Re: Transhumanism vs Humanity!

From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Sun Mar 10 2002 - 03:54:54 MST


On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 12:56:34AM -0000, Bryan Moss wrote:
> Why isn't transhumanism mainstream?
>
> Because we suck.
>
> Check the subject title, would you want to hang with us? Oh
> come on, it'll be fun! When you're broken-hearted we'll
> explain the evolutionary basis of love! Make it all better!
> Feeling low? I know exactly which part of the brain is
> involved! Maybe 10-15 years from now we'll fix it so you're
> happy all the time! Aw shucks, there I go extrapolating
> beyond the Singularity again! Silly me!
>
> It's that simple folks.

:-) I think you hit the nail on the head.

So, what changes of transhumanism would be needed to correct this, and
would they be good changes from a transhumanist point of view too (and
not just PR)? Let's see: instead of just explaining away
broken-heartedness it would actually put it into a larger context: one
that includes evolution and biology, but also psychology and a general
understanding of the human condition in general and the needs of
individuals in particular. Instead of saying that you get pie in the sky
when you are uploaded we should look at how we get there - and that
requires more than tracing Moore's law on a graph paper! It requires us
to discuss how culture, society, economy and technology actually work
together; a tall order for any person, but we can at least achieve some
of this by networking with brilliant thinkers in these fields and act as
a third culture willing to mediate between the disciplines - our vision
is a great motivator for this.

Such a transhumanism would be far more popular; maybe not mainstream,
but definitely influencing the mainstream by being a source of good or
at least interesting ideas that can fit within the current context.

Would it be good for *us*? Beside the obvious utility of having close
ties with the mainstream and its resources, it would also be a
transhumanism that would be constantly in interaction with other fields,
other views. This would make the tendency to insulate onself behind cool
terminology and closed discussions untenable; I expect that quite a few
people who right now consider themselves transhumanists would not enjoy
that - they would have to explain their views to critical outsiders. But
the rewards would be far greater: an inflow of new ideas and far better
memetic selection. In the long run it would be very good for us too,
both personally and ideologically.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anders Sandberg                                      Towards Ascension!
asa@nada.kth.se                            http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:54 MST