New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#1 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-12-02 21:34:46

Cordially,

EarthWolf

It's been awhile, so, Hi folks. Now, as to religion on Mars, I think that executing or deporting people on the basis of non-compliance would be at best, unrealistic. Religion will spread to Mars, because people need religion. Communist societies have tried to wipe out or repress religion.

As you can see in the former Soviet republics and currently in Communist China, government pressure can't sanitize a society of religion. As for the influence of religion in politics, I hold no doubts that political leaders will act within their moral/philosophical views. Can't get away from that. Might as well ask a person to ignore their body parts.

As for the Mars colonies, I just hope that maybe society would try to keep the religious debates from exploding into a bloody mess. Now onto the capital punishment row. I feel that execution should remain on the books. Though, execution should be limited to the " mad dogs " of society.

Well, if you based your statement about "executing people for non-compliance on my post, you completely misunderstood it. At no time did I say or imply that there would be penalties for practicing a religion. In fact, my idea would extend the Declaration of Independence notion of religious freedom to include ALL religions who meet one important criterion. They will not attempt to impose their beliefs on practitioners of another religion by either physical or political force. In my Mars there would be a very strong and diverse religious life. But certain beliefs that have been part of some historical religions would be barred for the reason you suggest, religious debates might explode into a bloody mess, as they so often have in the past. My suggestion is a potential answer to your problem, while allowing, indeed encouraging, a full range of religious life.

With respect to reserving the death penalty to the "mad dogs" of society, I point out that many of these "mad dogs" in the past have been religious zealots. Sometimes whole religious orders of them, e.g. the Dominican Order of the Roman Catholic Church, which provided the torturers for the Inquisition(s) and mandated criteria for guilt which essentially prevented any possibility of the accused being proven innocent. They were all guilty, their only choice was to receive mercy by confessing or full punishment by continuing to assert their innocence.

A milder version of this continues in our own legal system where an innocent man may face the choice of reducing his term by a plea bargain (which he receives only by admitting his guilt) or receive full punishment if convicted. [Added via edit]. It is a curious perversity of our legal system that the plea bargain is a windfall for the guilty but a nightmare for the innocent.


I've read articles about people that kill for fun, kill quite readily in order to achieve one's goals. Such people have a shockingly cavalier attitude towards human life. As such, these people can't be trusted to act within societal bounds. We put down mad dogs, don't we?

Why is it so many liberals act as if such people don't really exist?

Most crimes are committed out of desperation, passion or plain bad choices in life. For those offenders, give them jail time. Though, let's drop the corrections out of criminal justice, a criminal sentence is supposed to punish, not try to force a person to change. A person reforms because of personal reflection and insight.

Well, in some cases I think that there might be other alternatives than jail time. E.g. for crimes like hot checks or larceny restitution plus a penalty might be very feasible. Especially if the crime were done out of true desperation (but let's be careful here. Many stories sound like desperation, but on close examination, realistic alternatives were readily available). Where you need confinement is when other people must be protected from habitual behavioral problems. For example, I have heard that over 90% of burglaries are done by a very tiny percentage of criminals (well under 10%). Those people do need to be isolated from the rest of us.

As for rehabilitation, whether confined or not, most will need to work. I think provision of basic (and sometimes advanced) job skills are very much to be desired, if only because prisoners working with the prisons getting a cut of the profits will reduce the cost to the taxpayer.

#2 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-12-02 20:57:00

That would be something, quite a symbol. Executing people on Mars.

We sit here and day dream about bringing life to Mars, making Mars live- the day when people walk and talk and breath and live on another planet.

Quite a symbol to suggest that it's fine to destroy what we dream about. But that's just me, and I tend to look at things in a rather strange fashion.

Well, quite a few people dream of people living and breathing on Mars and still believe in capital punishment for the few, I repeat my previous post, for the few that deserve it.

If your dream of a Mars includes a dream of no deaths administered by law, then I would hope that it would include a dream of no deaths by outlaws. Would a society that tolerates death at the hands of outlaws, but not at the hands of justice be worth having?

#3 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-22 17:01:51

True indeed. The big question is whether capital punishment is primarily revenge or primarily justice.

Justice is the ideal to which we must aspire, not something we are "ever" qualified to measure or dispense.

= = =

If the current system fails to protect society (releasing dangerous criminals) then the system is flawed and the death penalty becomes necessary due to our own prior failures and weakness.


Tell me the death penalty is something we need BECAUSE all of us are flawed creatures (all of us, police and judges and legislators included)and I will say, "Well, okay in limited circumstances, the fewer the better, execution may be the lesser evil of the options presented, but its still evil."

Tell me that execution brings a society closer to justice and I will fight relentlessly.

While it is true that justice is something to which we must all aspire, rarely, if ever, fully achieving it, I hold that it is not true that we are never qualified to dispense it. The alternative would be to never punish any crime.

With respect to use of the death penalty to increase justice, I guess we will have to "agree to disagree". I would argue that even if we had the techniques to completely rehabilitate a first degree murderer and absolutely assure that she would never do such a thing again, we should still execute them. Once again, the basic concept of justice is reciprocity (restitution) plus a penalty symbolizing the amortization of the cost to society of dealing with the situation.

#4 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-21 12:18:36

I suppose I need to clarify my own point of view here again, I'm not going to get all worked up over a faux-fix patchjob answer. Wrongfully sentencing a man to death is no more unjust than wrongly sentencing him to life in prison, it is the process by which that sentence is reached that must be fixed. If we can be certain of our conclusions, the death penalty is perfectly moral, if we cannot than any punishment cannot be considered just. I don't know exactly how to reform our legal system to meet this standard, I have a few ideas but certainly no ironclad foolproof plan. We have alot of work to do, I just hope we can focus on fixing the real problem.

I agree with your conception that one of the greatest needs of our society is a thoroughly revised legal system. This would be one thing in which a Martian settlement could take the lead. I would also like to hear your ideas. While I am sure that an "ironclad, foolproof plan" does not exist, I am equally sure that with fundamental questioning of basic principles, something much better can be developed. There a plenty of people on this forum who, between them, could almost certainly come up with a useful outline.

#5 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-20 15:46:46

Cobra. A really thoughtful and interesting post in general. However, there is one part I must comment on.

A quick and relatively humane death penalty prevents both the criminal from repeating his crimes, and in those rare cases of wrongful conviction one could argue that a quick death is more humane than a life in prison. I know some are going to latch onto this as though I'm now advocating executing innocent people and if that's the best argument you can muster, go for it.  But that's the quandry of the whole punishment issue, if we look only at the truly guilty we will in time subject one who is not to whatever horrors we devise for punishment, yet if we focus on the rare conviction of the innocent we create a system hopelessly incapable of fulfilling its purpose of punishing crime.

The accuracy of this statement depends on your definition of rare. Recent analyses of murder convictions by law students revealed such a horrendus scandal in Illinois that even Justice Sandra Day O'Connor commented on the need for higher standards in capital cases.

Fully ten percent of the people on death row were, on review by the students, were proven innocent by the most convincing of hard evidence (e.g. DNA samples and convincing confession of the crime by someone else in a manner consistent with the evidence). In well over half the cases, there was so much doubt that it appeared likely that the prisoner was actually innocent. Some of the most amazing failures to pursue evidence on the part of both the prosecution and the defense were revealed, e.g. apparently never having visited the murder site. If they had, they would have seen that the events described by the prosecution were impossible at that location.

Of course there is no telling how many more were falsely convicted on the basis of traditional procedures and for whom there was no DNA evidence to either prove or disprove their innocence. I have heard lawyers on C-Span start to take the 10 percent figure as a hard and fast rule. They fail to understand that the 10% figure is necessarily the lower bound of the error percentage, which may be much higher.

One of the nastiest features of current criminal jurisprudence is the widespread use of criminals with an interest in the outcome as witnesses in some of these cases. Sixty Minutes once presented a case where a nice young man with an excellent school and conduct record was convicted of a violent crime (it may have been a murder) on the basis of such evidence. He claimed, and presented some evidence to support his claim, that he was at a rock concert at the time of the crime. The heart of the program was a new "brain wave" test which gives a particular response when things are described that a person actually experienced. When this test was used to evaluate the prisoner's experiences at the time of the crime, both of the concert and the crime scene, they uniformly validated his claim that he was at the concert. Why juries will believe the word of a convicted  criminal with something to gain by their testimony over a person with a good record is beyond me. Of course, this is only a problem if the accused is poor or a minority. If wealthy and prominent, the judge throws the testimony out (or doesn't allow it to be presented in the first place).

And then there are a variety of biases that judges have. For example, many in the justice system are very skeptical of any evidence based on behavioral science studies regarding the trustworthiness of witnesses' memories and perceptions. This despite the fact that properly done behavioral science studies are just as reliable (and, strange as it may sound, in some cases even more reliable) than evidence from the "hard" sciences.

In one dramatic case, from Australia I believe, a rape victim identified a psychologist as the rapist and was absolutely firm in her conviction that he was the perpretrator. It was shown in court that she was watching the psychologist in a live TV discussion of rape when her rape occurred. His image was burned into her mind as the perpetrator, even though he was not anywhere near her location.

Some months ago a judge in our state would not even allow evidence relating to such distortions to be presented in a criminal case. As far as I am concerned judges, some of whom have very poor or even non-existent scientific qualifications, should be forced to admit all relevant evidence from high quality scientific studies. When it comes to evidence of guilt it is only the relevance and the scientific quality of the evidence which matters and ancient distinctions such as the presumed superiority of "eyewitness" evidence over "circumstantial (non-eyewitness)" evidence should be thrown out completely in a thorough-going revision of the basic legal concepts in the system. (Of course, the most reliable evidence, DNA testing, is circumstantial evidence).

#6 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-17 23:30:19

And my point is that for the "State" to assert such authority is deeply and profoundly immoral and unjust except in cases of necessity related to actual self defense, not self defense "after the fact" after a real threat has been neutralized.

And just when has the real threat been neutralized? Certainly not by being imprisoned under current laws in the U.S. The Governor of my state just pardoned a man convicted of murder. The pardon was based on a pastor speaking up for him (our current governor was a pastor before getting into the government business) and not on any new evidence indicating that he might have been innocent of the crime.

And didn't I hear on the news a few weeks ago that a confessed serial killer had been released on procedural grounds? When you start to look around you find an astonishing number of people serving sentences for their second, or even third, homicides (which did not all take place at the same time, as in a gangland killing). No, people who killed someone, served time, and killed someone again.

The Declaration of Independence asserts quite plainly that human rights arise from higher and more sublime source than what begins and ends with "the State" - - to reject the Declaration of Independece is to reject the founding document of our Nation.

I agree with this statement since I am a moral realist (in the philosophical sense). I do not, however, see that this implies that capital punishment is always wrong.

My goodness, few religions have implemented more capital punishment than orthodox Christianity in it's historical purging of "heretics". As for the implementation of the Declaration of Independence in the early US, I'm sure that Judge Parker and Judge Roy Bean saw it in a different light from the one you portray.

Revenge and legitimate self defense being entirely different things.

True indeed. The big question is whether capital punishment is primarily revenge or primarily justice. This is similar to the Christian distinction between "judgement" and "discernment" (as in Jesus' aphorism "Judge not that ye be not judged). Earlier this week I heard a Baptist pastor explain that the aphorism does not mean that it is always wrong to evaluate another person's behavior in "good or bad" terms. Telling whether an act is "good or bad, right or wrong" is a matter of discernment.  As this was a brief morning devotional he did not explain what judgement was but the context implies that it is premature evaluation (a failure of discernment) and/or a tendency to want to penalize an action more severely than the occasion warrants. Apropos a previous post, this would also seem to entail a lack of mercy.

I do not believe that capital punishment for murder is revenge. It is a symbol of respect for the sanctity of the lost lives of the victims and an utter rejection of persons who intentionally and "in cold blood" violate it.

#7 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-16 23:25:44

Executioners are not soldiers.

Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. Executioners and soldiers are overlapping classes. In any event, my point is that both are proper instruments of the state and in both cases homicide according to a specified set of rules is legitimate. Ditto for police officers.

Should we execute everyone who "deserves" it or only some of those who "deserve" it?

Most but not all. Mercy might be granted, for example, if the family of the VICTIM requests it for some reason. But that is only an example. The violation of the sanctity of persons with no families is just as bad as that of those who have families to represent them so someone, in this case a representative of the state, must speak for them. And this representative must grant mercy only for very clear and compelling reasons, e.g. the perpetrator had saved one or more lives prior to the murder, the perpetrator was delusional when the murder was committed and actually thought he was acting in self-defense, etc.

Remember, every Sunday in Church people pray that God NOT give us what we deserve. The essence of Christianity is that people do not get what they deserve, they get more than they deserve. And how can I refuse to show mercy and then ask for mercy myself?

It depends on the offense. The less the injury and the more ways of compensating the victim in particular and the society as a whole for the injury, the more mercy becomes a reasonable option. It is the particular nature of murder that no compensation to the victim is possible and therefore mercy must be very nearly impossible.

#8 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-16 00:19:40

.

My religious faith requires me to accept that I am my brother's keeper and while I cannot save all of my siblings, I am not permitted to abandon hope for any of them. Ever.

What hopes are you not permitted to abandon? It is one thing not to abandon the hope that a criminal may truly come to sincerely regret her action and to become a better person, it is another to abandon the hope that a murderer can restore his victim to life. Yet justice based on reciprocity would seem to dictate that the fact that the murderer denied his victim(s) the ability to become better persons and all the other things that life implies should have a morally higher status in determining punishment than the hope that the perpetrator will come to sincerely regret what he has done.

I am less than confident of our ability to discern those cases with rationality and impartiality, but that is beside the point

I share your concern, especially in a justice system like ours which is based on an inferior conceptual structure which is not in keeping with the potential for improved justice provided by modern science. Certainly the horrors of the proved wrongful capital convictions in Illinois should give us pause. On the other hand, there are cases in which there is essentially no doubt of guilt.

Question - - would you have any qualms about your child marrying an exeuctioner? That the hands which killed a man at 12:01 a.m. were two hours later caressing your grandchild?

No problem at all, if the executioner where a man who did his job honorably and justly. Neither would have any qualms about my daughter marrying a soldier.

#9 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-15 23:46:53

You end up providing the exscuses by which real monsters kill women for adultery. or beheading civilians. Or flying planes into towers.

If I accept that the death penalty is legitiamte, than I am forced to accept the actions of terroists as acceptable since they justify their actions by the very basis of your argument. Don't you see that Morris?

Hay-zeus? Isn't he that guy who preached about love and tolerance? Was he before or after those tablets from god?

Yes, and also said, "I come not to bring peace but a sword".


Okay, but the question remains, why do we need to kill a person who no longer poses an immediate threat to society?

In the case of murderers, because they took from their victims the same sanctity and potentiality of life which most of them and their anti-capital punishment advocates use as an argument for preserving their own life.

If we're going to build a foundation on evolutionary theory here, shouldn't we address the children of those who commit murder?

Yep, evolutionary action is statistical in nature. Young males are much more likely to commit violent crimes than other groups. It doesn't take much of a statistical differential to have a big effect over generations.

The death penalty is used as a means to "control" behavior- permanently. Look, no penalty is going to deter a person from a commiting a crime they are intent on commiting. The evaluation is always based on the ability to get away with the crime, not with the punishment associated with the crime.

It's just about true for all crime and for all people who commit any kind of crime- be it speeding, jay-walking, cheating on their spouse, incest, rape, not paying taxes, or murder.

You seem to think that deterrence is the primary reason for punishment, whereas it is, in fact, only one of many factors. My argument is based on moral reciprocity as the foundation for justice. For example, while I am no expert on the literature of crime and punishment, I have heard that punishments which have a foundation in restitution tend to be somewhat more effective in reducing recidivism than those which do not.

The principle of restitution is fundamentally consistent with reciprocity principles. However, many crimes, and homicide most of all, generate an injury which can never be healed, either ever by anyone as in the case of homicide, or by any future action of the perpetrator (as in the case of permanent physical injury or many financial crimes). In these cases, the punishment should have a comparable impact on the lives of the perpetrators as on the victims. In the case of first degree murder the only comparable effect is the surrender of their own life.

If you accept the death penalty for a crime, then you accept the death penalty for all crimes.

???? This violates the common experience of justice in almost every country in the world. Can you name a country where the penalty for all crimes is death?

It's just a subjective test to determine when and where it is culturaly acceptable.

Actually, reciprocity principles provide the basis for a relatively non-subjective implementation of moral principles. In fact, thinkers such as Georg von Wright contend that ethics is fundamentally more conceptual like mathematics than empirical, like physics or chemistry. I don't agree, but their arguments must be taken seriously.

#10 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-10 14:43:57

Trash disposal, nothing more profound than that.

I prefer to refer to it as "human toxic waste" applied very carefully to those few humans who deserve it.

#11 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-11-10 14:39:01

Capital punishment?

Always morally wrong. Always.

I disagree. In appropriate cases, I argue that it is morally wrong NOT to use capital punishment. As I pointed out in a previous post which I don't have time to go back to at the moment on this library computer, NOT having capital punishment for serial killers who are certainly guilty is a horrible moral contradiction from an evolutionary perspective as the human rights of the killer are placed above those of the victims. This CAN'T be right in any theory of morality above the level of social Darwinism. Certainly is fails both Jesus' and Kant's reciprocity tests.

Sometimes necessary due to a society's failure to plan ahead sufficiently to either educate its people to avoid egregious criminality or to take other steps to assure the safety of its citizens through non-lethal means.

To advocate capital punishment as policy is a powerful confession of one's own weakness.

You are right. It is a confession of our intrinsic "weakness", if "weakness" it be. We simply DO NOT KNOW HOW TO EDUCATE ALL PEOPLE AGAINST CRIMINALITY. This is one example of the basic flaw in the "liberal" perspective. Liberal descriptions of social problems are often very accurate and should be regarded with careful attention. Liberal proposals for solutions to the problems are almost always either totally ineffective or have, at best, limited effectiveness. This is because the liberal believes in social cause and effect far beyond the level to which is really applies. We respond to many social influences, both relatively overt and relatively subtle. However, due to the fact that humans possess free will the liberal assumption of social causation (thus allowing us to educate all people against criminality, for example) is fundamentally flawed. There is a huge difference between social influence and social causation.

We do not have, and in my opinion should not want, the ability to control others behavior (though we may very justifiably want to hone our persuasive skills to the very highest level).

To revel in or relish the death of any criminal (no matter how heinous his crimes) is itself one epitome of evil.

True, but what does that have to do with the administration of justice?

P.S. For those who might be interested, my mother has been discharged from the hospital and may be allowed to put full weight on her hip after her X-rays a week from Friday. In the meantime I am logging on from a library computer with a maximum of 30 minutes use time if anyone is waiting. Thus I can't respond to those issues requiring more detail.

#12 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-10-28 14:51:02

Forms of punishment vary, and I willingly admit that it's all the freaking same. Murder though is wrong. Killing when there is no neccessity for it is just wrong.

According to your view of morality, and that's the point. The fact that we've been arguing this all day and neither can come up with anything more than hypothetical examples, logic traps and forceful opinions is a testament to the reality that all the distinctions we throw back and forth come from us. We decide that killing is wrong except in self defense, we decide where to draw that line. To brush against the original topic of this thread, it's an almost religious conviction, you're certain of the rightness of your position because it's true, it just is. You want to keep people in prison just to avoid killing them, I'd rather just get on with it. The end result is essentially the same.

If only it were. It is much more expensive to imprison the truly dangerous ones and, periodically, they get released on procedural grounds. I certainly agree with Clark that it is important NOT to use the death penalty with those about whom there is any significant (vs. reasonable) doubt. The whole concept of doubt should be upgraded on the basis of modern science.

However, there are a substantial number of people, e.g. some serial killers, where their crimes are substantiated by DNA evidence, confession (where the details of the confessions are consistent with known but unpublished features of the crime) where there is no significant doubt. In those cases, the death penalty should be imposed as a symbol both of the profound violation of the rights of the victims and of the principle of the enforcement of comparable consequences for deadly crimes. We frequently hear arguments about the sanctity of life used against the concept of capital punishment but rarely about the sanctity of the lives of the victims of these serials killers. To permit these people to live makes an evolutionary statement that killing whoever is foolish enough to make themselves vulnerable to such murders is a social good and that the life of their murderer (or that of any aggressor) is more valuable than the lives of their victims.

#13 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-10-28 14:31:56

The natural right of self defense is the only real right we have, when all the constructs of society are stripped away we are left with that, a natural "right" to fight those who would harm us.

But Cobra, I thought you didn't believe in natural rights <g><wink>.

#14 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-10-21 10:04:07

Morris, you'll notice my post got included in your quote! I have Forum Confusion Syndrome, so please be patient!

http://www.betterhumans.com]http://www.betterhumans.com

Yes, sometimes some strange things happen on the board. I understand that Josh Cryer can deal with some of these issues.

Thanks for the hyperlink. I am aware of the site and have it bookmarked in my computer at home. I am currently using a library computer in my parents' home town. I don't notice much difference in speed from my computer at home, but then I haven't tried to download a long file. I'm glad I am hooked up again so will probably be posting once or twice every few days.

While here I will see what RA Wilson books I can find, hopefully including Prometheus Rising and

Quantum Psychology

.

BTW, I enjoyed your discussion of the situations in which you have found science interesting and those you have not very much. I think that much of the supposed avoidance of science by American students may well be in the way it is presented and the stringent separation of "general education" and "professional" tracks in science curricula.

Why do you dislike the term "new age" so much?

#15 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-10-05 12:57:56

Why, I do believe Morris that you have articulated a price upon life!

it is perfectly reasonable that capital punishment be used in cases of violation of laws against religious preference when deportation is not an option (i.e. there is no money for return passage).

Your base claim assumes that capital punishment would act as a deterent against such crimes. I wonder what the literature says about the effectiveness of such punishment on the criminal element in their determining to commit a crime? Of course I know, and I think you know, so I'm a bit surprised you end up here at your logical conclusion.

Perhas I am mistaken, but isn't the failure of the capital punishment based as a detterent based on the fact that the criminal choice to commit crime does not evaluate the associated punishment with breaking a law, but merely the chances of succeeding in breaking the law without consquence? Those with the mind to break a law don't worry about the punishment, they worry about getting caught.

Need proof? When you speed in your car, or you jay walk across the street, do you think of the punishment for your crime? Or do you look to see if there is an officer to enforce the law and catch you?

Capital punishment is nothing more than satisfying the blood lust of the social group and to empower the State as the ultimate power above individual. You speak elequotently about the rights of Man, inherent and all that, yet somehow hold the contrary view that the inherent rights might be violated by the group construct.

In a matter of self defense, of course, we have as much right to use as much force as neccessary to protect ourselves. But a man in chains poses no such threat.

And as for Singapore, would you subject your children to a city that used such laws? If it works for them, more power to them, but I think it's rather needless all the same.

Clark,

The topics you raise are very critical and I will respond to them. However, it may be some time because I must go out of state to take care of my parents.

Catch you when I get back.

#16 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-10-05 12:55:17

Thanks for the additional titles on Wilson. Are there one or two you prefer?



Marilyn Ferguson.  Am familiar with the name and the book title you mention, Morris, but have not read it (and likely won't, for a variety of reasons).

Well Ferguson is an old book by now and many of her topics have been taken up by others. However, for those not familiar with them she has the ability to explain complex things very clearly. I think that if her title weren't so misleading that the book would have been much more widely read.

Hoo-ah for Bert Rutan and Space Ship One!!!!

Well, this is one of the few threads I have been contributing to recently so I will tell everyone here that I won't be responding for some time. I got word today that my mother broke her hip and I will be going out of state. My parents live in a small rural town and they don't have a computer so it may be some time before I am on again.

#17 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-10-05 07:13:09

I have the Kaku book on hold at the library. It's overdue and so I don't know whether this will be one of those cases where they simply decide to pay for it rather than returning it. I also notice that he has an interesting looking book entitled Hyperspace. I may read it while waiting for Visions.

I haven't followed up on Kardashev yet. I've been reading an outstanding book entitled Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War. It provides, one one hand, a very discouraging picture of how our government typically operates and the very painful outcomes for those who try to restore integrity from within the system. On the other, it shows what can be accomplished by men of integrity if they truly don't care who gets the credit. While not an intention of the book, it also shows how a foreign rival could "wax our ass".

I vaguely remember reading some RA Wilson some decades ago. I think I was turned off by some of his more doubtful "New Age" speculations.

I like New Age works like Marilyn Ferguson's The Aquarian Conspiracy who stick fairly closely to real science and informative data. While they often stretch the conclusions they have the science as their starting point. Ferguson introduced me to concepts such as mathematical catastrophe theory, fractals, and self-organization/emergent phenomena. Looking back I realize that she brought into American discourse much important work that was going on in Europe.  But too many "new agers" get off into really weak ideas like "Illuminati" conspiracies, channeling,  and various forms of mysticism.

In any event, if you have a recent Robert Anton Wilson work that you especially like, please let me know.

Morris, are we the only ones here?

No, I don't know why people aren't responding to this thread though I have some speculations. For one thing many of these basic ideas have been explored before, sometimes ad nauseum, in other forums and threads. For another, some of the books and names are not generally known and that requires a little background work for those more seriously interested in this particular topic. Then, there is reference to "anarchy" as a serious political system and that just makes a lot of people uncomfortable. After all that was the big "bogeyman" in American politics before communism came along (as it was in Russian politics). And, I think that the notion that someone has to use library and internet cafe computers really makes some people uncomfortable. A social ambience sort of thing. Finally, the authors you cite that they do recognize have a "New Age" aura and nothing is treated with more contempt in wide circles of the scientific and technological communities, circles which are heavily represented on these boards.

#18 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-10-03 14:09:10

I'd make more sense here if the cleaners in the net cafe weren't scraping the chairs and talking loudly about the various inadequacies of their boyfriends!!

Incidentally, I tracked down Korzybski's Science and Sanity online, albeit in pdf format.

http://www.esgs.org.uk/art/sands.htm]ht … /sands.htm

Damn, I got the first link working but now the second one is knackered...don't put me in charge of the airlocks...

I tend to think that the 'withering away of the state' seems inevitable as the move toward a globally connected culture occurs, since movement of capital and resources for global benefit would tend to get obstructed by nation-states whose primary concerns were local: and that movement of capital and resources more and more falls under the control of corporate entities which recognise no national boundaries.

Certainly these factors could tend to undercut the nation-state. An interesting review of the actual and potential impacts is given in The New Barbarian Manifesto by Ian Angell.

An early science fiction novel discussing some of these implications, especially with respect to military considerations is Robert Aspirin's The Cold Cash Wars.
However, these processes may not produce a withering of the state, but tend to centralize power in a "super-state" or "world government". For some, this is the most feared possible consequence.

In Martian terms, any Martian civilisation - and for this I assume a terraformed and colonised Mars - would have an advantageous position in that people arriving on the planet would, I hope, tend to see it as one world without borders and therefore have a common interest in avoiding the territorial squabbles that have afflicted Earth in the process of it's development. Martian civilisation would start off unified.My inner-optimist hopes so.

You will find a number of people who agree with you on this board, but when I look at the pragmatics of the situation I am not hopeful. Most scientific missions would have to be financed by governments (or groups of governments like the EU) as would all military missions. Other interested parties such as religious groups or industrial operations would want a high degree of control over their own settlements. It would take an extraordinary effort to develop a set of ground rules for settlements and the current payoffs would not make it worth it for the major players to invest heavily in such an effort at present. However, I think it should be tried. Several groups (including the Mars Society) might well come up with proposed solutions to have a rapid response capability when the real negotiations begin.

Moving on to non-quoted paragraphs - thanks for making me aware of Kaku's book. The library computer shows that it's checked out but overdue so I might be able to get it soon. Also the reference for Kardashev.



Morris, don't knock repeated recycling ( is that a tautology? ), it's nature's way!  I know what you mean though about such notions producing very little that seems useful, but there are always pioneers whose ideas and lives achieve change gradually and by seepage, for want of a better word. Such things tend to resonate with me more on a personal level not a 'revolutionary' level.

Yes, I think you are right about achieving change by "seepage". Then there is usually a "catastrophic" (in the mathematical sense) change when these personal changes accumulate (e.g. the Puritan Revolution and the rise of the bourgoisie).

BTW, repeated recycling is neither a tautology nor a redundancy. Recycling would refer to a single repetition, repeated recycling to multiple ones.

#19 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-10-01 10:17:15

I think John Lennin said it best, "Violence begets violence."

The government sactioned violence we call 'execution', or the even more PC 'capital punishment', should be the first form of violence to outlaw.  But that's probably just my religious ideas getting in the way.  big_smile

The point you raise is a very good one and a tough one for me philosophically. Certainly loads of studies show that children are very sensitive to demonstrations of real or simulated violence and tend to imitate aggressive actions very quickly. In the ordinary conduct of life, violence is certainly a negative and we want to emphasize non-violent means of solving problems in civil life.

Unfortunately, this leads to foolish over-generalizations such as that children should never be physically restrained, spanked, etc. And discussions about the alternatives typically lead to "more heat than light".

Only rarely do people descend from their abstract beliefs about these matters and get down to relevant facts. I remember one very articulate advocate of physical discipline, a faithful and active churchgoer, productive citizen who proudly discribed himself as a "redneck", and successful parent who vividly described his mother taking him to the barn and using a bullwhip on him. He pointed out that this did nothing to harm him. Further discussion revealed that he was physically punished only 2-3 times during his entire life.

OTOH, there are many parents who support physical punishment who state that they use this punishment "occasionally". When asked what they mean by occasionally, they respond "once or twice a week". Well, any parent who has to use violence that often is simply an incompetent parent as the parent mentioned in the previous paragraph was quick to recognize. Truly abusive parents have defensive systems very similar to alcoholics and must always be pinned down to specifics.

I have a friend who has been a top child/adolescent psychologist in the area for many years. Over the years he has described several cases of young (age 3-4) children who terrorize their households by throwing tantrums whenever they are told to do something that they don't want to do. While the specific actions used vary according to the specific circumstances, he has had a great deal of success by simply not giving in to the child, no matter how persistent the child is. At times, when the child is physically violent, this has involved actually holding and physically restraining the child for hours at a time, letting them go free for periods of time until they cause a fuss again and restraining them again. The child's behavior is usually brought under control in one or two sessions and the parents taught how to use the technique. For some children, he recommends that the parents spank them when the child disobeys. Yes, Aunt Nellie, done properly this can work very well!! (As millions of our parents and grandparents were well aware).

Most important,  there are some people and groups of people who have no qualms about using intimidation and violence to achieve their ends and MUST be physically and sometimes violently restrained.

So the issue becomes one of discrimination between proper and improper uses of violence. Most people seem to believe that violence should be used: when no other reasonable alternatives are available and the use of the violence should be constrained by a carefully developed set of rules which specify when and how it is to be used and identification of the limits of how far it can go in specific settings. This is the way it is typically used in the justice systems of developed countries. One especially interesting system is used in Singapore where a number of minor crimes are punished by caning. The rules are very explicit, e.g. a cane is used which is specifically designed to break the skin. In fact, if the stroke doesn't break the skin, it doesn't count. On the other hand, the number of strokes is strictly limited. I forget the maximum number now, but it is less than 10 (I vaguely remember perhaps 6) so you don't get into the habit that sailing ship captains and slave overseers used to use of dozens, if not hundreds, of lashes for minor offenses. Naturally medical assistance is on hand if needed. The advantage of strokes is that they are fast, make a big impression in a short time, and inexpensive. Singapore also makes heavy use of the death penalty and that is the usual penalty for serious crimes, e.g. drug distribution, violent crimes, etc. They also strongly support the justice system. For instance, if a foreign businessman is the victim of a crime, the government pays the businessman her travel and living expenses to come back and testify in court. Courts are deeply respected and corruption is nearly non-existent. They no longer have jury trials because of experiences similar to the O.J. Simpson trial in the U.S. As human justice systems go, the system works pretty well despite it's unusually high use of violence, properly considered and restrained violence. This consideration and restraint are important social lessons in themselves.

Because history has shown that religious differences are so prone to generate profound social discord and the development of violence, it is perfectly reasonable that capital punishment be used in cases of violation of laws against religious preference when deportation is not an option (i.e. there is no money for return passage).

#20 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-10-01 08:45:25

What about indigenous religions?  Will the Church of Mars get a blank check for conversion by the sword just because their name's not on the contract?

Even if they don't, I'm not fond of this idea.  Keeping my religion out of politics sounds very un-Episcopalian to me.   :;):

ALL religions, indigenous or not. And all individuals must make the avowal as part of their oath of citizenship, either upon attaining legal age or becoming naturalized. Resident aliens would also have to swear to that part of the oath.

As for it being non-Episcopalian, though I do not know the relevant doctrinal details, I have no doubt that you are right. I think that most Christian denominations would have to do some real soul-searching to be sure that they could take the oath in good faith.

The problem is that most religions were formed prior to the development of the American idea of religious tolerance. This was a "better mousetrap" and rapidly became so popular that most churches have adapted to it and even churches with the most savage histories SEEM to have adopted it, at least within the context of the U.S. However, a study of their basic doctrines would probably reveal a number of beliefs contrary to this idea.

The unmitigated savagery of Christian religious wars (including the wholesale slaughter of emphatically peaceful "heretics", e.g. the Cathars) prior to the Enlightenment was, of course, one of the driving forces behind the Second Amendment. The remnants of these conflicts, e.g. Northern Ireland, give a modern reminder of the dangers of allowing religions to have any direct role in politics.

Of course, the trade-off is that others can't, under penalty of law, interfere with your practice of your own peaceful religious beliefs. Naturally, your religious beliefs will color many decisions in civil life, including who you will associate with, which businesses you may choose to patronize, etc. In those cases your beliefs may conflict with other considerations, e.g. Company X does a better job and is cheaper but Company Y is owned by someone of my own faith, etc. And, as men have in all times and ages, you will have to make the ultimate decision about how to deal with these conflicts.

#21 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-10-01 07:00:53

I doubt if it's the same Peter Marshal but how wonderfully funny if it was! I love the idea of a Chaplain of the US Senate becoming an anarchist historian spreading notions of revolution and free love! Never happen under Bush though...

I looked it up. No, it's not the same Peter Marshall.

As far as "anarchism and free love" are concerned, those might have attracted some degree of interest for me 45 years ago, but I'm afraid that the repeated recycling of those same old things (late 1800s, 1920-30s, 1960s) produce very little that seems to have the potential for real growth and constructive change.

Maybe the young will find a new combination that works. Certainly some of the anarchistic critiques should be studied in philosophy, history, and government courses because they do raise issues that need to be dealt with. However, the solutions they provide tend to be utopian. In reading the Spencer essay you referenced I was amused that he was describing the "withering away of the state" from an anarcho-capitalist perspective and Marx used the same concept later from a socialist perspective. I do,  however, agree with Spencer's observation that the idea of a state is so attractive to most people that it won't be given up until the need for it is long past! Like the American Federalists, Spencer had a very good grasp of human nature.

#22 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Role of Religion in the Martian frontier » 2004-09-30 11:09:28

I have no doubt that Catholics and Mormons will be there early on as well as a wide variety of evangelical Protestant sects. Also, with the recent rapid increase in paganism in the U.S. (at least) we can reasonably expect that as well.

I would be astonished if the simple processes of production of scientists and engineers didn't produce some staff/settlers of the Jewish faith, though I understand that there are wide variations in religious observance there.

Classical guy that I am, I see only one problem with lots of religions - attempts to put down other religions through active violence or through government. Following the classical liberal (capitalist, libertarian) principle that your rights stop at the end of my nose I believe that every person who lives on Mars, and every religion that supports settlement, must swear an oath that their particular religious faction disavows extension of their religious beliefs via violence or government intervention. Violent actions to the contrary are dealt with locally by the usual laws against violence (assault and battery, murder, etc.) and attempts to intervene through government action will result in the offenders being deported or executed immediately. The legal shields which protect government officials from prosecution in most cases should not apply with respect to religious intervention. My position is that any religion which cannot compete for followers on a non-coercive basis by that very fact admits doubt as to its truth, since anyone convinced of the truth of their position and power of their God will also believe that they will inevitably win any moral contest conducted on "level ground".


Members of all religions which can truthfully make the disavowal backed up with appropriate documentation from their various church bodies should be allowed to practice their beliefs without hindrance.

#23 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-09-30 06:26:35

Thanks for the welcome, Morris. I haven't tracked down a copy of  Science and Sanity yet, though I found a great deal of info on Korzybski online. I came to the subject mainly through Robert Anton Wilson via Aleister Crowley. Another influence that I hold responsible for my less panic-stricken response to the world these days, Buckminster Fuller. Anyway, I won't get off topic here - these library computers do not exactly race along when the system gets busy so I'll try to contribute more and more thoughtfully when I get more time. Incidentally, my anarchist tendencies constitute a pretty recent development as far as actually thinking about the subject goes, mainly due to an excellent book, Demanding the Impossible by Peter Marshall to which my response was a horrified, 'Why did I never hear any of this stuff in school??' I always look closely at anything that provokes such a reaction. Interesting too that complexity and emergence get mentioned in this thread, I just started reading Capra's The Hidden Connections. Most interesting.

Yes, I enjoy Buckminster Fuller's work. It's a little hard to read, but his accomplishments make it worth it.

I also find Fritjof Capra a good popularizer of major scientific advances. I think he relates best to those who are approaching it from a "new age" perspective.

Is the Peter Marshall you are referring to the famous minister who was Chaplain of the U.S. Senate?

Remember the purpose of schools it to narrow your perspective in many important ways and expand it in only a few.

#24 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-09-29 14:24:59

And add my welcome as well!

As far as the current link goes, I am happy to see that general semantics is alive and well. Science and Sanity was one of the transforming books of my intellectual life. Of course, it is very influential in many forms of psychotherapy. The influence is especially strong in Albert Ellis' Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy.

Just reading a couple of books in this area can help avoid all sorts of linguistic pseudo-problems. But don't spread the word too widely. It might reduce the number of posts on the forum and the steam generated by them <wink><grin>.

#25 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » All of you have it wrong » 2004-09-29 14:15:22

Thanks for the very interesting articles. While I am not a libertarian of the anarchist stripe, I certainly think that the relevant arguments need the same degree of (but hopefully more sophisticated) examination that thay did in the late 1800s.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB