[extropy-chat] Books: Harris; Religion and Reason

[Joseph Bloch]

All hail the hypno-toad!

Joseph

Mike Hayes wrote:

> All needed answers to these questions may be found in that sacred text 
> known as the  "futurama cartoon series"
>
> Mike Hayes
>
> On 1/10/06, *Samantha Atkins * <sjatkins at mac.com 
> <mailto:sjatkins at mac.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     On Jan 9, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Robert Bradbury wrote:
>
>     > Ok, lets see if I can keep this at an elevated level.
>     >
>
>     As opposed to?
>
>     >
>     > If there are those who would like to support my renomination to the
>     > ExI Board based on the platform that all information as is feasible
>     > should be preserved and that the execution of programs which seek
>     > to destroy information without a substantive argument that such
>     > information is worthless ( i.e. a legitimate reason to erase
>     > information rather than simply an unjustified assertion that one
>     > religion is right and another is wrong) should be terminated, I
>     > would be willing to accept such a nomination.  Note carefully, that
>     > I am *not* saying that the information potentially contained in
>     > external programs should be erased ( e.g. current forms of capital
>     > punishment) -- I am simply saying that the execution of programs
>     > that would intentionally erase information without a really good
>     > (proven) reason should cease execution.
>     >
>
>     I don't think positioning on "information" is particularly clear and
>     therefore not a good platform.  How would this "cease execution" be
>     implemented?  I wouldn't want to see a board member advocating nuking
>     Iran, for instance or doing a Pat Robertson advocacy of assassinating
>     people like Pat Robertson.
>
>     > So, in some respects, I am throwing my glove down to the ExI
>     > board.  Either you *are* or you are *not* extropic.  Harris has, in
>     > my mind, outlined the problems with being a "tolerant" extropian.
>
>     While I have less and less tolerance for a lot of imho brain damaged
>     and brain damaging notions, beliefs and practices,  I am not
>     altogether comfortable with hardline pronouncements about who and
>     what is and is not extropic from you or any other supposed
>     authority.  Discussions about such are fine though.
>
>     >   The problem with that is that it means transhumanism rules and
>     > extropianism falls.  In transhumansism (using its most basic
>     > definitions) there is no moral compass.  One can become transhuman
>     > along many vectors, some good, some bad.  With extropianism, there
>     > is at least some guideline -- more information is good, information
>     > destruction (entropy) is bad, allowing (or worse enabling) the
>     > destruction of information is bad, etc..  This leads to the
>     > questions of what paths will generate the most "good" information
>     > the soonest (perhaps with the minimal destruction of *perceived*
>     > less useful information)  and how does one deal with entirely
>     > unexplored paths (where the information gain may have positive,
>     > neutral or negative consequences).
>
>     Perhaps in seeking elevated style you have become too abstract to
>     make your meaning clear.  Please say more.
>
>     - samantha
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     extropy-chat mailing list
>     extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>     http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>