[extropy-chat] The meme of transhumanism

Mike Dougherty msd001 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 8 22:36:32 UTC 2007

On 3/6/07, Anders Sandberg <asa at nada.kth.se> wrote:
> [ Maybe it is time to go back to the philosophical heavyweight issues?
> Anybody up for a discussion of deontological vs. consequentialist
> transhumanism? With reasoning under uncertainty? ]

given that we don't necessarily have consensus on the ends, it would
be hard to justify arbitrary means, so i guess conservative progress
would have to be made deontologically?

arbitrary means: those randomly but distinctly selected for
discussion.  Perhaps this would end up categorizing a class of
behaviors rather than any particular 'rightness' of action.

conservative progress:  with increasing command of our physical
environment, the potential for existential disaster should provide a
sobering point of reflection about what means we employ to reach those
'ends'.  Progress must surely be pursued without blindly rushing
forward.  What would be the point of diving headlong into the
Singularity only to realize we missed an important lesson in the
maturation process of our species.

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list