>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.
Nature does not 'try' to do anything. Its effect on things like planets
is to _decrease_ entropy.
>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.
To not create because it will someday be destroyed seems tatamount to
shooting oneself in the foot (or maybe more like taking your ball home
if you can't be quarterback). In any case, even with 'immortality',
eventually any given life would run out. A billion years sounds like
a long time now, but, to me, a hundred did too, once.