> Richard Brodie commented about what....
> >
> > Erik wrote:
>
> > >Classification is one thing, but using a number based "level"
> > >system tries to show a goal oriented evolution.
> > >Anyone care to postulate a goal?
> >
> > Shaping the evolution of man's future toward a place of safety,
> > abundance, and opportunity. How's that?
> >
>
> Good call.
I really can't argue with the outward beauty of such an ideal, however,
the very idea is an oxymoron.
If biological entities are meant to evolve, they will continue to evolve.
There is no switch to turn it off, other than the one known as death.
Mutations occur, and clash is inevitable.
How many Vonneguts, Orwells, Ishmael Reeds and the like do we need
to raise the warning flags of a "safe" society?
The same passion that influences murder gives music.
If the creative and passionate minds of the world created a huge theme
park with rides and unlimited food, ushered in the rest, and then offed
themselves outside it's gates, we might have all of the above.
OK, so I'm having a little fun and being facetious, but seriously, in a
system as large as life, it is not possible to draw up a "social
contract" agreeable to all.
Memes will constantly compete and evolve as long as humans
give them fertile growth though open-mindedness, and I for one
hope this will never stop.
It's getting to be time to eat, so I'll just drop this idea out there
and let some argument help evolve it
eEc