[extropy-chat] Bad idea, was Transhumanism as Religion

[Samantha Atkins]

Bret,

How does that which will effectively "revalue all values" including  
the very nature and place of humanity manage to be compatible with  
the majority of religions that contain rigid value systems and  
dogmatic assertions about many aspects of reality and especially  
about the nature and place of humanity?  This rigidity and dogmatism  
is held by the adherents as being of the very essence of their  
religions.  Thus I don't see how you can seriously expect this to  
work.   Am I missing something?

- samantha

On Feb 19, 2006, at 12:38 PM, Bret Kulakovich wrote:

>
>
> Phew. It has been a heck of a week. Sorry not to chime in sooner -
> Just to remark on the overall notion:
>
> ExI/Transhumanism in its current form is _compatible_ with almost all
> religions.
>
> Once you make it a religion in and of itself, you are now competing
> with these other groups. That is why eventually all cults fail. They
> get too big, too threatening, and bottom out.
>
> Some of the most successful and fastest growing elements of human
> culture, particularly in the past few decades, rode "on-top-of"
> something else. For example, the web is "on-top-of" the internet. It
> is more practical use-wise and compatible with all machines. That is
> where we need to be. On-top-of, more practical than, and compatible
> with, the majority of religions. A culture of inclusivity rather than
> exclusivity will always win out. A Meta-religion at worst.
>
> Bret K.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat