I don't know what you are saying but I read you as thinking in free philosophy. But then again I think in scissors rather than in knives. That's why I won't change your title line.
On 24 Sep., 11:23, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Two colleagues once wondered what it might be like to write other than > as a functionary. The problem is related to Lee's pondering on music > rights and illegal downloading. The problem of not being a > functionary is that there is no 'money' in it. Even writing something > for Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy online (free to users) could > be regarded as 'money connected' - there would be certain 'credits' > for an academic career. > > I find myself wondering how we might establish something free of our > early twenty-first century plight. I see some answers in future > memories, perhaps ones in which we write from the perspective of the > current plight having destroyed itself. I catch glimpses of a world > where much we now take seriously is so old hat it could only be part > of a ridiculous history (like Blackadder). One of these worlds has us > genuinely trying to leave Earth with the technology to do so. I > posted recently on what I believe the case for space-time travel is. > Essentially, the equations (sadly based on currently inadequate data > on exotic substances like 'dark energy') tell us that travelling at > acceleration acceptable to our bodies, we could reach the 'expansion > horizon' (edge of the universe) in what we would experience as 30 > years in 'planet of the apes time'. We could not come back, in the > sense that all we left behind would be gone, except a bleak, dark > place - as 'here' would have experienced eons of 'time'. > > In some sense, my questions are about the 'freedom' such a trip > involves. We get the freedom to roam space-time vastness, but > presumably need to arrive somewhere in which we can enjoy something > similar to Earth that has not undergone 'eon decay'. If possible, > great questions about what we are leaving behind arise, as well as > what we would be seeking to do. A myriad of 'Mayflowers' becomes a > possibility. No doubt some sect of 'believers' might well stay behind > for the 'second coming' at the time of the heat death of the sun. > > Much that we value, like family, friendship, neighbourliness and so is > challenged in this experiment, as well as much of the moral circling > we do. In my science fiction, I'm concerned with what such a future > does to philosophy (I take this from Popper). What would a woman in > such times regard childbirth as? What would we consider 'natural'. > In another post, Chris and I are wandering back from Europa, already > substantially changed by genetic splicing (he, in fact, is a 'built > man' not born of woman - so no change there mate as I plagiarise > MacBeth!), unaware in early chapters a new lifeform has entered > symbiosis with us from Europa's underground ocean). We made the > mistake of running out of whiskey and cactus juice and drank the > water. Earth is recovering from war and asteroid catastrophe and > survivors are focusing on relativity travel (there are new worlds out > there to royally screw-up!). Would 'morality' at such a time be to > sabotage the space-time travel to save the universe from humanity? > > I've been on the fringes of a few physics symposia ('pose' being the > key term) at which such stuff is trolled out over too much beer and > too little female company (sort of Mind's Eye plus beer?). My own > science isn't good enough to know who is talking rot or not really. > What I'm on about, should anyone have survived this far, is changing > the 'black boxes' of philosophy to see if we can open up free space. > One could imagine in the novel, that when Chris attacks me with a > knife, he understands I had always really accepted his view of gun- > control as he looks down the barrel of the cocked .38 Magnum I've just > raised from under the table. Or one could wonder, accepting that the > science works, just how daft our current values are, being little more > than the good intentions that lined the path to Hell (two more world > wars precede the time of the novel). My plan is a genre of > deconstruction-reconstruction (of mice and men). Those in the know > may suspect I am somewhat shackled by 'strategic scenario building' > here, but I hope there is no return of managerial desire and I'm more > concerned with the impact on knowledge of where is knows it 'has' to > go, and that we can cut through that straitjacket. Relativity travel > can remain a fantasy and still provide some direction on how we might > better await future generations pass into entropy. Those who think > religion has no part to play might reflect that such a future moment > might well be the triumph of the Cathars (the return to nothingness > and final defeat of the material devil). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
