[ExI] I'm not sure I understand..please enlighten me.

[Mike Dougherty]

On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Eschatoon Magic <eschatoon at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mike: following Einstein, spacetime is more fundamental than 3D space
> at a given time (different observers would not agree on simultaneity).
> Nature can be defined as all that exists in spacetime. I hope not to
> see the Sun going nova in my lifetime, but the event "the sun goes
> nova" exists in spacetime (if our descendants will not be able to do
> something about it). All future entities and events exist in
> spacetime.

Absolutely.  My point was about how the word is used by the majority.
However, I agree that spacetime as 3D+Time is not really enough to
adequately express the idea of multiple potential futures.  But this
is really only a confusion of reference whether one is inside or
outside some region of the system being examined.

> "once humanity is uplifted (by whatever means) there will be no
> purpose for transhumanism as group." Well, once women were allowed to
> vote, there was no purpose for the social movement in favor of voting
> rights for women. But they repurposed and moved on other feminist
> issues, and their struggle continues today. Similarly, transhumanism
> is about leaving all limits behind, and I don't think we will be able
> to do that anytime soon. There will always be new frontiers to explore
> and new limits to overcome.

I am not going to propose another definition for transhumanism, since
there are already so many.  I think a too strongly worded definition
is limiting (such as your suffrage example) and a too weekly worded
definition would lake direction.  (ex: "betterists: seek to make stuff
 better than it is currently")  Anyway, I'm just throwing my thoughts
out here  :)