Re: virus: Re: Future man, immortality and memes
JD (jd@bilbo.bio.purdue.edu)
Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:32:12 -0500 (EST)
In response to B.N. Whittington:
It is true that children are currently one of the ways for promoting
memetic immortality, and many "free thinkers" I know don't reproduce as
much as uhhh "non-free thinkers", and this may or maynot be preferable to
evolution. You see, sometimes i ask myself if a certain degree of "ignorance
or niavity" is a evolutionary advantage. The old saying "Ignorance is bliss"
comes to mind, and those who have bliss are probably more evolutionary advantagious than those who are not. Nature has no conscience, it has no interest in
continuing the human race, or continueing are great memes, it is only trying
to increase the entropy of the universe, so why would it choose to pick
free thinkers as evolutionary preferable. Also, nature creates and destroys
without any remorse, so I choose not to play its game. The beauty of new
thoughts in books, symphonies, etc will be there in the future, but if I
die i will not even know it anyway, nor will I have the emotions to care
about it. Therefore I renounce my evolutionary role, because this role
means nothing to me, I want to control my own role. The process of evolution
is in my opinion a cruel role to play out.
If We had the technology for immortality, I might consider a child. Because
right now I would only be creating something I know will be destroyed.
Jeremy