[extropy-chat] The most "dangerous" idea

Samantha Atkins samantha at objectent.com
Fri Sep 3 19:56:12 UTC 2004


On Sep 2, 2004, at 2:08 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
>> Us vs Them develops when there are such difference
>> between the groups
>> that there is little mutual understanding and when
>> there are
>> conflicting needs or agendas.  One such conflict is
>> when one or both
>> groups sees the other as a threat that must be
>> eliminated.
>
> *nods*  Not saying this won't happen.  Just that it
> need not always happen - like, say, by trying to
> develop mutual understanding or find ways to make the
> needs/agendas not conflict, before resorting to
> destroying the other group.

What if one group develops and willingly uses such enhancements that 
the group without them is no more capable of understanding them than a 
ant is capable of understanding a human?

>
>> In
>> transhumanist terms those without various levels of
>> augmentation/life
>> extension/intelligence enhancement and so on will
>> consider those who do
>> have it as deadly vastly more competitive threats
>> UNLESS the technology
>> is either available to all or seen as seriously
>> improving everyone's
>> lifes and well-being at a very concrete level.
>
> And aren't the enhancements we're trying to get
> developed aimed at improving the lives of those who
> have them?  So, make sure that everyone can have them,
> and that their benefits are easily seen by everyone
> (which shouldn't be too hard, once there are real
> examples to point to), and there we go.
> _______________________________________________
>

Yes, but not everyone will choose the enhancements nor is it clear that 
all enhancements can produced cheaply and in quantity sufficient for 
everyone who does want them to have them.  People are not completely 
rational (big surprise).   If we can quickly get to a more abundant 
world where comparative super-persons do not threaten one's very 
survival directly and if the "haves" consider the "have-nots" as 
potential "haves" who just need a bit of time and space or as simply an 
example of worthwhile and valued diversity, then it should have a 
relatively happy outcome.

- samantha




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list