Money - on mars

Josh Cryer · 2003-03-22 00:31:27

Muwha, clark, you are a charmer. You sound like me with your paragraphs about automation and so on. It's wonderful. I don't know what happened to ya. :;):

Truely, you've summed up everything I've been saying in the span of a post. All that remains really is to argue which political systems afford the most freedom (assuming freedom is our desire).

I see no issue with your 747 comment. It's true. We'd be living in cans for the most part. Sure, we'd probably have domes (their construction isn't really beyond our capablities to be honest), and all sorts of other things to detract from the situation of living within a confined space, but there are so many reasons this doesn't really bother me personally, and this is why I don't really make it a point. When you guys talk about humans having to adapt in habs and so on, I shrug it off (probably arrogantly), because I'm just the perfect kind of person to deal with this kind of thing. I'm the kind of person who drives on 3000 mile trips, and has had a majority of jobs which were wholly indoors with long boring hours. I often travel far and happily enjoy closed environments! Can you really blame me for not finding this to be a ?problem??

clark · 2003-03-24 09:09:46

Mars won't be a permanent prison colony.

That's not what i am implying in the least. "Prison colony" is subjective.

Case in point: Is living in America like living in a prison?

On the face of it, no. But then, can you go to another country whenever you want? If you don't have a passport, then no, you can't. It's a matter of perspective.

People living in communities on Mars will more than likely NOT view their homes as prisions. They will not view it as living in tin cans. However, their community will be fragile- it will depend on machinery that fails occasionaly. It will be surrounded by an inhospitable environment that is held at bay artifically. It's like being on a plane. A big plane, on the ground, with lots of room to move and live. But a plane- an artifical construct to do something man cannot inherently do on it's own.

Bill pointed to an image, is it a goblet or a womans face. Different people see different things. None is wrong though, becuase it is both things. Such is what we are discussig.

And Soph, if Mars ever does have an open environment capable of supporting humans, then forget what I am talking about. I don't accept your numbers for terraformation, and I have no desire to discuss those numbers- I'll shrug and say, fine, whatever.

As for which political system is best- one that fosters individual responsibility to community, and supports social stability at all points.

Mars colonists are all on a small life raft together, so they must make decisions on this raft together. The greatest deal of decision making should be reserved for the communities themselves. Only in instances where one community may affect another should a larger body be involved to make the decisions.

Byron · 2003-03-25 11:27:55

Hey, I have a solution....

Since most of us agree that social stablity is of the utmost importance in keeping a Martian community alive...after all, we can't have a disgruntled worker allowing the greenhouses to freeze due to some unfair criticism from his supervisor - indeed, everyone would starve! Also, we can't have people become so depressed that they no longer carry out vital duties...there is a case of a mechanic in Antarctica who nearly killed everyone in a remote outpost by neglecting the single power generator because he was so depressed. Also, we can't have disagreements like we do here on Earth...everyone has to do things pretty much the same way in order to preserve "public safety."

Rather than relying on pure "will power" of each and every settler to be on their best, rational behavior 100% of the time, why not engineer a battery of drugs that would be intergrated into the food/water supply that would ensure stability of emotions, rationality of thought, and the elimination of negative behavior towards others...in other words, a "niceness drug." If people never got overtly angry, never developed hate towards others, if they never allowed their emotions to get the best of themselves, if physical violence was completely eliminated - wouldn't you think that a majority of the "social" problems of living in a confined, isolated environment would be greatly mitigated, if not eliminated altogther?

Before you start thinking I'm insane to even suggest such a thing...think about what we do today in terms of behavior modification...the widespread use of Ritalin and other drugs to keep spastic kids in their seats at school, the rapid rise of antidepressant drugs, and the event of new drugs that promise to cure drug addicts of their addiction. So if one were to extropolate current trends, it's not that far fetched to imagine that my "niceness drug" would be considered a vital part of every space settler's diet - without which, each and every person would be at the mercy of another's unstable emotions and irrational acts.

What do you guys think of my "crazy" idea?

B

clark · 2003-03-25 11:34:29

Even *I* am appalled.

I believe this is one of those points where the intellecual mind develops a clear and consice solution to a given problem, without reflecting on the implications of the solution.

In a word, you advocate a form of slavery Byron.

I understand the motivation, and on the surface, it seems legitimate.... but come on.

A world of zombie's?

Are you serious?

Bill White · 2003-03-25 11:37:23

Its called Soma in Huxley's Brave New World - a title pinched from Shakespeare's Tempest, by the way.

Byron, I suggest you read "Brave New World" and reconsider your suggestion.

clark · 2003-03-25 11:43:22

Hug me till you drug me,
drug me till you hug me.

Byron · 2003-03-25 11:51:18

Well, I was just tossing out an *idea*....

So, do you think the use of Ritalin should be banned except for the most extreme cases of ADHD? Virtually any school teacher would tell you how much it much it aids the overall teaching environment when everyone is on their best behavior. Without the use of these admittely mind-altering drugs, it makes it that much difficult for well-behaved kids to learn when the ADHD-effected kids are causing a ruckus.

Also, I've known people who have had their lives transformed for the better through the use of antidepressents, such as Paxil or Prozac...and I can wholeheartily assure you that these people are not zombies...not by a long shot! Indeed, they were held hostage to their own emotions, and these drugs have freed them from being enslaved by their brains.

Like anything else, the use of mind-altering drugs is subject to abuse...and I do find the idea of making everyone behave the same way through the use of mandatory drugs rather scary myself. But what I really find scary is the idea of people ganging up upon each other because of built-up animosity towards each other...it happens all the time in isolated bases...and I'm sure the station doctor has to administer appropiate treatment whenever individuals become too "unbalanced."

Besides, the way I was envisioning my "niceness drug" is that its effects would be more subtle than even the antidepressents we use today...in effect, it would not effect a person's personality except to act as a "brake" when their emotional state becomes too unbalanced. I DO NOT advocate making everyone a drug-addled zombie...indeed, I was pointing out some of the positive benefits that these types of drugs could provide people in a space-type of enviroment...after all, I don't hear too many people stating that the use of antidepressents is a terrible and awful thing and it promotes slavery. I will also admit that perhaps I extropolated things a bit too far with my earlier post...live and learn, I guess ???

B

Bill White · 2003-03-25 12:08:33

So, do you think the use of Ritalin should be banned except for the most extreme cases of ADHD? Virtually any school teacher would tell you how much it much it aids the overall teaching environment when everyone is on their best behavior. Without the use of these admittely mind-altering drugs, it makes it that much difficult for well-behaved kids to learn when the ADHD-effected kids are causing a ruckus.

IMHO, Ritalin is a very useful drug in limited circumstances. Its a case by case basis.

Too often, Ritalin is used as a substitute for genuine intervention and creation of a stable home environment free from psychological and verbal abuse. Some teachers favor wide spread Ritalin use because it makes their days go easier - rather like the flight attendant who put a sedative in the baby's juice bottle.

For a more favorable treatment of your idea, may I suggest a John Brunner novel - Stand on Zanzibar - a truly marvelous sci-fi novel, IMHO. One of the major plot threads is the precise idea you propose, only here on Earth and this idea is dealt with favorably.

Byron - why do I suspect we have already read all the same books?

Byron · 2003-03-25 12:10:08

Its called Soma in Huxley's Brave New World - a title pinched from Shakespeare's Tempest, by the way.
Byron, I suggest you read "Brave New World" and reconsider your suggestion.

Bill, I've decided to do exactly that...lol...considering that I've never read that book...shame on me!

Perhaps I will look at Prozac and Ritalin in a different light after I get done reading it...

B

clark · 2003-03-25 12:17:55

I am inclined to agree with Bill's previous post.

There are medical reasons for people to take certain medication.

That is a far cry from taking medicine to solve social problems.

Do you see the difference?

I am not villifying you Byron, I just find the idea odious. I find it even more disturbing though becuase you managed to present it in a very reasonable, and rationale light.

It may become neccessary for pscyhotropic drugs to be used for space colonists, to deal with the environmental pressures of living in space or Mars. Yet that would be reacting to an environmental constraint we can only guess at. It's one of those gray areas even I have a tough time imagining.

A way to think about it is that all laws ever created were to control and influence human behavior and interaction. It threatened force to gain compliance of the individual. Using drugs to effect the same results end up creating a situation where individual choice in complaince with laws is no longer an option- they comply becuase they have been chemically induced to- they have no choice.

How do you undo unenlightened laws when the population can no longer make an independant choice not to obey? That's why I have a problem with what you suggest.

Byron · 2003-03-25 12:44:29

A way to think about it is that all laws ever created were to control and influence human behavior and interaction. It threatened force to gain compliance of the individual. Using drugs to effect the same results end up creating a situation where individual choice in complaince with laws is no longer an option- they comply becuase they have been chemically induced to- they have no choice.
How do you undo unenlightened laws when the population can no longer make an independant choice not to obey? That's why I have a problem with what you suggest.

Good point there, clark. But I have some questions: If you believe it's important to have the "option" to disobey the law - as a way to undo unjust laws, wouldn't this also allow individuals to disobey "legitimate" laws as well? Who gets to decide what laws are legit, and which ones are not?

We both agree that the individual in Martain settlement must be subservient to that of the community...otherwise everyone could be placed at grave risk of their lives. So whatever system of laws and regulations is implemented would have to be almost 100% enforceable, otherwise they would still be back at square one. Remember, just ONE individual disobeying the safety regs even ONCE (such as in a fit of anger) could place the entire settlement at risk.

Rather than throw out rational but obviously distasteful solutions to this problem , I think all this goes to show that the time period between First Landing and Open Door Day is certainly not going to be easy for all those Martian settlers...indeed, they have their work cut out for them, don't they?

B

clark · 2003-03-25 12:59:27

In a nutshell, yes.

I've said it before, space colonization has got to be one of the most irrational ideas ever proposed. Tough choices will have to be made, and most of them will be dictated, by the environment.

Let's go through your questions:

If you believe it's important to have the "option" to disobey the law - as a way to undo unjust laws, wouldn't this also allow individuals to disobey "legitimate" laws as well?

Yes, it does. However, most rationale people follow legitimate laws as a matter of course. Psychotics though do not neccessarily fall into "rationale". think of a legitimate law as one that you don't need, but write down so everyone understands.

Who gets to decide what laws are legit, and which ones are not?

The individual. If there is a conflict between two parties in interpretation, a binding unbiased third party arbitrator to resolve the dispute (a judge).

So whatever system of laws and regulations is implemented would have to be almost 100% enforceable, otherwise they would still be back at square one.

But there are other means to achieve complaince, other than enforcement, or threat of enforcement. Compliance can be achieved through consensus, through slow and deliberate education, and through incentives that reward optimum behavior.

I think all this goes to show that the time period between First Landing and Open Door Day is certainly not going to be easy for all those Martian settlers...indeed, they have their work cut out for them, don't they?

Actually, the problems that we discuss routinely will not be a problem for those of First landing, or the first few generations of Martian settlers. The problems we are outlining are the fundamental problems that an established Martian society will have to deal with.

This is the dark side of the flourishing martian culture. this is the day-to-day crap they will have to muddle through- like our day to day stuff.

This is the problem with an established society where the individuals that enter into the society do not neccessarily want what that society was founded on.

America is no different. We started with pioneers- and to an extent, many of our problems are the result of that pioneering spirit coming to grips with a new American non-pioneering society.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-03-06 14:51:54

Crypto expert reveals whether Trump or Biden is better for Bitcoin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQaYcnZp6Io

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2003-03-22 00:31:27

Re: Money - on mars

#77 2003-03-24 09:09:46

Re: Money - on mars

#78 2003-03-25 11:27:55

Re: Money - on mars

#79 2003-03-25 11:34:29

Re: Money - on mars

#80 2003-03-25 11:37:23

Re: Money - on mars

#81 2003-03-25 11:43:22

Re: Money - on mars

#82 2003-03-25 11:51:18

Re: Money - on mars

#83 2003-03-25 12:08:33

Re: Money - on mars

#84 2003-03-25 12:10:08

Re: Money - on mars

#85 2003-03-25 12:17:55

Re: Money - on mars

#86 2003-03-25 12:44:29

Re: Money - on mars

#87 2003-03-25 12:59:27

Re: Money - on mars

#88 2024-03-06 14:51:54

Re: Money - on mars

Board footer