From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Jul 26 2006 - 10:47:48 MDT
And I think this is, indeed, the best answer. You don't need a thick
philosophy book to justify having fun. If you can have fun without
damaging others, just do it.
Past generation did not have this problem because engineering could
not do anything against mortality. We are beginning to glimpse the
possibility of a better engineering that can do something against
mortality, and perhaps soon enough to be a practical issue.
As a rational being, I can accept mortality if I know for a fact that
nothing can be done against it. But as soon as science gives me the
choice, I definitely prefer staying alive.
On 7/26/06, R. W. <email@example.com> wrote:
> Yes. ACCEPTING mortality. I don't expect love or even rationality. In
> fact, I don't expect any response. What good is there in outliving all the
> stars in the universe?...
> The best answer that I can come up with for justifying infinite
> transcendence is that it would be fun! What other purpose is there once
> you've crossed the boundary of all necessity?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT