[extropy-chat] H+, autism, selection effects, biases

Sat Jul 1 09:01:30 UTC 2006

>Anne Corwin wrote:
  >What draws people to become interested in how things work and how they 
  >might be improved

  Anna replies:)
  Curiosity and knowledge.

  >and to even concern themselves with seeking meaning in existence?

:) In my opinion, empathy.

  >As a young child I often found myself asking lots of questions about why things
  >were, and was always extremely dissatisfied with the answer, "Because that's 
  >the way it is", or, "Because that's the way society works".  

  :) Great anology.

  >It was uncomfortable, but at the same time, it felt like a "project" -- something 
  >I had to explore and find a solution to.

  Wiki:
  A project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product or 
  service.
  :) Isn't that what's life all about?

  :)My problem with this; 
  Before you said the word atheist=Asperger's syndrome,  I was fascinated.
  After reading or Googling, I would feel like have a disease like syndrome:)
  From a general public point of view, being unique, original, different or 
  particular, means being diseased and full of syndromes?  

  It's not so much as the description but the definition of negativity it generates.
  Certain words judge meaning.
  In my opinion, if you had not mentioned disease, disorder or syndrome, 
  I would have agreed at the definition stated by Wikipedia based on Aspergers.

  Anna:)
  That was a really great post, thanks.

  Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and 
  in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy. 
  Aristotle

Anne Corwin <sparkle_robot at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Hi, I just joined this list in response to George Dvorsky's suggestion that I do so.  Hopefully it is OK if I simply jump in and comment on this particular issue, since it seems to have been the impetus for my being told about this discussion list.

I cannot comment specifically on statistics of transhumanists on the autism spectrum -- but in my observation, those attracted to transhumanist ideas do at least tend to be somewhat prone to having intense (and often science-based) interests that began in childhood.  I think that the larger question here is: what draws people to become interested in how things work and how they might be improved, and to even concern themselves with seeking meaning in existence?

When I think carefully about it, I didn't become a transhumanist so much as realize I was one.  Or at least, I evolved a particular set of philosophies, notions about the future, and ethical guidelines that turned out to be a good fit with transhumanism -- as I understand and interpret it.

As a young child I often found myself asking lots of questions about why things were, and was always extremely dissatisfied with the answer, "Because that's the way it is", or, "Because that's the way society works".  My father was a sci-fi fan, and had Star Trek on the TV back as far as I can remember.  I grew up reading all his old books and eventually seeking more, in the realms of fact and scientific speculation as well as fiction.  

Childhood obsessions included time travel, "other dimensions", black holes, origins of the Universe, and things along those lines.  I don't know what drew me to these things initially -- but it might have something to do with a congenital fascination with parts and mechanisms, and a desire to find out how far things could be reduced.  My parents report that I was asking questions about what rocks and hair were made of in my toddler years, which definitely indicates a tendency toward this sort of thinking.  

So, though I don't believe in anything like "destiny", I definitely think that my development and childhood experiences sort of "optimized" me for transhumanism. 

Then, I underwent a massive existential crisis / restructuring at around the age of 20.  This was correlated to some extent with being able to admit to myself and my family that I was an atheist. I found myself at first in a state wherein I had a glaring and overwhelming sense of my own fragility and mortality.  It was uncomfortable, but at the same time, it felt like a "project" -- something I had to explore and find a solution to.

In the beginning of this exploration, I studied some humanistic philosophies that sought to make death into something that was simply accepted and even welcomed eventually, as part of playing one's role as a conscious being.  I tried to convince myself that since death was inevitable, I should just quit thinking about it and enjoy my life.  But it didn't work.  I tried going to a therapist.  I tried meditation.  I tried reading some material on Taoism.  I tried just plan stopping my thoughts, or distracting myself.  Nothing worked -- I ended up in a state where I only had access to what felt like 10% of my brain capacity for doing what I wanted to do, while the other 90% was constantly churning and calculating and reviewing data on the Death Problem.  I began to wonder if I had OCD.

But then, something clicked in my brain and I started asking myself questions like: WHY do people think death is inevitable?  And because it's been inevitable in the past, does that HAVE to mean that it's always going to be that way?  And am I the only one on the planet who thinks that aging and wasting away and finally having one's consciousness annihilated is an undeniable tragedy?  And is anyone actually trying to DO anything about this problem?

To the Internet I went.  This was pre-Google (mid-late 90s), so I looked up "life extension" on AltaVista.  To my exhilirated shock, I found that not only did companies already exist that would freeze a person for hopefully being awakened in the future, but that some people were actually of the same opinion as me regarding the supposed limits of human potential: for health, ability, and longevity.  I discovered Roy Walford's caloric restriction work, as well as some of the very earliest transhumanist FAQs and such.  

At first I was convinced there had to be a catch somewhere, that soon I'd find something indicating that these "transhumanists" were indistinguishable from UFO fanatics and cryptozoologists and such, but that didn't happen.  I read and read, and eventually had a massive internal paradigm shift wherein it occurred to me that *nothing* about indefinite life extension or cyborg bodies or whatnot actually violates any of the laws of physics.  Just because something sounds wonderful, I realized, does not mean that it can never happen.  And we would be fools to deny ourselves the opportunity to try to solve hard problems and explore previously unattainable areas of space and philosophy.  

There is no catch.  Technology is real, and humans can accomplish and learn to understand a heck of a lot when we put our minds to it.  When I look at myself in the mirror while wearing clothing, and eyeglasses, and carrying an iPod Nano filled with songs and talk radio files, and a cell phone clipped to my pocket, it is difficult to tell where I end and the technology begins.  And I love this feeling -- this sense of a nearly seamless integration with innovation, with adaptations not borne of biological chance but deliberate volition.

For the record: I am diagnosed with Asperger's (was first diagnosed with PDD-NOS -- Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified, but eventually this as "otherwise specified" to Asperger's, since I did develop speech at an early age, though it was mostly echolalic / scripted / repetitive questioning until I was in my teens).  The only aspect of this neurology that has ever felt remotely "limiting" is that much of standard American culture is not "set up" for people like me.  

People who find it easy to adopt the basic assumptions of those around them tend to take their dependencies on default social structures and stimulus thresholds for granted, so they look at people like me and see us as somehow less functional, or more in need of "special" help and instruction.  However, I've been able to become highly functional, by my estimation, through rigorous brainhacking.  For instance, one of the issues that always distressed me (and my parents) when I was growing up was the fact that I tended to have fits and meltdowns when things happened that I didn't anticipate.  

Thinking about radical life extension actually compelled me to start anticipating not only possible events, but possible future subjective states -- that is, I have tried to imagine myself being very old and to pre-emptively relate my present self with my future self.  This actually led to an improved ability to anticipate future emotional states, and to come up with alternative plans in the case of primary plans not working out.  In many ways, transhumanism has been very good therapy!  And it's enabled me to keep the aspects of my cognition and perception that I like, while at the same time allowing me to address the challenges associated with my neurology.

I imagine part of the reason I was drawn to transhumanism was related to the fact that I've never tended to share basic assumptions with those around me.  I had to sort of build my own "operating system" for living from the ground up.  And this "operating system" ended up looking a whole lot like transhumanism!

I apologize for the very long post but I figured this might comprise something of an introduction.

- Anne

---------------------------------
  Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta._______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

---------------------------------
All new Yahoo! Mail  
---------------------------------
Get news delivered. Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060701/597986d1/attachment.html>