[ExI] If anyone wants to Respond to the IEET piece re "Promblems of Transhumanism"
thespike at satx.rr.com
Mon Feb 8 17:21:11 UTC 2010
On 2/8/2010 11:00 AM, Natasha Vita-More wrote:
> "Libertarian transhumanists like Thiel and More..."
> Please read: RU's interview with Max:
That would be the following 2004 discussion:
<I am not a libertarian, unless you take a generously broad view of the
term. I’m hardly an exception these days. Even going back a few years, a
survey of Extropy Institute members showed that a substantial proportion
did not describe their political views with the l-word. When it comes to
politics and economics, a high degree of pragmatism (in the skeptical
and empiricist sense) is healthy, and ideology is problematic.>
As far as the actual quote in James Hughe's essay goes, does it
misrepresent Max's thinking on the topic at issue? This next quote would
suggest that Hughe's implication of antidemocratic or top-down bias (if
that's what he means) is wrong:
<OPEN SOCIETY: Supporting social orders that foster freedom of speech,
freedom of action, and experimentation. Opposing authoritarian social
control and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power.
Preferring bargaining over battling, and exchange over compulsion.
Openness to improvement rather than a static utopia. [...] I find it
both amusing and revolting to observe socialist transhumanists who
characterize themselves as "democratic transhumanists" but use the term
"democracy" as a cover for using governmental power to compel everyone
to fit into their notion of “equality.” Democracy, in the more generally
accepted sense, is an important way of implementing the principle of
Still, Max is quoted as saying
<Democratic arrangements have no intrinsic value; they have value only
to the extent that they enable us to achieve shared goals while protecting
our freedom. Surely, as we strive to transcend the biological limitations of
human nature, we can also improve upon monkey politics? >
More information about the extropy-chat