[extropy-chat] Famous author self destructs inpublic!Filmateleven.

[Brett Paatsch]

Charlie Stross wrote:

> On 6 Jun 2005, at 05:13, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
>>> The sub-text of the entire “human life begins at 10^6 cells/^10^3/1 
>>> cell” debate is that a *potential* life is worth as much, if not more, 
>>> than the *actual* life of the woman who is expected by the 
>>> anti-abortion lobby to go through a somewhat hazardous medical 
>>> condition (which, in the wild, has a 5-10% fatality rate) and then -- 
>>>  this is implicit in the whole mess -- spend the next twenty years of 
>>> life surrendering their potential for self-actualization to that other 
>>> formerly potential person.
>>
>> That sentence is too hard for me to parse. I think you are strawmanning
>> the views of those who I disagree with as well but I can't tell.
>
> Um, I was taking you initially for one of the "every sperm is sacred (and 
> you women had better look after them)" crowd. Not having run into you on 
> the net before.

You missed me by 180 degrees. 'Every sperm is sacred' is my favorite
Python song.

We have run into each other on the net before. It was on this list. I
remembered you favourably as the person that had once ran a version
of a prediction market at the Foresight Institute. I think you said it was
closed down when a new director wasn't sure how to account for it.

Perhaps I didn't recognize you as a science fiction writer because I
don't read a lot of science fiction. I've been generally disappointed
with science fiction perhaps because I like science and the plot lines
seem to date so quickly.

>>> As a non-American who lives in a country where at the last poll just 
>>> short of 90% of the population approved of abortion being available on 
>>> demand, let me say that I think this discussion would be ludicrous if 
>>> it wasn’t evil.
>>
>> So what are you a Canadian living in the US or what?
>
> British, living in the UK. (In the People's Republic of Scotland, to be 
> precise.)

An interesting part of the world. Therapeutic cloning and Ian Wilmut,
sportsbetting licensing with Betfair, and the question of what to do
about the EU constitution following the French and the Dutch votes.

I was interested in the stuff about Goldsmith and the legality (or
otherwise) of the Iraq war and how it played out in the election there
as well. The Brits seemed to be a lot more interested in whether the
invasion was legal than were Australians or those in the US.

> ...
>> Its ironic, but when you posted to the list recently you said that you
>> were irked I think that there was so much ranting going on. But now
>> I am struggling to understand what points you are trying to make
>> because you seem to have decided to rant along with us.
>>
>> When you use words like evil I don't know if you are parodying the
>> US President or if you actually really think in such terms yourself.
>
> See "British", above, and consider the possibility that a Manichean view 
> of the world ain't part of my outlook. Britain and the US are two nations 
> divided by a linguistic sar-chasm.

:-)

> (Although if I was going to try and bolt together a post-religious 
> rationalist ethical framework based on game theory with a side-order of 
> utilitarianism, I think I'd probably retain the word "evil" to describe 
> ideologies or beliefs that amount to repeatedly smacking yourself in the 
> face with a two-by-four. And the Christian fundamentalists are a good fit 
> for that pattern of behaviour.)

If you ever do decide to try your hand at bolting together a post-religious
rationalist ethical framework based on game theory and are looking for
people to kick it around with, I'd be another with an interest in your
hobby.

Brett Paatsch