Professor Responds in Open Letter to Unabomber’s Ideas : Terrorism: Teacher agrees technology has taken a toll, but condemns violence and says a peaceful revolution is already under way. LAX security still tight.

UC Berkeley officials released an exchange of letters Tuesday between the Unabomber and psychology professor Tom R. Tyler in which the two engage in a reasoned debate over the serial terrorist’s contention that technological society should be dismantled.

The elusive Unabomber, responsible for 16 bombings in 17 years, challenged Tyler to consider his argument that technology is destroying the freedom of human beings, who he said are most fulfilled when they function in small cooperative groups.

The professor, replying in a carefully crafted open letter, condemned the Unabomber’s violence and argued that the revolution he advocates is already occurring peacefully.

“There is already evidence that people themselves are developing an alternative ideology that lessens the importance of technology and increases their control and autonomy over their lives,” Tyler wrote in his 2 1/2-page response. “But how is it useful to promote social stress and instability, especially through acts of violence? My impression is people react to violence by becoming less willing to change.”

The public epistolary debate on the Fourth of July holiday came as Los Angeles International Airport remained under tight security because a letter from the Unabomber last week threatened to blow up an airliner out of LAX, a threat he recast as a prank in a later letter. His string of bombings across the country has killed three people and injured 23, including 12 aboard an airplane in 1979.

The Unabomber, who refers to himself as a group called “FC,” said he put Tyler on his mailing list because the professor had recently commented in a newspaper article about his bombings and the April bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building.

“The trouble with psychologists is that in commenting on what people say or do they often concentrate exclusively on the non-rational motivations behind the speech or behavior,” the Unabomber wrote. “. . . We suggest that you should not only consider our actions as a symptom of psychological or social problems; you should also give attention to the substance of the issues we raise in the manuscript.”

In a response reviewed by the FBI before the letter was released to the news media Tuesday, Tyler said it was a “fair request” that he look beyond whatever psychological problems the Unabomber might have and consider the merits of the terrorist’s arguments.

The Unabomber proceeded to pose a series of questions to Tyler, such as: “Do you think we are likely to be right, in a general way, about the kind of future that technology is creating for the human race?”

At times in his essay, Tyler seemed to be reaching out to the Unabomber in an attempt to engage him in an ongoing debate. Investigators, who are pleased that the Unabomber is sending letters instead of bombs, hope to obtain better clues to his identity through a continuing exchange.

“I regret that we cannot communicate more directly,” the specialist in social psychology wrote. “By circulating your manuscript you are encouraging us to think about these important issues. I have tried to read and consider your arguments with an open mind.”

Tyler said he shared the Unabomber’s view that technology has taken its toll: “I agree with you that technology is resulting in many social problems and that our society has to address those problems and their solution.”

But Tyler said he took exception to the terrorist’s belief that a highly technological society cannot be reformed. The professor noted that many Americans have quit jobs in corporations to start small businesses, have moved from cities to the country, and have voluntarily begun recycling and reducing their use of electricity.

“People are finding many ways to change their lives in positive ways,” he wrote. “. . . People are developing the type of anti-technology ideology that you advocate in your manuscript. Of course, many people’s lives continue to be difficult, and change takes time.”

Tyler argued that education is the key to changing society and suggested that it might be possible to develop a core of “intelligent, thoughtful, rational people” such as the bomber describes in his manuscript. Tyler asked the terrorist how such a group might be formed and what issues it should address.

“Many members of our society would welcome new ideas about how to deal with the problems created by society,” he wrote. “That group could change society by showing people a better way to live.”

The professor concluded: “I especially welcome your suggestion in the manuscript that a ‘revolution’ that changes the economic and technological basis of our society need not be violent or sudden. It can occur peacefully and over a period of decades. In that spirit, I think our society should consider the important issues you raise in your manuscript.”

Despite the flurry of letters received from the Unabomber in recent days, the FBI said it was still stymied in its search for the terrorist. Nevertheless, a new picture has begun to emerge of the bomber as a stable resident of some Northern California community who collects various kinds of scrap metal and other materials for later use in his bombs.

One official familiar with the investigation described the Unabomber as a “pack rat” who saves postage stamps and bomb components for years before using them.

Although the bomber has moved his center of operations from Chicago to Salt Lake City to Northern California, officials believe he does not move his residence frequently, simply because of the amount of material he has accumulated. As an example, the source said, the Unabomber has used electrical wire from the same roll in most, if not all, of his bombs.

The Unabomber, in keeping with his stated philosophy, typed his letters and the manuscript on a typewriter, using carbon paper to make copies.

“We apologize for sending you such a poor carbon copy of our manuscript,” he wrote in his letter to Tyler. “We can’t make copies at a public copy machine because people would get suspicious if they saw us handling our copies with gloves.”

In Los Angeles, airport security restrictions continued Tuesday despite a separate letter from the Unabomber saying his bomb threat was a prank--one apparently designed to call attention to his 56-page manuscript, which he wants to see printed in a major publication. The typewritten document has been received by the New York Times, the Washington Post, Penthouse magazine and Tyler, who got his carbon copy and accompanying one-page letter Friday.

Although law enforcement sources said each passing day was helping to reassure them that the Unabomber would not follow up on his threat to destroy a plane using LAX, security measures at the airport remained in place throughout Tuesday.

The heightened security is expected to be scaled back either today or Thursday, federal officials said, adding that they did not want to loosen precautions before the end of the long Independence Day weekend.

In his letter threatening the planes using the airport--a threat the bomber contradicted with a note to the New York Times saying he did not actually intend to destroy an airplane--the Unabomber set a six-day window for the attack. The exact days encompassed by that threat were unclear, but the time has now passed, officials said, helping to ease the fear and uncertainty triggered by receipt of the contradictory letters.

Times staff writer Jim Newton contributed to this story.