From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Mon Aug 19 2002 - 14:08:02 MDT
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 09:59:52AM -0700, Regina Pancake wrote:
>
> >I think there is a deep difference between us and the green ideology;
> >they consider nature as something that is inherently good regardless of
> >human outcomes and that has to be retained as it is not just out of
> >practical considerations but due to its inherent ethical value.
>
> I think you've got a good point with this. It does seem like their saying
> All nature-"GOOD" all technology-"BAD."
> But I think there is a lot of room for communication between the two groups
> here.
Yes. Transhumanism is (or at least should be) more than saying
"technology good" in all situations. Rather, what we aim for is progress,
and this means progress both for humans and nature (exactly what
constitutes progress is left as a major philosophical exercise for
everybody ;-)
> > This doesn't leave out respect for nature or the need
> >to keep our biosphere liveable and of high quality, but we are far more
> >willing to consider changes in nature. After all, if one accepts changing
> >the human condition, why not the natural conditions too?
>
> I think where the Greens and especially the Earth First groups would freak
> out about on that statement, is that
> we have this knack for throwing things out of wack as a race. you know,
> children playing with guns, sort of thing.
> Its shown up in problems like introducing new species to other lands. Such
> as rabbits in Australia and the like.
> Or weed killer that mutates the local frog populations. Stuff of the nature
> (so to speak) is just hands down, bad P.R. for any group that pushes for
> change. Namely us.
The real issue is: can people learn from their mistakes? The
(trans)humanist position is that we can and do, the antihumanist
position that we never or seldom do. If you believe in humans then you
have to believe humans can handle the environment better and better - we
also create institutions and systems to avoid repeating mistakes and
ameliorate our human fallibility. But many of the greens have
unfortunately become convinced about the antihumanist position and hence
will not trust any promethean project. But by accepting that position
they also undermine their faith in their own abilities: after all, will
not conservation and environmentalism also lead to unforeseen
consequences and disasters? (their answer would likely be that they at
least are lesser disasters, but current wildfires demonstrate that a
lesser disaster can still be rather big).
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - 09:16:15 MST