🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2997802C.21324@ics.uci.edu> mludwig@ics.uci.edu
(Michael Scott Ludwig) writes:
>My apologies if Eugene was being sarcastic in the main part of the message.
>But even if so, this is not a total waste - unfortunately there are people
>out there who would agree with this message in seriousness. ...
>Eugene is correct in identifying the media as at least part of this problem.
>But just because the media tries to make us think like this doesn't mean we
>have to.  If you want any problem like this solved, you have to try to break
>this pattern.  And no you probably cannot do this by yourself.  But you
>can't hurt, either.  Plus, look at what is happening just because nobody
>thinks that they themselves make any difference - nobody tries, so nothing
>gets done.  I saw this great example once, I forget where (paraphrased from
>memory) :

Very good, no need to apologize.  And you caught the sarcasm:
Business as usual....
But I did not mention the media to bash them.  The media is only a
carrier.  Yes, it can filter, but it is still largely the carrying
which is significant.

>Whether you yourself litter or not makes very little difference on how dirty
>our streets and parks are.  So that means it's okay to litter, right?  But
>this ignores the fact that litter will never completely disappear if you
>litter.

Very good!

However raise this issue say (3 months "after the media, Government"
declares 'victory.')

The key must be the development of an awareness that we have problems which
are not easily detectable (sensible).  That the world interconnected by
more than computer networks.  You can see litter, and I even know an
environmental slant which would encourage you to litter (Abbey).
I think we need to have people get sick, perhaps even die because of
consequences like this, it will happen, we just have to wait, this is
what happened at places like Bhopal.  We have too divorced ourselves from
our environment and are not watching for long-term consequences
(and I do not mean dealing with the trade-imbalance among the long-term).
And our tolerance for accidents will increase as our population increases.
"Oh, it's just a 'cost' which gets passed on to the consumer."  This
is what Skinner called "Selection by Consequences" in an article in Science.

>Maybe we should make a newsgroup alt.apathy?  On second thought, no, because
>apathetic people wouldn't care enough to read it.

Ah, you got it!

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene