[ExI] Left Behind

Will Steinberg asyluman at gmail.com
Fri May 22 19:07:03 UTC 2009

I am terrible at email.

"...puts so much emphasis" on this grand shift in consciousness.  We needn't
take a stance for each step on the rung--transatomism, transprokaryotism,
and other silly slippery slopisms.  A purely extropian viewpoint of the
force of complexity and progress puts the situation in a better light.

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Will Steinberg <asyluman at gmail.com> wrote:

> Seems like a huge conflict in this sorta transhumanist talk concerns
> pragmatism and progress versus romanticism.  The problem is that everyone
> who is smart enough to think about this stuff also tends to be cultured
> enough to love things like forests and books and history.  We are so
> unwilling to let go of these humanist instincts--because the movement
> focuses on transcending humanity and thus produces a whole
> conflicty-dialectical-esque deal.
> When viewed in a wider, panprogressivist style, we can think about letting
> go of humanity as a step along a gradient, much like leaving for college or
> a similar shift.  The notion of transhumanism is as subjective as they get
> simply because it puts so much emphasis
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Aware <aware at awareresearch.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net>
>> wrote:
>> >> Giulio, nearly everyone in these futurist forums (and nearly everyone
>> >> else too) shares this desire for more in the way of the sensual
>> >> pleasures you list.  But I think it's worth pointing out, that more
>> >> coherently, there is no distinct or essential "you", separate from the
>> >> meat, and the very sensual desires you express are *defined* by the
>> >> nature of the "meat" within the current cultural context.
>> >
>> > Not so sure. Even today, there are, e.g., sex-related pleasure
>> > (seduction, e.g., or some forms of cybersex) where the "meat" is not
>> > really involved.
>> Was referring to drives, encoded via evolutionary processes in the
>> "meat" organism (including its brain and nervous system), regardless
>> of the interface or interaction.
>> I have no problem, conceptually, morally or otherwise, with
>> "upgrading" the embodiment (not just the substrate) , but I would
>> argue that this will also "upgrade" the "self" and all that entails.
>> - Jef
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20090522/6b132d01/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list