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 !__