| Subject: Re: How are we defining Inteligence? |
| From: Ed |
| Date: 20/09/2004, 19:24 |
| Newsgroups: alt.sci.seti,sci.astro.seti |
Paul Bramscher <brams007_nospam@tc.umn.edu> wrote in news:cimpg4$dhk$1
@lenny.tc.umn.edu:
Matter transporters will always be problematic, especially if they
require destroying the original and making a copy, or even
de-constituting the original and reassembling it. This is the stuff of
science fiction today, but even if it were possible I would refuse to
use one myself, and I'm certain that millions or billions of people
would likewise refuse on religious, spiritual, psychological or
naturalistic terms.
I believe you can take the fiction out of that. I believe it was in 1966
when I heard the first reports that a transporter would work. The
problem with the approach that they had was that it would basically use
more power then was available in the world at the time.
In any case, there are lots of things we do today despite technological
advances. We have cars and trains, but people still walk and ride
bicycles. We can order almost anything online, but people still shop.
We watch television and movies, but still enjoy live theater. People
can drink at home, but this is even somewhat stigmatized: many prefer
drinking at bars.
Might have to do with the fact that we are individuals. We don't all run
in the same herd. We like to be different and we are.