify with the knowledge tribe. Are you sure you want to identify with the ignorance tribe? John K Clark -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
