[extropy-chat] Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion

Fri Jan 16 17:54:08 UTC 2004

Below is the excerpt from ExI's Exponent Newsletter (11/15/03) on Brian
Alexander and his book _Rapture_
___________________________________________________

___Brian, how did you become so interested in biotech? 

___BA: Hmmm... Well, I've always been interested in biology -- it was the
only science subject I ever did well in high school or college. I was an
English literature major and political science major in college and it may
seem as though writing about biotech is an odd area for me to work in. But
my overarching interest has always been the culture, and to me biotech is
most certainly a real cultural phenomenon. It is literally changing the way
we regard our futures, our religions, the natural world, and ourselves. So
for me, this is a perfectly natural realm to work in. Professionally, I
first became interested in biotech in 1994, just as the book opens with the
second A4M conference in Las Vegas. It really started with a question,
which was, what is the real science behind any of this? And if there was
any real science, wow. 

___: . In your opinion, does transhumanity have a particular political line
of thinking that is evident in the underlying values of transhumanists?

___BA: I do recognize that within transhumanism, and even within extropy,
there may be a wide variety of views on political philosophy. Just have a
look at the past year on the extrope discussion group! This is a very
important question for transhumanists. (More on this in answer to later
questions.) 

___? If you could separate out one element that keeps people from rushing
to support transhumanity and donating money to Extropy Institute to further
its goals, what would that be? 

___BA: Just one? That's tough. Everything from people just not having the
money to thinking that the money is better used for other causes, but if I
had to pick just one, I would say that it is a lack of the overarching
vision of what transhumanity means in the near term, as opposed to the far
future vision. Getting people to support a cause aiming to do something
they can take part in the next five years is much easier than getting them
to support a cause that looks ahead 100 years. Aubrey's Methuselah mouse is
a good example. other institutions are trying to do the same thing, but
they place the work in a framework of understanding the diseases of aging.
That's something more concrete that everybody can relate to as opposed to
saying you want to engineer a super-long-lived mouse for the sake of making
a super long-lived mouse.

___? How did writing _Rapture_ change your mind about transhumanists? 

___BA: well, it didn't really. I've always liked transhumanists, and enjoy
spending time with them, though I am not a "transhumanist" per se and I
disagree with a fair number of the predictions and with some -- not all by
any means -- of the attitudes expressed by some transhumanists. A TV
interviewer asked me the other day if I didn't "feel sorry" for life
extensionists. I said no, that life extensionists -- and I would say the
same about transhumanism in general - - are actually being more honest than
many of us about that they want. I admire people who can be unabashed about
their desires. Nobody, at least not anybody in good physical and
psychological health, wants to die. But saying so, or saying you'd like to
be smarter, or improve your body in some fundamental way, is considered
strange by many people because it seems so impossible, and so wanting the
impossible can be seen as something odd or even pathetic. Well, I don't
think it is impossible in the very long term, and I think these are some of
the most basic of human desires, expressed for thousands of years.
Improvement is the driving force behind much of human culture. It's who
were are. now, one person's "improvement" is another person's danger, but
the point is, we all want "better." Now, I will say that I always thought
the transhumanist vision works better as a concept or an idea (hence the
subtitle of the book) than as a practical path. That did not change with
the book. My research only confirmed my view. Transhumanism seems to me to
be about propagating the idea that it's okay to favor change. The idea of
transhumanism being "about" cryonics, or the singularity or merger with
computers, or space colonization or germline engineering is, in my view, a
mistake. I've always thought that man himself is "transhumanist" and has
been throughout history, as I try to show in "rapture." we all want to rise
above our current station, whether that is in a spiritual, cultural,
physical, mental sense doesn't matter. We've always evolved. We've always
been "trans."

___? What do you think is the most urgent issue to contend with regarding
Leon Kass and the anti- biotechnology swarm? 

___ BA: Leon Kass is only one incarnation of anti- biotech, which is really
about anti human improvement. My reading of the "bio-Luddite'" (as I call
it in "Rapture") philosophy is that they believe that "human" cannot be
improved upon. I say that humans have always tried to improve upon
themselves and that this is, in fact, human nature. Dr. Kass is expressing
a view that has always been expressed about science and man's place in the
natural world. Most famously, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is just such a
warning, but there have been such warnings about defying the natural order
forever. I think the most important thing to contend with is the idea that
enhancement technology will, by its very nature, be de-humanizing.
Sometimes it might be, sometimes not. Personally, I think it is important
to keep an open mind. I might add that this is why Dr. Kass and others use
transhumanism, and the longing for some to have a "post-human" future,
against biotech as a whole. Rhetoric about "post-humanity" doesn't really
do anybody any good. First, I think it's incorrect. We will always be
human. Second, it makes people think that, say tomorrow, alien-like
augmented species who used to be people will walk the earth. That won't
happen but it makes for a great sound bite, a good headline, a scary
scenario.

___? Do you think that transhumanism is more scientific than it is
cultural? In other words, do you think that we should emphasize science or
culture in order to prosper and elicit positive memes about transhumanism? 

___ BA: I think you ought to give MORE emphasis on the cultural than the
science. I know transhumanists will disagree with me here, but much of the
science upon which the movements seem based is not only not yet ready for
prime time, it may never be ready. Let the science takes care of itself.
The minds of people are what really count. I think transhumanists have done
a generally poor job of addressing fears, concerns, apprehensions of the
general public about how biotech will affect people. There's a tendency to
look down on such fears with disdain. But when Leon Kass and Francis
Fukuyama and others appeal to fears, they talk about culture, society,
religion, art, and human relations. People understand these things. This is
what "Rapture" is about, really, the culture. The science places it in
context but it is not, at heart, a science book. It's about hope. So if I
were a transhumanist who wanted to make a difference, I'd research issues
like population, resources, environment, social justice, human rights, art
and the ways these will or will not be affected. When I give talks, these
are the questions people are most interested in. 

___ ? Do you think Extropy Institute has succeeded in memetic engineering
of "transhumanism? " 

___ BA: Yes, but I do think transhumanism is now becoming bigger than
Extropy or any one organization. I think this is a measure of Extropy's
success, but also may mean that in the future extropy comes to be less and
less important as the spawn swim on their own. As science catches up to
Extropy's ideas, the ideas will spread outward into the general public, as
"rapture" shows they already have, and the need for an organization like
extropy will pass completely. And by the way, let me say that I have always
admired the very grown up way Natasha and Max and a few others have dealt
with some of the snarkier writing about extropy and transhumanism,
including some by me about certain elements of transhumanism. (In a wired
story I referred to extropians as "enthusiastic amateurs" and that pissed
some people off so much that they couldn't see that the story was about how
some of the ideas were being accepted by mainstream science and that
extropes were not as kooky as some might think.) That can be tough to do.
but by putting yourselves out there, by taking the good with the bad, you
do get some of the message through. 

___? Looking back, is there anything you feel you left out of your book
that you would now expand upon? 

___BA: If I thought anybody would read it, I would have liked to make the
book about another 100 pages! essentially I would have gone into more
detail about some of the things that are already in the book. I would have
liked to have done more with how biotech actually works. I mean how drugs
are made by engineering cells to produce human proteins. I would have liked
to have spent more time with Wally Steinberg, a truly fascinating
character, or Deeda Blair. I would have liked to gone into much more detail
about regeneration science (but look for that appearing somewhere soon).
__________________________________________________

Natasha

Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Emlyn O'regan oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:54:28 +1030
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion

Me too

Emlyn

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Purvis [mailto:wpurvis7 at bellsouth.net]
Sent: Friday, 16 January 2004 9:23 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion

Thanks. I would be interested in seeing that.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Natasha  <mailto:natasha at natasha.cc> Vita-More 
To: ExI chat list <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>  
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion

It was covered in ExI's Exponent Newsletter.  I'll forward it to the list in
case anyone didn't see it or is interested.

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .