[extropy-chat] Libertarianism and the AutisticSpectrum (fwd fromfehlinger at un.org)

[Brett Paatsch]

Natasha wrote:
 
> From: Amara Graps 
> 
> >At least consider for more than five seconds some of 
> >what Jim F. is describing.

I have considered it for more than 5 seconds and Jim F emailed
me the same thing he emailed other folk obviously. So far as I 
can tell Jim F is on the level (ie genuine) but as I have said to him
on at least one previous occassion why don't you sub to the ExI
list again yourself and make your points there yourself - and he
declined at that stage. So far as I know the door is still open. 
I don't want to get too caught up with either an exercise in narcisism
or with what could be a form of trolling by proxy. 

If Jim steps forward to make his case I'd be pleased for Jim 
AND care more about his case. 

> We _can_ do better to try to understand each other. If
> >we cannot succeed in this tiny microcosm, then [by] what
> > right do you expect to succeed elsewhere?

Well as I say, I see that Jim is not making his case directly on
the list as a key determinant. As I can't tell if he is serious or 
trolling and don't have the time to spend on psychological navel
gazing with someone who won't step forward behind their 
arguments. The world contains lots of intelligent but timid folk. 
I respect their intelligence. I understand their timidity also I think.
But one cannot route out all the corners in which people choose
to lead lives of quiet desperation. Sometimes people need to put
some skin in the game. Life has always been about opting in or
dying. To me, if Jim wants to be taken seriously, he should be
here making his case in person.

> 
> Yes.  Like any good design practice, the use and reuse of 
> ideas as patterns can be compiled in all sorts of different 
> ways to reorient stasis in thinking patterns.  
> 
> Solutions to problems require many types of lenses. 

Sometimes may be. Sometimes may be not. 

> Listening is one of
> them.  It seems that most of the unempathic characteristics 
> of transhumanistis is positioning, labeling, claiming, pointing
> a finger, etc.Where elese is it so obvioius outside discussions 
> on politics?  

This is NOT unique to transhumanists :-) Its a human trait. We 
are political. A fact deriving from having unlimited individual
*potential* and yet limited personal resources at any given 
time. 

>Do we ever
> accuse each other of being non-superlongevity enthusiasts? 
> Non-nanotechnology advocates?  Non-biotech advocates?  
> What does this say about the culture.  

If we never did. It would say precisely nothing :-)

> You tell me, because all I'm reading on the topic are
> claims of what one person thinks of another person and making
> that a fact  rather than an impression.  Take Max's short piece 
> in  the newsletter.

Which piece? 
 
> Rather than address it in the vein it was written, it became a 
> bone of  contention for one group against another group - which
> was NOT what it was about. 

I am pretty sure that "it" was not what "it" was about. But politics 101
is that the other will always try and use whatever they can to make 
what you do about what they are about. Well not always. But perhaps
you get my point. Politics is not about the answers to particular
questions but about which questions get to be asked. 

The universe is considerably bigger than human politics - one
piece of space junk could prove that, but to individual humans
the things they have to spend most time working with day to day
is other humans :-)   Such is the essential nature of politics. 

> However smart, I don't think this was because the content was
> highly provocative. I think it was because it was written by Max 
> and some  used it to start labeling and making accusations.  This is
> a very sad  reflection of people's actions.  What political
> pursuasions were they?  (rehtorical)

Without even digging deeply into the context I can asked that 
rhetorical question. "They" were instances of the species homo-sapiens.
A *very* political species. And one I am quite fond of that 
point on politics notwithstanding. 

Regards,
Brett