[ExI] What the France!?

Rafal Smigrodzki rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Sun Apr 5 23:56:24 UTC 2009

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:

 recall R for Rafal and L for Lee, and contrast
> the skepticism, repudiation, and revulsion of the right
> hemisphere R with the orderly, confabulatory (in the
> sense of creation), rigid, progressive, logical step-by-step
> relentless proceedings of L, the left hemisphere:

### Me the right hemisphere? Jeez.

It's not moral indignation that makes me oppose your notions (although
that I feel too), it's the conclusion that your recipe is abominably,
how should I say it, errr... mistaken on factual grounds.

> R:   "France", a body? Clearly your logical confabulations
>     (in the creative sense) have gone off the deep end.
>     The analogy fills me with the greatest disgust and
>     brings uppermost to mind the question of what has
>     happened to your skeptical powers of good judgment.

### Not disgust, Lee, and not logical. If you were logical, you
wouldn't be generating this stuff.

> R:   That is mere logical extrapolation. We don't know
>     that any of that will take place. When we weigh those
>     remote (in time, at least) possibilities with what
>     happens to real people in the hear and now, then the
>     judgment must come down on the side of doing no harm
>     (or the lesser harm) in the here and now.

### Ah, yeah, you remembered I am a physician. And yes, of course you
need to discount future events and predictions, especially based on
highly uncertain models, compared to the present.


> L:   Do you dismiss out of hand the developments of which
>     I warn? Do you think that these have zero probability?

### You mean Muslims reaching majority status in France in 30 years?
According to


this is indeed zero probability, given that Muslims are about 6-8 % of
the group below 25 year old, and would have to breed much much more
than they do now to generate the majority.

Give me reliable data saying otherwise. Then convince me that the vast
majority of French Muslims wish to institute Sharia. Then show that
the only way of preventing this is by indiscriminate destruction of
Muslims, rather than e.g. by declaring limits on the number of
children a citizen may have, and ruthlessly taxing or sterilizing all
overbreeders irrespective of faith (still a stupid idea, IMO, but it
would prevent rapid changes in the demographic makeup of the country).
Finally, you would need to convince me somehow that the French culture
is so freaking valuable that killing a million or two of innocent
(i.e. non-violent) people is a good price to keep it around. That's
all you need to have me join your camp.


> R:   It doesn't matter. What is important is a principled
>     adherence to our cherished principles at all times,
>     regardless of risk.

### The whole point of my cherished principles is that they are the
least risky (AFAIK), compared to the stupid flailing about that
constitutes the life politic.

>     What you propose is *not* an ESS, and it flies in
>     the face of your antecedents who made your policies
>     and probably your very existence possible.

### You mean, my modest proposal to be nice to nice people, including
nice Muslims, is *not* an ESS?


>     You are a free-loader. <etc. etc, lotsa stuff elided>

### Yeah, sure.


>     Reply to that, if you will, and---if somehow you can---
>     please try to keep the dialog focused on the analytic
>     and non-emotional, as understandably hard as that may be
>     for your right hemisphere in this kind of discussion.
### Lee, you base your thinking on factual errors, believe
preposterous predictions, you show a lazy unwillingness to consider
non-violent or less violent solutions, and you have some funny values,
too. Fine. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that I am


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list