From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Jun 25 2001 - 01:50:48 MDT
Russell Blackford wrote:
>
> Samantha Atkins quoted ...
>
> > >
> > > Ascend!
>
> ... then commented
>
> >This is a very *spiritual* admonition, perhaps the most central
> >one of all
> >spirituality.
>
> This comment misses the point. What makes transhumanist philosophy unique is
> that we are able to offer each other such admonitions/ encouragement within
> an entirely naturalistic framework. In at least one (very important) sense,
> no "spirituality" is required.
It is a bit strained to speak of our "naturalistic" framework
when we fervently
strive to overcome all the supposed limits of our nature that we
can. Perhaps
transhumanism could better be set to be based upon a
trans-naturalistic framework.
Or don't you find the posibility of simulations within a jupiter
brain much richer
than the natural world we evolved in to be a bit of a stretch to
strict naturalist
positions? How about an advanced SI that governs and sets the
framework for all
material interactions within its domain? Who are we kidding
here? We are talking
about the real possibility of building a God whose intelligence
directs or underlies
reality for at least those beings within its domain.
We are out to transforma and transcend our nature and we should
he straight up
about that. But we would rather, it sometimes seems, dream our
dreams of "Me Forever"
without thinking too much about what we propose and dream of
brings us right back
into very deeply spiritual and difficult questions.
>
> That said, Samantha, what exactly is it that's bothering you about all this?
> What do you think we disagree about, apart from the use of words? I doubt
> that either of us wants to devote his/her life and energies to debating some
> non-issue, or side issue, with an ally. I want to concentrate on debunking
> my intellectual opponents and I imagine you feel similarly.
>
I would rather take what my "intellectual opponents" care most
about and show
them that the way to actually have what they most care about is
a bit different
from what they might have thought. I have little better to do
than to do what
I can to unite and bring peace where others see irreconciables.
I don't think
we will make it very far if we as a movement and humans as a
species continue
to disown one another.
> Although, I've expressed serious reservations about the word "spiritual" and
> its cognates, I've not tried to censor anyone's use of them if they find
> them useful in their own experience. Moreover, I've not merely conceded but
> positively emphasised and celebrated aspects of life that are often covered
> by the "spiritual" rubric. Mike Lorrey wrote in a similar vein, I thought.
>
> Do you have some particular belief whose expression you think is under
> threat from me and others on this list who are wary spirituality-talk? If
> so, what is it? When we know, perhaps we can indeed just bracket off the
> issue and get on with helping each other debate the real enemies of the
> future.
>
> Yours in solidarity
>
It is my wish to also work together in solidarity. It is also
my wish to point
out that this business of self-transcendence include
transcending a lot of our
internal programming and notion of who we are leaves us most
definitely not in
our materialistic, naturalistic Kansas any more. A lot of the
spiritual paths have a very long history of attempting that type
of work of self
transcendent and being beyond our apparent programming.
I bring it up now and then because we are planning to build the
seeds of and/or
ourselves become gods. With that comes a whole raft of
value-laden, quite karmically
heavy questions and responsibilities. Some I know are very much
considering them.
Others I am not sure yet have because, among other things, they
don't how to
fit it into their naturalistic framework. Their materialism and
rationality doesn't
quite give them the tools for that type of examination and
self-transformation.
This is a place where I think some forms of spirituality have a
lot to offer. To
be more clear, I don't believe we will be whole and sane
godlings without something
beyond our materialism.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:16 MST