Talk-Polywell.org

And you define the onset of sapience and personality how? I'd look for evidence of differentiated areas of the brain associated with personality - the prefrontal cortex, for example. You just don't seem to get that the law defines SHARP lines in place of your fuzzy "feelings" based assumptions. You...

Diogenes wrote:That your are unable to see it is only due to the limitations of your perception. It exists none the less. People not biased can see it easily.

All you have to do is give up your preconceived notions, especially those that you have rationalized to suit you.

You can't explain how one is different from the other, but take your word for it, there is a "qualitative difference." Who says? There are, to my mind, obvious qualitative differences between a zygote and a person; to borrow a word from earlier in the thread, sapience being a prime difference. Pers...

You choose to put a threshold where one is not clear, and to ignore a threshold where one is indeed very clear. There is certainly a difference between an unfertilised egg and a zygote, but there is also qualitative difference between a zygote and a person (and any vagueness in defining a precise b...

I'm not the one claiming that objective evidence can show an act to be morally right or wrong. No, you are the one claiming that a position you support cannot be defined by objective evidence. No. I can define it - just not to your satisfaction (remember the continuum fallacy - vagueness alone does...

Sure, the law makes a decision, but is it correct and reasonable? Correct ? There's no objective way of saying one way or the other. Well, yes there is. There really isn't. /shrug Reasonable ? For me (and the moral majority), yes. For you, no. So was slavery. That is all I need to say about the use...

It's not so vast a conspiracy, just a small group of people sitting in the middle of it all, surrounded by a larger group who need the power and influence that AGW provides them. If you are tring to remake the world you need a big hammer and there is nothin bigger than the threat of the ned of the ...

we now know that this is exactly what has happened to climate science. We don't. You have a strong belief (probably related to an ideological perspective) that this is the case. Others don't share that view (/bias). We have the team's internal communications thanks to climategate and what's there i...

Maybe you are intentionally using the term 'liberal' to confuse your position - I don't know. Well, I was responding to Diogenes' comment about 'liberals'. He's the one who subsequently brought the Democrats into this. He will no doubt contend that liberal and Democrat are interchangeable. But I di...

Betruger wrote:I'm really skeptical about it as well.

I'm pessimistic optimist.

But look at the numbers Kurzweil's put together.

I really hope he's right, but I rather get the feeling that he's allowing his emotional investment in the notion that "The Singularity Is Near" to over ride any objectivity.

Betruger wrote:Was letting self give opinion in full color in response to what seemed like an unrealistically pessimistic POV.

I dunno, I think that it not unreasonable to be concerned about an economic paradigm predicated upon exponential growth.

liberals have never been right about anything. The Afro-American civil rights movement? An effort necessitated by Democrats refusal to obey the law since 1868 I guess the connection between Democrats and liberal values is as tenuous as that between Republicans and traditional conservatives values. ...

williatw wrote:I can also remember the "energy crises" of the '70's. Nowdays repackaged as "peak oil".

What do you mean "nowadays repackaged as peak oil"?

hanelyp wrote:To have prosperity you need rule of law, property rights, and legal enforcement of contracts. All anathema to the Left.

Yep, proponents of radical ideologies, left or right, are pretty nutty.

There were no internet myths in the '70's. Sorry, no prizes for pointing out the bleeding obvious. :( there was one paper, critiques by otehrs, that got blown up by journalists, and then propagated as an internet myth "and then" as in afterwards, subsequently, some time in the future, not necessari...