[extropy-chat] Re: peak oil debate framed from a game theorystandpoint ?

Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com
Sun Sep 4 23:44:56 UTC 2005



--- Hal Finney <hal at finney.org> wrote:

> Spike asks:
> 
> > Here's an ethical question for you guys.  Suppose I am a skeptic
> > regarding the sillier stuff we hear about global warming: that it
> > was the cause of the snowstorms in Los Angeles this past winter,
> > that it makes more and bigger hurricanes, that it causes the
> > genitals of the children of outer Mongolia to mature at the age
> > of four, whatever.
> >
> > Suppose I am in a position to make money off of that hype.  Would
> > that be unethical? If I don't actually *contribute* to the
> > silliness, but rather take advantage of that which is already
> > out there, entirely thru
> > free market reaction.  Do you see anything wrong with that?
> 
> I think the main ethical question would be whether your actions cause
> harm, from your perspective.  If you don't agree with this theory
> about global warming, yet you are, say, selling products that tie
> into the theory somehow, then your actions would arguably increase
> belief in what you view as a false idea.  So I think that would be
> ethically wrong.

On the contrary, holding others to their own beliefs, having them put
their money where their minds are, and gaining or suffering the
consequences as a result, is evolution in action. Are you saing
evolution is unethical?
 
> If your product or service, on the other hand, somehow would show or
> demonstrate to people the falsehood of their beliefs, then your
> actions would be more likely to be ethical.
> 
> Suppose your product were useless. Suppose it was a ghost repellant
> and you sold it to people who foolishly believe in ghosts. Then you
> might argue that you are implicitly punishing a false belief and
> indirectly rewarding people who believe correctly. However I would
> say that you are doing harm to people who already suffer from their
> false beliefs, without really doing anything to lead them to the
> truth.  So this would in my opinion be unethical.

I recall a Dr. Suess tale that resembles this remark, about a society
of two sorts of people, with attendant strife between them, and an
entrepreneur that sold one group a machine to make them look like the
other group, and sold the other group a machine to make them look like
the first group. Everybody got in a tizzy going from machine to
machine, changing back and forth, until they were all broke (except for
the entrepreneur), suffered the cognitive shock I've occasionally
spoken of, and realized it didn't matter what people looked like.

I would say the entrepreneur is selling not a machine, but an
education. There are some lessons that people have to learn the hard
way.

> 
> Do you have a specific idea in mind to make money off global warming
> hype?

Selling appalachian backwoods land at 200 meters altitude as future
ocean front property... selling Canadian tundra as future prairie
farmland... selling solar power panels with an ROI of 25 years...
selling electric cars that produce more toxic waste in batteries than a
normal car does in CO2....

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
Founder, Constitution Park Foundation:
http://constitutionpark.blogspot.com
Personal/political blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list