From: Brian D Williams (talon57@well.com)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 10:06:59 MST
>From: John B <discwuzit@yahoo.com>
>Hello.
>Hi John, welcome!
>I hope I'm not going to step on anyone's toes, but
>I've a few questions on transhumanism. I first ran
>into the concept in Orion's Arm, a sci-fi setting at
>www.orionsarm.com . In the course of that, I was
>directed to the Extropian web site, and came across
>their Extropian philosophy. It's sparked quite a few
>questions, and I hope someone or -ones here can help
>me with them.
First, this is Extropians, not to be confused with other brands of
transhumanism.
>"1. Perpetual Progress- Seeking more intelligence,
>wisdom, and effectiveness, an indefinite lifespan, and
>the removal of political, cultural, biological, and
>psychological limits to self-actualization and
>self-realization. Perpetually overcoming constraints
>on our progress and possibilities. Expanding into the
>universe and advancing without end."
>At what cost? Every path you take means you're not
>going down a different path. What paths have
>been/are/will be passed over instead of going down the
>path of perpetual progress?
Every time we start down a particular path we eliminate other
possibilities. This is not exclusive to Extropianism. Rather than
remain satisfied with the status quo, we seek to advance ourselves
as well as provide the opportunity to others.
>That sounds negative, which is NOT my intent - merely,
>there's a purpose for stability, for progress, even
>(perhaps especially) for backsliding/entropy/etc. When
>you choose one, the other(s) suffer. Not saying that
>this is a bad thing, but I do wonder what other goals
>have been sidelined in place of perpetual growth.
Concepts don't "suffer", and the concept is "perpetual progress"
not necessarily growth, at least not in the physical sense.
>"2. Self-Transformation - Affirming continual moral,
>intellectual, and physical self- improvement, through
>critical and creative thinking, personal
>responsibility, and experimentation. Seeking
>biological and neurological augmentation along with
>emotional and psychological refinement."
>Is the order of self-improvements intentional?
>Least-important to most-important, or vice versa, or
>all important? What if they conflict - which takes
>precedence?
Intentional, although we welcome serendipity as well.
>"3. Practical Optimism - Fueling action with positive
>expectations. Adopting a rational, action- based
>optimism, in place of both blind faith and stagnant
>pessimism."
>What about faith in the general goodness of humanity -
>which everything I've yet seen in transhumanism seems
>to implicitly include.
We have a positive outlook, which is very different than faith. We
do not delude ourselves about human nature.
>What about cautious pessimism, that keeps you from
>destroying a top-rate mind with a poorly understood
>experiment?
A cautious pessimism might work, try it out and report back on the
results.
>My point is, is that this is a shades-of-grey
>spectrum, not black & white. Practical optimism's a
>great concept, IMHO, even if I may be seen as
>pessimistic.
It's important to maintain a positive outlook.
>"4. Intelligent Technology - Applying science and
>technology creatively to transcend "natural" limits
>imposed by our biological heritage, culture, and
>environment. Seeing technology not as an end in itself
>but as an effective means towards the improvement of
>life."
>*nod* & *applause*. Tool USE, not becoming tools. This
>is a wonderful statement, IMHO.
While some may augment using mechanical devices this does not make
them less than human in this philosophy.
>"5. Open Society - Supporting social orders that
>foster freedom of speech, freedom of action, and
>experimentation. Opposing authoritarian social control
>and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of
>power. Preferring bargaining over battling, and
>exchange over compulsion. Openness to improvement
>rather than a static utopia."
>The previous comment about the faith in the goodness
>inherent in the human beast applies here, IMHO.
No, we believe in rule of law, just not that government is the only
possible source of such laws.
>Also - a general question when I start seeing the word
>'freedom' tossed around - what about your
>RESPONSIBILITIES? Are you responsible for your
>neighbor's action? No? Then who helps you when your
>other neighbor's "freedom of action" starts to be
>applied to your nose, or dog, or daughter?
My neighbors freedom ends where he interferes with mine. In the
U.S. for example this is normally handled by governments. As
Extropians we also acknowledge our own rights to defend ourselves.
>As for experimentation, that goes literally without
>saying. The trick is experimentation without
>inappropriate repercussion. Example - a woman walking
>around without a veil/purdah in a fundamentalist
>Islamic state: Should she be beaten? Is that an
>appropriate response to her experimentation? I'm
>pretty sure that one dose of the cane prevents most
>further experimentation along those lines! However,
>you can stop experimentation by the human creature by
>either 1) complete and utter control, or 2) death. We
>question, and in questioning experiment, and in
>experimenting, learn. The trick is, as mentioned
>above, to teach the cat not to sit on a hot stove.
>(Story told by Mark Twain which may be paraphrased,
>"If the cat sits on a hot stove lid, that cat's
>learned a lesson - not to sit on any stove lids!")
We support societies where individuals are free to experiment. We
seek to change societies where they are not.
>"6. Self-Direction - Seeking independent thinking,
>individual freedom, personal responsibility,
>self-direction, self-esteem, and respect for others."
>OK, throw out the old mores that brought us this far
>and start fresh. *wry grin* I know, not quite what is
>meant - more like, throw out the parts we don't like
>and keep going. Question - WHO DECIDES? And again,
>what happens when your neighbor's choice(s) threaten
>you, either directly or through your loved ones?
Not necessarily throw out, but examine and question the validity
of. The individual decides, and as previously mentioned the end
result of personnal responsibility is that the individual assumes
responsibility for their own defense.
>"7. Rational Thinking - Favoring reason over blind
>faith and questioning over dogma. Remaining open to
>challenges to our beliefs and practices in pursuit of
>perpetual improvement. Welcoming criticism of our
>existing beliefs while being open to new ideas."
>In general I strongly agree with this point.
>I hope that the members of this list will not take
>this as an attack on their beliefs - such is not the
>intent. Rather, these are concerns I have regarding
>the aforementioned document, and I'd like some help
>resolving them.
We welcome well reasoned challenge, it's how we stay sharp ;)
Thanks for the interesting points raised, I'm sure others will
comment.
Brian
Member:
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
SBC/Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:02 MST