[Analemma_]

> The fact that we are alive seems to demonstrate precisely the opposite.

No, it doesn't. That's the whole thrust of my post. We are alive only because we've gotten extremely lucky so far, not because we're actually smart enough to handle this stuff. Adding new ELE technologies on top of the ones we already have is just pushing that luck.

[antepodius]

You say

People stupid => survival is luck, he says

Survival => people not stupid.

Throwing more arguments at each other won't resolve anything- your arguments are both internally consistent, but they run opposite to each other. You can't refute one just by saying the other, they're rooted different axiomatic takes on the same dataset. You have to attack the axioms.

[devereaux]

The whole point of my post was to look for the root of the disagreement. What you call luck (as you suppose human beings are naturally inclined to do evil), I call that normal as I suppose human beings are naturally inclined to do good, and are looking for ways to continuously improve that.