From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Fri Sep 13 2002 - 02:40:59 MDT
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> Samantha Atkins wrote:
>>
>> I agree and disagree. To those of various different types who have
>> been marginalized, knowing that they are welcome and that we truly are
>> open to all who share our principles with no exclusions is quite
>> important. In that sense it is not simply "irrelevant".
>
>
> That is not an issue of race. That is an issue of comforting a sentient
> being which has experienced a past trauma and fears the trauma may be
> encountered again. This trauma may have involved an illusory concept
> called "race" held by other sentients, but I don't need to buy into that
> illusion to feel compassion, to offer assistance, or even to offer
> reassurance.
No disagreement there at all. But I thought we are talking
about an inclusions statement exactly to offer that bit of
compassion and reassurance. So perhaps I misunderstood you.
Are you in favor of such a statement, with suitable avoidance of
making unreal preoccupations stronger?
>
>>> >> And likewise from the perspective of combating racism, I believe
>>> >> there is no value to either racial diversity *or* racial unity; in
>>> >> the face of the future race is simply irrelevant. To attempt to
>>> >> value "diversity" is to abandon colorblindness.
>>> >
>>> > Hardly. Seeing everything has monotone is not the same thing as full
>>> > acceptance and welcoming of all persons of like mind regardless of
>>> > otherwise different from you they may be.
>>>
>>> Race is not relevant as either a difference or a similarity.
>>
>>
>> Well, yes, but it was one of many differences.
>
>
> It was never a difference. It was one of many illusory "differences"
> that human beings used to separate themselves from other human beings.
>
It is a difference when it is treated as a difference. And not
all differences can just be brushed under the rug of
color-blindness or the equivalent. Some differences are matters
of personal importance and self-image.
> > That they are not
>
>> relevant to you or your treatment of others within our outside of
>> transhumanism/extropianism does not mean it is of no value for these
>> groups to state that such openness is a matter of policy.
>
>
> Fine. Let's do so. I still strongly object to a general transhumanist
> organization making the statement that we *value racial diversity*
> because this statement is incompatible with my beliefs about the moral
> and rational value of colorblindness.
>
So maybe a statement that we value diversity in all forms and
are unified by a common core of values and goals would be
sufficient.
>>> >> If every transhumanist were of the exact same race and body type, I
>>> >> don't see how it would make the slightest difference one way or the
>>> >> other. How does this supervene on cognition?
>>> >
>>> > Cognition is not everything.
>>>
>>> Race is not anything, except insofar as there are still some people
>>> remaining who unfortunately pay attention to the irrelevant bundle of
>>> characteristics they call "race".
>>
>>
>> Why keep harping on race and seemingly ignore the more general point?
>
>
> *What* more general point? Someone wanted to state we valued racial
> diversity. I objected. You objected to the objection. Are you
> withdrawing your objection^2 and raising a different point to debate?
> If so, please state it so that I can decide explicitly whether I agree
> with it.
>
We have been speaking of a list of differences that are
sometimes points of exclusion, not just race. It is that that I
was referring to. Do you believe that any differences at all
between people should be both acknowledged as differences and
explicitly accepted as of value? Do you believe that diversity
is ever a value or that some differences are not adequately
accepted and the people possessing them appreciated by taking a
stance that only their sameness matters and their differences
should be, where possible, ignored? What I am attempting to
get at here is the degree where people feel fully seen and
present and accepted in an organization vs. only being accepted
in those ways and too the extent they are the same as everyone
else.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:00 MST