<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Alan Brooks <<a href="mailto:alaneugenebrooks52@yahoo.com">alaneugenebrooks52@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">The big question is how much is unspoken resentment of the status quo resentment of the cosmos itself when the cosmos is not obligated to us in any way, isn't even obliged to pay attention to us?</div>
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;">Celebrity culture has trickled down to the grassroots so there is an insistent message of "you must pay attention to me, I deserve it, society owes something to me ". Those such as Tim McVeigh commit a crime to say "the world must notice insignificant little me, so I blow up a building. Notoriety is my due. Gimme". Charles Manson goes to trial to mug for the camera and say "Give me your attention, It's me. You must notice poor little suffering violent little me ". Gimme.</div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br>The "poor little suffering me" argument disappears with the advent of nanotechnology. That was the point of my "Sapphire Mansions" paper many years ago. The "you do not notice me" argument cannot easily be eliminated. We all want to be noticed because that allows for sexual opportunities which allow for reproduction. So from the level of the genome up we have a need to be noticed. To shift that you have to say one should engineer genomes which do not crave acknowledgment [1]. That potentially creates an entirely different set of problems which we have extremely experience with (Most species on earth are defined by their ability to be noticed as potential mates.)<br>
<br>You can eliminate "poor" from the equation, but not the "suffering" due to the fact that it may be self-defined.<br></div></div><br>Robert<br><br>1. The term "sociopath" comes to mind...<br>