[extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god)

[Brett Paatsch]

Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > And more generally, anybody, if extropy is a
> > transhumanist philosophy how would if differentiate as a
> > philosophy from hedonism?  Where are the extropian
> > principles incompatible?
> 
> In a nutshell - doesn't hedonism live for the
> pleasures of the moment, with little regard for the
> future?  Transhumanism encourages one to take action
> to maek sure there is a pleasant future, starting with
> making sure there is a future.  (And preferably not a
> finite one.)

Living for the pleasures of the moment is pretty close to
how I think of hedonism anyway. Seems to me like
*all* pleasures are experienced in the moment as are
all pains, we can *anticipate* pleasures and speak of 
"looking forward" to things and we can anticipate pain
and be anxious about it, but anticipation of both takes
place in the present. As does pride in accomplishment. 

A key thread for most transhumanists seems to be to 
oppose the arbitrariness of three score and ten years
or of a lifespan upperbounded at 120 but few transhumanists
expect to avoid dying altogether, most recognize that an
accident would get them sooner or later. 

That being the case, there are many other boundaries that 
one could choose to oppose if opposing boundaries gets
one's juices flowing. I wonder, I do not claim to know,
if it might be just as valid if not more so to live more in
the moments we know we have - the present ones. 

I accept your point that at least superficially transhumanists
tend to be more future oriented than hedonists but ultimately
both only live and experience in the present. 

Why would mortals facing lifespans of seconds or of eons 
EVER delay gratification? 

Brett