[ExI] How to make progress (was Re: Why do political and economic leaders deny Peak Oil and Climate Change?)
brent.allsop at canonizer.com
Sat Sep 7 21:53:45 UTC 2013
On 9/7/2013 3:00 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 02:27:52PM -0600, Brent Allsop wrote:
>> Why is it that people are so willing to put so much time, effort and
>> pain on possibly critically important things like this, when there
>> are better ways to go about this and get something done. Sure, there
>> could be some existential threat out there, but if there is is this
>> the best way to go about it?
> A number of people are seeing a crtical problem ahead, yet the majority
> doesn't. In order to solve the problem it however requires the action of
> the majority. This thing is way too big for people, or municipalities.
> This is nation-state, nay, planet-scale.
Exactly! And there could be some more terrible existential threat that
only a few people are now just starting to see. In fact I feel like one
of these. But I'm not giving up on anyone. I'm working to communicate
concisely and quantitatively, to build expert consensus amongst experts
everyone will trust, and I believe we can do something to save the world
and all of us.
> Therein lies the problem. We are yeast.
Oh puuleese. Yeast can't communicate, at least like we can. And there
are ways to comunicate much more effectively than like this. If there
truly is a terrible risk, the most effect way to communicate such is to
start building an expert consensus arround it in an open survey way,
where you can also survey for why others can't yet accept what you are
saying, if there are any, and have a concice and quantitative reference
to that to work with. Currently, you are just working from your frame
of reference, having no clue why I so hate what you are saying, or what
might convince me. It also would help to find a set of experts that I
trust, and start to build a consensus amongst them. That would
definitely convince me, and I bet most every rational person. Once
people understand, I and I believe anyone would go to the end of the
world to save it, or any loved one.
> Don't hate on
> so much. Try some suspension of disbelief, and as a working
> hypothesis assume it's modelling many aspects that are true.
To bad you have no clue as to why I so desperately truly 'hate' these
kinds of points of view, and why I feel they are leading to the
unnecessary eternal damnation of so many of my loved ones, indeed
possibly most everyone alive today. Maybe if you had half an idea, you
could finally find a way to communicate to all of us that feel as I do,
then I could help you?
> What is the best way to go about it? It seems that we've ran
> out of options but at personal and small community level due
> to the reasons outlined above.
Oh yee of little and mistaken (thinking we are all nothing more than
> Even knowing that doesn't help much, since most of us are locked
> in a precarious configuration it will hurt to change short-term.
> Yet by acting too late we will not be able to effect that transition.
Once we can communicate, concisely and quantitatively, in an expert
consensus way, it will amplify the moral wisdom of us all, and enable
all of us to do whatever is required. Co-operation only requires
definitive expert consensus. Sure, yeast can't achieve that yet, but we
most certainly can. You can't expect everyone to be experts in the
infinite number of existential end of the world threats an infinite
number of individuals are going on about infinitely. All we need to do
is to measure for which of them have the most expert consensus, and
enable all these experts to comunicate in a definitive and concise,
nobody can deny way, and rigorously measure for how fast this consensus
is growing. And if it isn't growing in certain cercles, finding out
why, concicely and quantitativedly, and surveying for what might work
better, from their frame of reference. Why would the world not follow
that, on a dime, giving any and all required, if you could do that?
> It seems the best strategy now is to act ruthless, bold and selfish,
As in kill people? Take away their free agency? Excommunicate
nonbelievers? Give up on people? Force everyone to work on what you
think is the most pressing existential threat, rather than what others
think is a far more serious and pressing?
> and make your exit while you still can. The exit must involve building
> a mutually supportive rural community. This is an alien concept to
Exit? What will any of that do? So, yes, you hate, or are giving up on
the rest of us? You'd leave us behind?
> Here my fortune cookie ends.
Yup, definitely giving up.
> In case yours says something else,
> let's compare notes
What are you saying here? It sounds like you are almost asking people
to try to communicate, concisely and quantitatively?
> (please no discussions about how it's all
> unreal; because: nazis wear nice leather uniforms).
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
More information about the extropy-chat