[ExI] Making Rationalizations is Superior to the Alternative

Lee Corbin lcorbin at rawbw.com
Tue Apr 14 00:29:56 UTC 2009

Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> Lee, I am disappointed with your argumentation. When I challenged you
> to provide me with the exact chain of reasoning leading you from "I
> live in France" to "let's destroy all Muslims in France", you didn't.

Perhaps I didn't get to that post, sorry. Besides, I'm
very disappointed with your rephrasing. Who said *ANYTHING*
about destroying anyone? How bizarre that you should choose
that word.

Besides, I had previously outlined my reasoning pretty
clearly. If I lived in France, and if there existed a
clear distinction between my ancestors who were French
and had been living there a millenium or so, and if I
valued greatly the French (and of course, Western)
traditions that were and are so at odds with what happens
in *every* Muslim controlled country, then it follows that
my people and I must expel the Muslims or else run the
exceedingly severe risk of losing those very traditions;
and worse, very possibly having to live or have our
children live under Sharia.

> When I challenged you to run the numbers and to explain how a 6%
> minority with marginally higher procreation levels could become a
> majority in 25 years, you didn't.

What? This is a matter of numbers for you? Are you saying
that if they were a 40% minority that would tip the balance
in your thinking? This sounds misleading, to put it mildly.
Are you really grappling with the issues? Why don't you
give me some examples where you *would* expel some minority,
and I mean *expel*, not "destroy".

> Yet you persist in dismissing me and others as dumb ("right
 > hemisphere", "rationalizations"). This hurts,

Jesus Christ. The two halves are *totally* necessary for
*all* thinking.

My apology, since if one read

    There indeed was exhibited a great deal of what should
    be called "solely right hemispheric thinking". For
    example, some assertions (made by me and others)
    were and are dismissed out of hand without argument (!)
    in many posts.

and had no context, then one could suppose that I was thinking
that the left hemisphere played no role. I should rephrase,
and say instead that it's "dominant right hemisphere thinking",
of the timeless kind, as I explained. You probably read Brooks'
article, and besides this is all well known: an instantaneous
judgment originates in the right hemisphere.

> On top of that, you have been whining about people trying to shut you
> down like a heretic. No, you are not a heretic. You walk in any bar in
> the US and you will find dozens of regular dudes who think like you
> do.

The things I was saying were pretty heretical on *this* list,
though I guess one or two others are pretty much in agreement
with me. Extreme expressions of revulsion and disgust in a
public forum have just three purposes: (1) shut the offender
up (2) advertise how squeaky *clean* I (the speaker) am, and
(3) prevent our crowd from getting a bad reputation for
having certain beliefs, though this 3 should be stricken
from the list since calm rational retort serves the same

> So, as to uphold the high standards of the list, let me ask you again
> - Run the numbers. Give me a quantitative analysis of current
> situation, trends, likely quantitative outcomes of various
> interventions in support of your plan. To channel Eliezer, shut up and
> multiply. And did I mention, run the numbers?
> If you don't do that, what's the use arguing?

Oh, I like to hear views and analyses that differ from mine. (Some
people don't. (I'm not saying you.)) I do appreciate your argument
that according to you according to your numbers, the truly crucial
"us becoming a minority" wouldn't be going to happen for some time
(were I that hypothetical Frenchman I spoke of above). Indeed, the
singularity might happen first.

But as painlord said first, it would be a hell of a lot better to
expel 6% of the population (which, remember is not destroying
anyone) than risk an eventual civil war or worse. So I don't
quite see the real point of numbers, here.


P.S. So you've completely changed the topic *back* to the
question of WSFD. When I changed the subject line to this,
it was to get away from that (here), and to talk about
the need for rationalization (bad as it sounds) in sound

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list