X-Message-Number: 17007
From: 
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 11:23:07 EDT
Subject: altruism and terminology

Lee Corbin's post #16999 seemed to me rather confused and partly 
self-contradictory, but said in part:

<<  We are debating terminology, and the important semantic links that our 
terms have. >>

Yes--very often the WRONG links, which is why, despite the difficulty, it is 
important to get to the basics and correct bad usage. Nefarious usage has 
often related to such concepts as nobility, honor, and duty. Over extended 
times and places the "good" was associated with God, King, and Country. In 
feudal Japan, it was "good" and "honorable" for a parent to sacrifice the 
lives of children for the local lord--sometimes even merely as a gesture to 
prove loyalty. 

One old saw goes, "I could not love thee, Dear, so much, loved I not honor 
more." Well, what is love of honor, if not devotion to your own sense of self 
worth, hence to yourself? It is indeed important to the psyche to maintain 
consistent standards, but we must still understand the difference between 
means and ends.

Lee also writes:

>You understand what is really going on in people's nervous systems as well 
as I, and I understand
>what is really going on in peoples nervous systems as well as you.

That flabbergasts me. I certainly don't have much understanding, and I don't 
think anyone else does either. It's going to take an enormous amount of work. 

Mammy Yokum said, "Good is better than evil, because it's nicer." That's 
about the extent of most people's "understanding" today, and that's being 
generous.

Robert Ettinger
Cryonics Institute
Immortalist Society
http://www.cryonics.org

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17007