[ExI] enough time has passed...
steinberg.will at gmail.com
Mon Jan 24 15:06:52 UTC 2022
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:46 AM Jason Resch via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> Conversely, if this widely implemented measure X gave everyone cancer in
> five years it would be good if it were not adopted by 100% of the
> population. I think some degree of robustness is afforded by populations
> not all doing X at any one time.
> It can be a deficit in some circumstances and a strength in others, but we
> can't always know upfront which it is.
> Consider that when you turn on the lights, half the cockroaches scatter
> and hide and the other half remain in the open to continue eating. The ones
> that scatter risk starvation while those that remain out risk getting
> squashed. Either strategy can be good or bad for the individual, but the
> species as a whole benefits by distributing different response strategies
> across members of the population. It's a hallmark of evolution and
> necessary for a species's survival.
Thanks for putting this concisely, this is essentially what I've been
telling people; I say something like "SOMEBODY has to not take it!" but I
like the way you put it better. But yeah I've been saying that it doesn't
make sense for 100% of people to immediately take a medical intervention
that the government or society tells them to. Things need balance,
harmony. If we lived in a society where 100% of people blindly listen to
authority, that would not be good.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat