[ExI] Making Rationalizations is Superior to the Alternative

[Lee Corbin]

BillK contributes a *rational* response (for the most
part), and I forgot to thank Rafal for the same. Thanks,
Bill. As you'll see here, and as you saw in Rafal's recent
posts, there is a lot less emotional distress and mere
dismissal---and more reasoning and argumentation---than
earlier. A good sign.

> On 4/14/09, Lee Corbin wrote:
 >
>>  Besides, I had previously outlined my reasoning pretty
>>  clearly. If I lived in France, and if there existed a
>>  clear distinction between my ancestors who were French
>>  and had been living there a millenium or so, and if I
>>  valued greatly the French (and of course, Western)
>>  traditions that were and are so at odds with what happens
>>  in *every* Muslim controlled country, then it follows that
>>  my people and I must expel the Muslims or else run the
>>  exceedingly severe risk of losing those very traditions;
>>  and worse, very possibly having to live or have our
>>  children live under Sharia.
> 
> 1) You don't live in France.

Please see the first word of the sentence that begins
"If I lived in France, and..."

> 2) You assume there is a clear distinction between 'old' French
>    citizens and 'new' French citizens.

Please see the first word in the phrase in the first sentence
that begins "if there existed a clear distinction..."

It isn't just in discussions of extremely hypothetical
thought experiments concerning identity that people
have such trouble with that little two letter word.

> 3) You greatly value French tradition and civilization.

Damn. See the phrase that begins "if I valued greatly..."
(although your guess is pretty good---I do happen to
value the parts of French civilization that overlap
the western in general, but the above logic does not
depend on it).

> 4) You therefore want to expel all Muslims from France.

Well---literally I said that (under those assumptions
that had all those "if"s in them) we *must* expel them
whether we wanted to or not.

> So all this attacking human rights is merely a 'thought experiment'
> for your intellectual amusement and the disruption of the extropy
> list.

It should not be possible to disrupt a list where people
like to think with thought experiments. Frankly, don't
people attend to so-called interesting lists *because*
it disrupts thought? As my topology professor used to
say, you can seldom learn anything important without
first becoming confused.

> Sometimes you so-called 'libertarians' make me hurt my ribs with
> laughing so much.

Oh. *That* kind of disruption. Sorry. Most people sort
of like that :-)

> Just about every point above contradicts the principles you claim to hold dear.

I admitted the tradeoffs: violate a principle now in
exchange for reducing the risk of losing that principle
and far, far more in the future.

> You don't really value French tradition, as you have lectured us
> before about how the Western systems of government should be scrapped
> in favor of a libertarian system.

Come now. It's all relative. Besides, I would never say "scrapped".
Our governments should gradually be *reformed*, even corruption
itself needs to be slowly excised from the system. But be they
as they may be, current western governments, institutions, and
traditions are vastly superior.

> But you still want to initiate force against law-abiding citizens
> because you suspect that many years in the future they 'might' spoil a
> society that you want to scrap anyway.

You suppose that I want to *scrap* rather than *improve*
our western societies? Odd. Anyway, you are right to
emphasize that Muslims *might* wreck our very slowly
evolved and much prized western traditions. They might
also not. They might assimilate, after all. There may
be a singularity or other big tech breakthrough first.
It's all about weighing risks, just as in everything
else.

> Therefore you should also agree that the French should expel all
> 'libertarians' because they recommend dismantling the French system of
> government and destroying centuries of tradition.

The logic is not exactly parallel (as you surely know),
because the libertarians in France are really a part
of the traditional French embracing of liberty, fraternity,
and so on. Compared to how a Muslim state is run, what
separates the French libertarians from their socialist
friends is very minor indeed.

Lee