gurglingmonkey
04-01-08, 12:43 PM
Do you think that there are truths that the general populace should not or need not know?
Would it be okay if only an intellectual elite had access to the truth, while the public was left with folk versions of science disciplines?
I'm reading a book now called The Robot's Rebellion (http://books.google.ca/books?id=VRsgtSBMh0YC&dq=robot%27s+rebellion&pg=PP1&ots=7ruPSTTiPg&sig=YN28-Zb4RICvEkPg2pH5xUOQETM&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=robot%27s+rebellion&btnG=Google+Search&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail) and it outlines the ways in which evolutionary psychology is breaking down old notions of the "soul, the self, free will, responsibility." The author explicitly wants to avoid a future in which there is an intellectual proletariat left out of the loop because they are not emotionally capable of handling the truth.
I suppose this question only stands if you believe there are unpleasant truths, but: do you think the public can/should handle the truth?
Would it be okay if only an intellectual elite had access to the truth, while the public was left with folk versions of science disciplines?
I'm reading a book now called The Robot's Rebellion (http://books.google.ca/books?id=VRsgtSBMh0YC&dq=robot%27s+rebellion&pg=PP1&ots=7ruPSTTiPg&sig=YN28-Zb4RICvEkPg2pH5xUOQETM&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=robot%27s+rebellion&btnG=Google+Search&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail) and it outlines the ways in which evolutionary psychology is breaking down old notions of the "soul, the self, free will, responsibility." The author explicitly wants to avoid a future in which there is an intellectual proletariat left out of the loop because they are not emotionally capable of handling the truth.
I suppose this question only stands if you believe there are unpleasant truths, but: do you think the public can/should handle the truth?