[extropy-chat] Politics

[Natasha Vita-More]

At 06:28 PM 12/28/2005, you wrote:


>On 12/29/05, <mailto:nvitamore at austin.rr.com>nvitamore at austin.rr.com 
><<mailto:nvitamore at austin.rr.com>nvitamore at austin.rr.com > wrote:
>
>From: Harvey Newstrom
>
> > As my original note pointed out, all "solutions" fail some
> >segment of the community.  There seems to be no answer that everyone
> >finds acceptable.  No matter which we chose, some segment of the
> >audience will leave.  I have no idea what the answer is, because
> >different people have different criteria for the list.
>
>My ideal discussion would be to approach an issue/problem from
>multidisciplinary, and domain-diversity, viewpoints.  Rather than beating
>the donkey or elephant silly, it would be more extropic to take an issue
>such as getting vaccines to developing countries or proactively fighting
>for individual (human) rights and work at finding a solution.  For example,
>if a topic is "POL-STEE: Vaccines & Dev. Countries," posters would apply
>domain-diversity in their suggested solutions by looking at the issue from
>social, technological, economic and environmental perspectives.
>
>Rather than pushing party politics, posters would push the domain "ideas"
>to solve the problem.  In the end, this would mean that the solution
>finding would be non-partisan and focused on solutions rather than personal
>politics.
>
>
>That works for well defined technical problems.
>It does not work if some dispute that there is a problem, or for social 
>problems that involve cultural clashes.
>How would you use your technique to resolve the abortion debate in the US?

This method has to work for social problems or it is no good.  I think all 
social problems involve cultural clashes, don't they?  And usually these 
clashes can be reduced to religious or political views in which individual 
rights (freedom of choice) are not respected.

With your choice of abortion debate, the conflict stems from disparate 
views on when live begins and the mother's life being of more value than 
the life of the newly formed cells in the uterus.  There are a few views, 
but the central ones are the beliefs that (1) life begins with the union of 
egg and sperm; and (2) life begins when the conglomeration of cells 
differentiate and form cognitive function and memories (creating 
identity).  I'm afraid  there is no compromise between these two, 
usually.  Although there has been some sign of compromise between the two 
beliefs about when the cells form - what month do they create a being, etc..

The real issue is not abortion or the abortion debate, but how to prevent 
unwanted pregnancies. Preventing unwanted pregnancies needs to be looked at 
from a technological, economic and environmental perspective.

More later.

Natasha


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist - Designer
Future Studies, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Member, <http://www.profuturists.com/>Association of Professional Futurists
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
Honorary Vice-Chair, <http://transhumanism.org/>World Transhumanist 
Association
Senior Associate, <http://foresight.org/>Foresight Institute
Advisor, <http://alcor.org/>Alcor Life Extension Foundation

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, 
then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the 
circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system 
perspective.
Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20051229/bdd9e6f5/attachment.html>