From: Dan Fabulich (daniel.fabulich@yale.edu)
Date: Mon Dec 04 2000 - 21:26:57 MST
Corwyn J. Alambar wrote:
> > - Do extropians support eugenics?
> Comment on this: I think "Eugenics" as a word in this case should be left
> out in favor of something like "germ-line genetic modification" or something
> similar. The word "eugenics" leaves such a bad taste in people's mouths that
> addressing it at all (save to specify that the historical justifications and
> practices of eugenics have nothing to do with the modern science of human
> genetics, much like ancient blood sacrifices for fertility have nothing to
> do with modern scientific agriculture)
Well, yes. But that's the question as it's asked. (Or, more
commenly, asserted about us in flames.) The answer should be calm and
reasoned; same as we should treat the question about whether
Extropianism is a cult.
"Cult" leaves a bad taste in your mouth, too. ;)
> >
> > - What do extropians think about "genetically modified" crops, foods,
> > etc?
> >
> > - What do extropians think about mysticism?
>
> This is where the dangerous ground begins to be tread. I've written five
> different reasons why, and realized that each one of them would eventually
> degenerate into flaming. And I think that alone should make the point. It
> does not mean that we endorse such odd "psuedo-theories" as the healing
> power of prayer, or "creation science". The personal, though, should remain
> such.
MOST of the FAQ answers say:
Q What do extropians think about such-and-such?
A Extropianism does not dictate any particular answer to this
question. Many extropians believe that such-and-such is good, for the
following reasons. Others deny this, for these reasons. However, all
of us agree that blah-blah-blah.
I'd imagined that these two questions would go like that.
> I admire the notion of trying to summarize past debates on these subjects,
> but I've seen this done on other email lists and newsgroups for many years,
> and the fact is that the peopel who already are here and have their own
> opinions on these subjects will continue to espouse them at a low level,
> subconsciously eliciting responses from newcomers who have not been in on
> these debates prior and who will 99% of the time not pause to read the FAQ
> or any other supportin documentation before replying and rehashing the same
> arguement over and over again. This is particularly dangerous in areas that
> arouse strict partisan responses and emotions, such as the "faith/belief"
> question or the thrice-damned gun discussions.
I, too, have seen this done before, but I found the results to be at
least mildly successful; not in curbing discussion, but in elevating
it.
I'm not supposing that some FAQ answer will put an end to frequently
debated topics. Rather, starting from a certain basic level of
knowledge about the usual arguments can elevate the intelligence and
novelty of debate quite a bit, especially when newbies are pointed
directly at the FAQ when it appears that they haven't read it.
> Somethign that meets similar ideas might be a set of questions that would
> describe extropian ideals as a series of positions on issues - things
> like:
>
> Is it beneficial for people to live twice their current life
> expectancy at the same or better quality?
>
> Are space habitats and permanent settlement off the earth possible and
> desireable?
>
> Should some scientific inquiry be stymied because of ite potentially
> upsetting effect on society?
>
> Shoul dhuman beings be able to make genetic modifications to themselves and
> their children?
>
> Other questions like this can be approached to present a
> constructive, rather than detructive, view. Rather than presenting
> an arguentative view on modern issues (and one can say this with
> certainty: most extropians have diverse and strongly-held opinions
> on most major modern issues), a more forward-looking, futurist view
> can be expressed, focusing attention where it needs to be.
These are good questions, too... Some of these questions, I think,
have already been adequately covered by the Transhumanist FAQ at
www.transhumanism.org. Maybe we could/should quote from it liberally,
as it's a rather well written document, IMO.
-Dan
-unless you love someone-
-nothing else makes any sense-
e.e. cummings
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:12 MST