> Here are some reasons why I think that cyberspace is a forum where good
ideas
>outcompete bad ones.
[...]>thinking independently, without the influence of a collective group.
[...]>communicating back and forth as equals,
[...]>Ideas themselves are the main focus,
[...]>People would be in a more rational state
[...]>Ideas are more open to challenge and can be looked at from a wide
variety of
>perspectives.
>Ideas can be edited, modified and developed much more easily [...]
Another reason for cyberspace being a forum where good ideas will outcompete
bad ones:
People who stand behind good ideas can find each other easier. It also
works for bad ideas, of course. In both cases a group of people behind an
idea becomes stronger. Since bad ideas will not result in anything
constructive, and good ideas will result in *discoveries* (followed by
*inventions*), the power of the groups behind good ideas will grow much
faster.
Evolution of genes leads to domination of organisms which can best perceive
and control reality. Evolution of ideas leads to domination of groups whos'
ideas are "better". The cyberspace will speed up this process tremendously.
> Objectivism rests on 3 axioms-existence, consciousness, and identity.
I have no problem with "existence" and "consciousness", but isn't "identity"
the same as "existence"? Isn't "A-is-A" the same statement as "reality is
reality"? It may be confusing if we insist that as soon as we recognize
something as A it has to be A no matter what (as in Vicki's example with
"new" gender, where our perception changes and better describes reality).
And if we agree that something we call A today may be not A tomorrow, what's
the point of saying A-is-A if we already said that reality is whatever it is?
Regards, Tadeusz (Tad) Niwinski from planet TeTa
tad@teta.ai http://www.teta.ai (604) 985-4159