HIGHLA-L Digest - 4 Jul 2003 (#2003-134)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Fri, 4 Jul 2003 22:00:00 -0400
There is one message totalling 41 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Immortal finances
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 19:29:14 -0400
From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Immortal finances
Sandy jumps in with both feet.
At 04:46 PM 7/3/2003, beccaelizabeth wrote:
>Yes but I dont actually see how any of that leads to thinking they
>should like abandon morals. I mean they have to kill (or stay on holy
>ground) in self defense as part of the game.
Actually that's not quite right. They have to kill as part of the
game. Self defense has nothing to do with it. Some of them *choose* to
only kill in self defense, but there isn't any such rule. The only rule is
that there can be only one in the end. Since illness won't kill them, the
only way to get to "the end" is for them to kill each other, and it doesn't
really matter (in the overall sense of the game) whether it's self defense
or not.
>Killing in self defense is pretty
>much mostly considered moral. If you have to. So why does the fact of their
>Immortality lead to smart people acting immoral?
Being smart has nothing to do with morality. Plus, I find it
counter-productive to judge the actions of immortals by the "moral" rules
of our society (or those of any individual in our society). It simply
doesn't work. They may be currently walking around in our society (the
human society), but the universe (the immortal society) they *really* live
in is totally different from ours.
"Morality" isn't carved in stone anyway. It's different depending on the
region you live in, the times you live in, etc. In a discussion about the
finances of an HL immortal, logic and practicality will win over morality
for me any day.
-- Sandy
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 4 Jul 2003 (#2003-134)
***********************************************