Anyone up for the Kyoto discussion?
Li-
In a message dated 11/21/00 10:39:34 PM !!!First Boot!!!,
[log in to unmask] writes:
> Life may apparently be, or be evidenced by, any moral virtue which for the
> moment [is] under consideration. In Shaw's play the two artificial
hominoids
> whom the rash scientific adolescents have made, use lies. We are told, "If
> they were alive they would speak the truth,' [Shaw, Back to Methuselah]. A
> moment later there is a question of destroying the hominoids. The male one
> desperately pleads that only his mate should be destroyed. Their makers,
> disgusted at this, say 'Let us see whether we cannot put a little more life
> into them.' They do so, with the immediate result that the male hominoid
> changes his entreaty to 'Spare her and kill me." Thus life is willingness
to
> die and an old paradox meets us in a new setting."
>
> Only the creator is responsible for questions regarding existence, which is
> the essence of being itself. As humans we have no power to extinquish or to
> replicate existence, therefore questions pertaining to the existence are
> really about 'quality' [Theatetus]
>
> "Nature destroys nothing without replacing it with something better"
>
> Meister Eckhardt
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|