I've often thought that by not having children I'm making up for someone else having more than two as we hurtle towards the carrying capacity limit of the planet. Since I haven't been able to think of a way (well, a legal way at any rate) to have negative children, I can personally only make up for at most one other child being born. Being therefore a limited resource, I figure that ought to have value so perhaps I can auction the associated moral high ground off to a specific parent. The notion is quite similar to the way in which some people buy carbon credits to offset their activities. Bearing in mind that this would be the rights to an American child, the most resource intensive type in the world, I wonder how much I'd get?
There is no room for what we wish to be true in science; that belongs in engineering.
Science is essentially reverse engineering nature; ultimately there is only one correct answer. In engineering, there are theoretically (if not practically) unlimited ways to approach the same problem. This is the biggest reason I am drawn to engineering over science, important as it may be.
Some believe that engineering is the intersection of art and science. I agree: it destroys one by turning it into the other.
Markets are a means, not an end.
The aim of the American Dream is the freedom to be fat, dumb, and happy. In practice, we've got two out of three.
Science finds the needle of truth in the haystack of delusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment