Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer
From: dyer@dec-vaxuum.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Whither Are We Drifting?
Message-ID: <1099@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 5-Jun-84 03:07:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.1099
Posted: Tue Jun  5 03:07:03 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Jun-84 19:24:18 EDT
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 43

Re: Whither Are We Drifting?___________________________________________________

	Well, it looks like this note's going over like a lead balloon, Ken.
I guess I'll throw some comments in.
	To summarize, Ken (Perlow) was wondering "about this fixation so many
high-tech types have with order, apparently for its own sake."  As Ken put it:

> There are rules, and not only don't you break them, you don't question them
> either.  The "if you don't like it, go someplace else" argument is thus
> another popular netlandism.  And indeed, most people engaged in intricate
> technology have very traditional lifestyles.  Why?

	Funny, not much response on this!  I wonder why?  I'm wondering if it
doesn't have something to do with the popular conception among technologists
that science and reason are reality itself.  If one's Weltanschuaung is made
with the hierarchies and classifying and specialization that one finds in sci-
entific thought, no wonder these people's lives are so orderly.

	Another thought on this:  these professions seem to attract a fair
number of libertarians.  I guess one could blame Robert Heinlein.  (I made a
nasty comment about Heinlein in net.flame and got a delightful letter from
someone who was grateful that he gave up on Heinlein and didn't end up "ano-
ther goose-stepping libertarian.")
	One wonders why anyone would embrace a philosophy that ignores at
least half of human reality.  (Note that just a few days ago, somebody posted
an article about being impressed by an Ayn Rand book.)
	Two possibilities spring to mind:
	(1) We high-techers usually get here from financially-secure back-
grounds.  (There are exceptions.  I'm one of them.)  Libertarian politics ap-
pear as the simplest and most straightforward system for the well-off to remain
that way.  Attendant philosophical overtones (or, in the case of Objectivism,
a philosophical emphasis) offer a coherent view of reality and ethics - and it
also happens to be consistent with the technological approach.
	(2) Perhaps a number of us who can deal with machines so well cannot
deal with people with as much success.  Thus subjective reality is ignored or
mistrusted while the objective reality takes the place of it all.

	Any other thoughts?  I hope so.
		<_Jym_>
        ._________________________________________________________.
     .__! Jym Dyer <> Digital Equipment Corporation <> Nashua, NH !__.
  .__! Arpanet:  dyer%vaxuum.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA <> E-Net:  VAXUUM::DYER !__.
__! Usenet:  ...{allegra|decvax|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer !__