Don,  et al

I am still thinking about your post.  Or perhaps I am dreaming of the
images you write of unable to translate it into my immediate reality.

Human?   No, collective speaking we are only alive. A mass of people yet
to be humanized or acquire the understanding to access the thoughts,
speech and actions necessary to distinguish human beings from the lower
animals forms.  Even with this last statement I create a false hierarchy
which prevents me from accessing true human values, capacities and worth.

I am still thinking about your post and will respond soon.

F. Leon


On Sun, 14 Jun 1998, Don Brayton wrote:

> F. Leon,
>
> We, the humans on the planet earth, are experiencing a degree of real
> affluence greater than any found in recorded history.   This affluence is
> testing our collective character and wisdom as severely as does a million
> dollar windfall test those of a lottery winner.  What do we do with it?
> We are close to having the potential of keeping virtually every conceived
> foetus alive to reproductive maturity and of  supporting entire
> communities of terminally infirm, indolent, parasitic and  criminal
> individuals.  We have come from nomadic communities living hand-to-mouth
> wherein 'the rebellious son shall be stoned' (Deuteronomy 22) to a
> thoroughly industrialized and automated society wherein  'all
> contra-survival behavior shall be tolerated, '  (no source, just my
> hyperbole).  'Human perfectability' is truly within our grasp when we can
> surgically or chemically weed out of our gene pool all potential for
> infirmity, indolence, parasitism and criminality ... a sort of preemptive
> triage which is more palatable to us than taking a sassy boy to the town
> square for his final moments.  But is it truly more ethical?  Who is to
> decide what is acceptable behavior to be left in the gene pool?  What
> else is to be lost from the gene pool?   The latter method does not allow
> for the individual to moderate his own behavior after having been shown
> what can happen if he continues to sass his mother.
>
> I say, to blazes with human perfectability!  Individuals can strive to
> perfect themselves, in fact, that is the basis of all that is noble.  If
> only our leaders would say, 'follow me ...  here is my dream, here are
> the principles I live by and here is the result.  If you want to pursue
> my dream with me, hop on my wagon.'  Instead, we see a President who
> dreams about a socialist utopia and lies and fornicates.  What is your
> dream F. Leon, I may just hop on your wagon.
>
> Forgive me. I am really trying to stay with your topic.  I believe that
> classical Darwinism is only temporarily obscured by today's affluence.
> If you take inner cities as microcosms of lesser affluence you will see
> pure Survival of the Fittest at work today.  It is inate in any living
> thing, inescapable anywhere on the food chain even for those who are so
> affluent that they never perceive the moment of death for the entity
> which is entering their mouths.   Veganism, anyone?   Within human
> society, we have been best served by the invention of business structures
> within which self-interest can be expressed and pursued to benefit the
> group, vis-a-vis the business, without eliminating the lower rungs of the
> ladder for the less able.  But alas, for the poor liberal, such an
> organization is difficult to control and tax from some central authority.
>
>
> > the individual pursuit of self-interest can be collectively
> self-defeating.
>
> This is an oxymoronic statement (self-defeating self-interest).  It can
> be understood if you equate the estate of the collective to be the estate
> of the elite ruling the collective.  Example, Castro is the 11th most
> wealthy man in the world.  If he lost his control of his citizens such
> that they could fully pursue their self interest, he would eventually
> have to give it back.   From the looks of things, he and his enforcers
> better start  '>Creating incentives for mutual cooperation'  (like obey
> or die) so that doesn't happen.
>
> So, I recommend approaching this issue on the basis of the broader
> historical and social context.  Now I will go read the article in
> 'Prospect.'
>
> Your favorite renegade lurker,
>
> Don
>
                [       [       TEXT CUT        ]       ]