>-----Original Message----- >From: chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [email protected] <[email protected]> >Date: Thursday, July 28, 2005 4:21 AM >Subject: incrementalism
I don't think youre going to have any argument with many here for at least some of that sentiment but I'd like to respond on a couple of things your observation of _high "background" mortality of wars and other human catastrophes that claim lives at random. the risk of death is continually there_ i wonder why suicide bombing has just taken hold, because this has been going on for ever. I don't have statistics so I can make no comparisons; but my suspicion would be that the pillage and rape attitude of _to the victor the spoils_ has decreased a lot of the killing is not random, though opportunistic killing and maiming may seem random if one is its victim or aware of one random killing used to be done by the system, the earth, just as propagation was - seeds everywhere, as many as you could manage, whether you were a tree or a human... that's gone for many of us - the need for large familiies to ensure one or more survived diseases we didn't know abour but I don't, for instance, see any sign that AIDS even at the period of greatest fearful response to it, led anyone to suicide killing random killing now is often technological - the ability to bomb massively without risk to the bomber is won at the expense of accuracy I could go on, but I think that's enough to illustrate how I am thinking about your idea - it's an interesting idea, but I don't go for it I'd suggest a modification which is that with the abstraction of the idea of technology from the many technologies and the clear success of much technology against indices set, there has grown an idea that we can somehow negate mortality i am an example of it myself 100 years before i would have died in 1953 (i think it was); and yet here i am resenting my own mortality still - 56 and wanting more technology will be able to do less and less to aid me in my plans for immortality, but potentially plenty to manage growing infirmity; and that too will give me pause to reflect that it is all unfair the way it has been - he not busy being born is busy dying - has been deferred the success of technology, hoiwever, may be measured by many indices; and some of them are not hopeful - there are too many of us, for a start; and the technology has side effects, though you may be more or less inclined to worry depending on where you live the ABUNDANCE you speak of always has been there potentially - whence would have come Eden and other images but from that observation science has given us it at a price i ate like a renaissance prince yesterday with nuts from brazil, dates from turkey etc; and I havent paid the consequence bill for the air miles and with it, abundance under capitalism, comes that persisting mix of belief in science and alchemy alexander downer, foreign minister on my radio from australia, oh brave new world, proposing the solution to our problems without the slightest idea of what that technology is it's all right, my lord, i shall merely take these flood waters and the buildings blown down by high winds and convert them into non greenhouse emitting fuel... would you like some gold while i am at it and so australia and other countries will spend money designing a box, with most of the human energy going into deciding whether to have 1 or 2 buttons to press; and then they'll pass it to someone else and say build that challenged that it's too late, theyll produce statistics to prove that the teething problems have been overcome certainly i agree that we should all think differently but all of us all saying which i send you this email L
