🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4239@drivax.DRI> macleod@drivax.UUCP (MacLeod) writes:
>:I *know* I'm not going into space -- for god's sake, why should I *want*
>:to?  To spend my children's inheritance on an orbital vacation in my
>:old age (I'm now 29)?
>
>I'm 36, and I'd trade the rest of my life for one LEO, assuming I could 
>take a stack of (old) Yes and Vangelis CDs along.  Quality, not quantity, 
>makes a life well-lived.

Your current life is so unpleasant that you'd sacrifice your remaining
decades for one 90 minute orbit?  Why, this is hell, nor are you out
of it.  And my condolences to your would-be widow and children, if they
exist.

>Some individuals experience extreme emotions, bordering on the "religious", 
>when contemplating the entry of man into space.  I do believe that it is 
>spiritual, of the *human* spirit, in the most sublime sense: it is something
>no animal would ever do, nor could it want to.

Um, let's not commit the common philosophical error of confusing the
individual with mankind in general.  It is consistent for me to
believe that people will eventually live in space and yet still think
that it would be pointless for me, personally, to travel there.

By the way, how would *your* going into space help achieve any goals,
other than purely personal ones?

>The fundamentally conservative values of those who oppose manned space flight
>are not to be questioned.

Once again, it should be noted that opposing manned spaceflight IN THE
PRESENT (or, more precisely, opposing the appropriation of public
funds to pay for manned spaceflight) does not mean opposing manned
spaceflight for all time.  Nor is it obviously true that manned
spaceflight right now is necessary or even helpful in achieving
a longterm goal of moving mankind into space.

I hope my values -- whatever you perceive them to be -- are not above
question.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu