17:55:44 G If it were rooted in abuse, then the choice is irrational.
17:56:00 G After all, "because someone abused me, I must become homosexual" is a non sequitur.
17:56:36 ex_banana-eater What happens is that typically when people are very young, under 8, abuse sets off something with gives them deviant tendences, and their brain and habits develope that way ever since
17:56:52 G They then need to check their premises, as Rand would have said.
17:56:53 ex_banana-eater So its environmental at root
17:57:02 ex_banana-eater But it becomes ingrained
17:57:03 ex_banana-eater yes
17:57:09 G Yet they can still have volitional control over it.
17:57:14 G It may be a difficult habit to break.
17:57:18 G Like smoking, for example.
17:57:36 G But many smokers have quit after a detailed examination of their goals and the realization that smoking conflicts with them.
17:57:59 ex_banana-eater When must one be tolerant
17:58:08 ex_banana-eater If something is a virtue should it be practiced all the time?
17:58:25 G One must be tolerant when the other party presents claims that are supported by rational argument.
17:59:03 G The other party can be wrong in argument, but, if it attempts to put forth claims that are debatable and open to reason, and does so civilly, it should be treated civilly, too.
17:59:05 ex_banana-eater So, if an intelligent rhetor comes up with some Marxist argument but it is based on faulty epistemology, you would ignore it?
17:59:09 ex_banana-eater If you choose
17:59:29 G I would be quick to point out the flaws in that argument, but I will treat the argumentator with civility and respect.
17:59:40 G David Kelley argued precisely this in Truth and Toleration.
17:59:50 ex_banana-eater Isn't he evil?
18:00:00 G He stated that "good and evil" apply to actions, not ideas.
18:00:05 G Ideas can be right or they can be wrong.
18:00:15 G But only their practical consequences are good or evil.
18:00:17 ex_banana-eater Hm, Ill have to read about that
18:00:24 ex_banana-eater Im interested to know
18:00:27 G Stalin was evil, for example.
18:00:40 G But Marx and his supporters were plain wrong. Very wrong.
18:00:43 ex_banana-eater Does Peikoff write that ideas are ethical too, in fact and value?
18:00:54 ex_banana-eater Where is the difference between the groups
18:01:07 G Peikoff is opposed to toleration.
18:01:17 G He thinks that Objectivism is a "closed system."
18:01:25 G This means that Rand's discoveries are "it."
18:01:35 G Nothing new can be added to Objectivism and called "Objectivism."
18:01:55 G Peikoff also does not want to associate with people like libertarians, because some disagreements may exist.
18:02:09 G Kelley thinks that this is an untenable way to advance a system of ideas.
18:02:11 ex_banana-eater I can see Objectivism (qua its philosophy) being a closed system
18:02:20 ddhewitt ddhewitt (~ddhewitt@[death to spam].c-24-2-135-104.client.comcast.net) has joined #immortal
18:02:29 G But Kelley would say that ideas constantly evolve and advance.
18:02:39 hkhenson wassail
18:02:40 G No individual, no matter how great, could ever discover everything there is to know.
18:02:44 G Greetings.
18:02:58 ddhewitt Howdy.
18:02:58 hkhenson mra been around?
18:03:02 G So ideologies must progress thru discussion, tolerance, and rigorous examination.
18:03:08 G Greetings, Mr. Hewitt.
18:03:29 G Some of the ideas newly produced may be wrong, but others will be right.
18:03:32 hkhenson responded to an MRA post on the mailing list
18:03:48 BruceKlein I'll be away soon, Duane, can you cover for me?
18:03:58 G Best wishes, Mr. Klein.
18:03:59 ex_banana-eater Say a Christian libertarian... wouldn't they be undermining what liberty stands for
18:04:05 G Not necessarily.
18:04:06 hkhenson hi bruce
18:04:12 ddhewitt Sure. What do I need to do?
18:04:15 BruceKlein * BruceKlein Official Chat Starts
18:04:18 G After all, they still advance liberty.
18:04:37 BruceKlein ah, thanks ... make sure noone goes home unhappy
18:04:43 G They could be wrong, but not in all things.
18:04:58 G And we could work with them where they are right.
18:04:58 ddhewitt Heh. That might be tough.
18:05:16 BruceKlein G. Stolyarov II - Objectivism & Immortality
18:05:18 ex_banana-eater If I said "Hitler was bad because he wasnt a vegetarian" I would be right that he was wrong, but base it on the wrong premises
18:05:36 ex_banana-eater K..Immortality
18:05:40 BruceKlein Science-fiction writer, G. Stolyarov II, joins ImmInst to talk about Objectivism, Transhumanism/Extropy and the pursuit of eternal life.
18:05:54 G Greetings, all.
18:06:02 hkhenson evening
18:06:02 BruceKlein
http://www.imminst.o...&f=63&t=4362&s= 18:06:13 BruceKlein Thanks so much for joining us, G.
18:06:19 G You are welcome.
18:06:23 BruceKlein So, how long do you wish to live?
18:06:30 G Forever.
18:06:33 BruceKlein * BruceKlein claps
18:06:36 BruceKlein why?
18:06:45 G Life is the absolute value.
18:06:50 BruceKlein cool
18:06:57 G There can be no value beyond the life of the individual.
18:07:04 G How can I value if I am dead?
18:07:12 BruceKlein heaven?
18:07:23 G Heaven is not logically substantiated.
18:07:28 BruceKlein * BruceKlein plays devils advocate
18:07:31 ddhewitt Well said.
18:07:36 G It requires *faith* to accept it.
18:07:47 hkhenson live forever or die trying :-)
18:07:53 G Faith is by definition a rejection of reason, a belief when proof is absent.
18:07:56 G Indeed!
18:08:02 ddhewitt All anti-immortalists must die.
18:08:10 ex_banana-eater G, if Objectivism is about living qua man, what is the opposite of living qua man?
18:08:13 ex_banana-eater Death, slavery?
18:08:20 G Yes.
18:08:27 hkhenson not all of them. we should keep one alive as punishment
18:08:32 G You will be enslaved by the collective.
18:08:37 G If you do not live qua man.
18:08:46 G The anti-immortalists will die of their own will.
18:08:52 ex_banana-eater Would it be acceptable to choose death over slavery
18:08:54 G In a free society, we should let them.
18:09:01 BruceKlein What gave you the idea to write "Eden against the Colossus"?
18:09:23 G I wished to play out the ultimate struggle between the forces of reason and those that opposed them.
18:09:39 G I set it in the far future, when life extension technology would be on the horizon.
18:09:48 hkhenson ah ....
18:09:49 G At the same time, the ultimate backlash from the Luddites would be imminent.
18:09:52 hkhenson how far?
18:09:57 G 2753.
18:10:09 hkhenson reminds me of AC clarke
18:10:09 G This would be their last chance to retaliate.
18:10:24 hkhenson he set AI billions of years into the future
18:10:34 hkhenson and it might well come about while he is still alive
18:10:43 G Yes.
18:10:54 G It seems the date for actual immortality may be closer than I thought.
18:11:02 hkhenson much closer
18:11:10 G Since I wrote "Eden," I became introduced to the efforts of Dr. de Grey.
18:11:15 G And the Methuselah Mouse Prize.
18:11:22 ddhewitt If we have anything to say and do about it.
18:11:24 BruceKlein yes.. excellent project
18:11:30 hkhenson there are a lot of people alive today who are likely to be here 1000 years from now . . . if anyone is
18:11:33 G As well as Mr. Kurzweil's predictions about nanoscopic robots in 30 years.
18:11:46 G And indeed I have a stake in these developments.
18:11:59 G I am in the flower of my youth.
18:12:06 ex_banana-eater G: Should a government regulate safety on nanomachines
18:12:13 G No safety regulations.
18:12:18 hkhenson you may make it without the LN2
18:12:19 ex_banana-eater Considering the possible weapon