🚀 go-pugleaf

John  Ings <nodamned@spam.org> wrote in message 
> Of course! It's a subjective issue! Haven't you realized that? 
Ofcourse, that means you and I practically can say anything we want. I
said that before a dozen times. Philosophically speaking, there's no
such thing as true objectivity simply because there's always a human
factor in between, an observation described by humans. And this is
certainly the case for this nice little discussion.

> In other words you just ignore criteria that don't support your
> argument.
I see you are also good at ignoring criteria that don't support your
argument.
 
> >Yeast is not man. 
> 
> But the situation is analagous.
Still yeast is not man. 

> 
> >Anwers are to be found.
> 
> But will we find them?

Hope so. Don't be pessimistic.

> Young enough to be around to celebrate the
> success or suffer the consequences of failure?
Let's be clear on this: whether or not we die as a species is not a
criterion for superiority, it's the achievement and actions of the
species that determine supremacy.

> >Everything that mankind can do MORE than evolutionary possible, is
> >superior.
> 
> That's nothing. Zero, Zip. Nada.
> Everything we are is evolution's product.
True, but that's not my point. Read again, I said "Everything that
mankind CAN DO", not what we ARE. Read below for examples.

> > Think of flying to the moon, or creating 'clone' life. I
> >think that's a good criterion.
> 
> I do too, but should it be the sole criterion? 
No, the more the better. As long as the criteria don't concern our
"physical self" (because we are physically no better) and "survival"
(how long we can exist is not my idea of superiority). I said before
that we are not going to be here forever.

> Can you imagine some
> future archaeologist from another civilization examining the wasteland
> of our planet? "Well it appears they were advanced enough to create
> quite a complex technology, including interplanetary exploration, but
> they couldn't control their population so their civilzation collapsed
> and after a long period of bare subsistence survival they went
> extinct."

Maybe it's because we value our personal life more than survival of
our species.

> 
> >> ## Are you thinking, or just rearranging your prejudices?
> >
> >Man is born with prejudices and dies with prejudices. In between, life
> >is a lie.
> 
> What a cheerful philosophy!

Hahaha! The obervation of the world happens in the brain, everything
you hear, see, smell and touch are things that are given meaning by
our brain dependent on the input. Maybe we all are just 'brains
floating in a pool'; the bio content (molecules) are controlled by
aliens, to give us the non-existent sensory input, who knows...
Actually, if everything we think of is subjective, then life itself is
'virtual' or imaginary, and imaginary things do not equal truth, hence
'a lie'. Maybe pessimistic, but just a thought.