I agree. You make choices from the one available, from your data... and what you can do beyond you own person, of often null...
the question is how much evil can do motivated people defending a Cause... Some says that since people are more dangerous than bandits. Milgram experiment show that clearly. on a scientist blog (she is a pro, a mainstream one, but now dissenter - guess who ) I have read an article about the opposition of micro-ethics, and macro-ethics. micro-ethics is for a scientist to be honest, to raise alarm when there are, to note problems, uncertainties, mismatch, errors, whatever are the consequence on his career, his project, on his college career, on his political/religious vision.... Macro-ethics is protecting the interest of the values, the communities, you estimate and want to defend. In real life there is an opposition between the two. Most mainstream scientists decide to hide uncertainties, if it is endangering their moral desire to make things change in the good direction. If it endanger the credibility of their scientific domain, of their scientific community, in which they believe to make the world better, to save the planet from evil they are sure do exist. They know/imagine they are under attack by "knowledge terrorists", the salesmen of doubt, the mercenaries of Great Evil. The "circle the wagon", the start to bend the facts, to hide problems, to manipulate peer-review, to terrorize the scientific journals, the academy who disagree... because they hold the Good, the Truth. Many people know they exaggerate, they are wrong, but it is for the Good... nobody can be against Good... They became salesmen of certainty... they know it is for the good. they ask for legal protection against denialists of their truth. the ask for ban, for ostracization... the behave like what they fear the most, like "knowledge occupation army"... the torture the facts, kills the dissenters, bomb the fringe labs... They do it because it is for the Good... one day there is a Manning, a Snowden, a Farewell, a FXXX (?) ...who simply cannot accept to burry his micro-ethic, the ideals he was born in, in the name of his macro-ethics, which he feel are corrupted now... who have an irrational ego to think he can change the things, that he will be recognized for so. They are not nice people, they are... required. data are leaked... and the house of cards is shaked... It hold for few years but more an more people lose faith in the macroethics... most continue by selfish interests, by laziness, or simply escape in silent... meanwhile the preachers of Truth get more and more radical, increase the level of their claims, as fast as the others lose interest... and it collapse like Berlin Wall. first in silence where nobody looks, then is a visible absurdity. and people forgets it ever existed. so it can happen again. 2013/9/23 Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > I agree with your description when applied to the details, Alain. However, > the system is influenced by certain people based on their self interest and > wisdom, or lack thereof. We see this situation play out throughout > histoery. Some people use their power to improve while others use it to > destroy. The rest of us are simply bystanders and collateral damage. Either > we do nothing and get slaughtered or we move out of the way. The choice is > based on knowledge. For example, some people left Germany when Hitler came > to power and others stayed and died in the gas chambers. Their personal > choice determined their fate. This choice was based on what they thought > Hitler would do. Everyone has that same choice today when they react to > events. Yes, there may be no vision in the system itself, but personal fate > still can be influenced by a choice based on knowledge. If enough people > make the proper choice, the fate of everyone can change. Right now poor > choices are being made by most people in the West. > > > On Sep 23, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: > > my sad vision is there is no vision... > > some people think they are right, using bad heuristics. > some follow them by selfish interest to get chocolate medal or to earn > their life > some follow just because they feel right when they follow > some get convinced because they have no culture > some shut up because they are coward, or have to protect their family > some see but nobody hear them > > media feel guilty of being pretended wrong and over react to the opposite, > to save their image > population follow the media to be cool > politician follow the population to be elected > scientists follow the money thus the politicians > politicians follow the scientists > media follos the scientists > population follow the media... > > system is locked, and the dissenters are fired. > The roland Benabou Groupthink model of mutual assured delusion, based on > the idea that if being right give you no benefit, and cause trouble, then > you prefer to be delusioned... describe the MAD situation. > > > the best intelligence is few people aware of material science which simply > know they have to be modest, and follow the evidence... > no strategy intelligence in the system above the one of an ant in a > colony. no plan... > at worst vicious hate of those one feel as the evil, the foes accused of > fighting against The True Truth... Defending the consensus like one defend > a Mother Goddess, or simply Mum. > No conspiracy, but huge ego motivation. > > all of that is tiny. From what I see , it is a tiny story. like a > kindergarten fight. > It is a serious affair for kids anyway. they bet their soul in those > battle... like some want to clear wikipedia, the holy territory, or science > from pseudoscience. > > with planet consequence. > > > > 2013/9/23 Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > >> I agree Bob, the world is not managed in order to increase everyone's >> benefit. Jed tends to be an optimist about the future while I and >> apparently you as well are more of a realist. The world is in a mess. The >> West has created an unstable and unsustainable economic structure and many >> parts of the world are being threatened by religious insanity. Add >> something so unexpected, uncontrolled, and threatening to the production of >> oil, coal, and uranium as is LENR, we can expect the worst possible >> outcome. For example, although the US is self-sufficient in energy, the >> cost is controlled by the world market. If the cost goes down, the profit >> goes down and the loans supporting the infrastructure cannot be paid, >> resulting in massive default. The system is already saturated with such bad >> debt. >> >> Meanwhile, China is limited by how fast she can build energy generators >> and by availability of water. If she can out produce us now, just think >> what she can do with unlimited energy. In the future, she will be selling >> to her own people for prices we can not afford, resulting in shortages and >> a lower standard of living in the West. I raise these issues because unless >> the West finds an intelligent way to respond to this situation, we in the >> West will be in bad shape. Unless the real threat is acknowledge, no effort >> will be made to find a solution until it is too late, as is typical of how >> the West reacts. Simply pretending all will work out is not a solution. >> >> Ed >> >> On Sep 23, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Rob Dingemans wrote: >> >> Dear Jed, >>> >>> On 23-9-2013 20:13, Jed Rothwell wrote: >>> >>>> Furthermore, decreasing the cost of energy is likely to improve first >>>> world economies sooner than it improves third world countries or China, >>>> since we have more high tech, we have more ways to grow the economy, and we >>>> import more energy per capita than they do. Lower energy costs would be a >>>> tremendous boon to Japan, because they are closing down all of the nuclear >>>> power plants. >>>> >>> >>> You would be right if the focus of the ones in charge were to be on >>> lowering energy cost and gaining a higher standard of living for ALL people. >>> However I strongly doubt if that is what their real intention is. >>> I tend to agree with Alain and Edmund's (probably also Peter Gluck's) >>> perception of how the world is "managed". >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Rob >>> >>> >> > >
