From: Nick Bostrom (bostrom@ndirect.co.uk)
Date: Tue Jul 07 1998 - 10:06:44 MDT
Eugene Leitl wrote:
> Michael Nielsen writes:
> > One question I have of transhumanism, which I sent to Nick Bostrom as
> > part of his email survey, is to ask how revolutionary transhumanism is?
>
> Frankly, I don't understand all this fascination with "being
> revolutionary". I think that transhuman core values are perfectly
> old-fashioned.
Our core value -- becoming posthumans -- is only part of
transhumanism. Just as important are our ideas of how it can be
achieved. Obviously, many people in the past have wanted to overcome
their biological limitations and achieve immortality; but they
haven't known how to go about it. Transhumanism is the first
philosophy ever to have both the goal of transcending the human
condition and the practical, technological means to make it happen. I
think that is quite revolutionary.
> Perhaps we should theoretize less -- imo both extropians/>H for quite some
> time now show distinct trend to memetic inbreeding, which might
> indicate that the discussion part is now largely over, and most of
> value is having been said already.
I believe we have only seen the beginning. As the amount of
brainpower involved in transhumanism increases, the intensity of
intellectual exploration of transhumanist issues will reach new
levels that will make most of what is being said today look very
crude and unsophisticated.
For a recent step forward, take for example David Brin's reframing of
the whole privacy debate.
_____________________________________________________
Nick Bostrom
Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
London School of Economics
n.bostrom@lse.ac.uk
http://www.hedweb.com/nickb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:18 MST