Quote:
Originally Posted by shnu  So both LWs see that certain kinds of inflow commitments and DWs see that certain kinds of outflow commitments are necessary to best pursue their life purpose. I still don't see where the DW starts to act in the best interests of the weakest. In fact, won't DWs prefer a much harsher world than the one we live in now? They might not want to destroy the world, but they might like climate change, with its scary stormy weather and the fight for less unflooded land. |
A DW certainly doesn't like his tax money being used by a (e.g. disabled) person who can't work and doesn't do a thing. However the disabled person still can provide enough value in order to be an added value to the whole body (and I think virtually everybody can, no matter in what situation you are in, certainly when you have the right tools) and thus to the darkworker. A LW wouldn't encourage a disabled person to sit around all day and do nothing either, that's not of benefit to the greater good and ultimately not of benefit to the disabled person either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shnu Well, surely I see that I could be wrong, but to the extent that maturity brings some convergence between the LW and DW, I still think it leaves gulf between them, in what they want and how they go about getting it. |
Could be. I don't see the final picture either. Would love to hear some more clarifications from people who can see beyond as well. If the convergence would be 100% ultimately then one could not deduce the intention out of the effect anymore and so one could not distinguish between a LW or a DW (only by asking). For instance is Bill Gates a LW or a DW? Steve Jobs? The guys from google? I can't tell for certain (out of the results, I am sure if you read biographies or interviews with them you can tell).