[ExI] Fwd: [wta-talk] Enhancement's Good, But Is It Necessary?

[Bryan Bishop]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Christopher Healey <chealey at gridsync.net>
Date: Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: [wta-talk] Enhancement's Good, But Is It Necessary?
To: Humanity+ Discussion List <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>

> how can you justify prioritizing transhumanism?

It's much easier to scale a sheer face with the proper gear.  We stand
at the base camp of many problems that tower over us menacingly, and
we might even be equipped to tackle a few of them.  But which few?
Given limited resources, which problems are the most moral to ignore?

We all employ tools to effect changes within our sphere of influence;
better gear can deliver more leverage to assail more challenges.
Perhaps, if one does it right, to assail entire classes of challenge
in one fell swoop.

Transhumanism simply recognizes that as we zoom inward from our sphere
of influence's farthest reaches, it doesn't stop at our skin, but
continues inward to our deepest structure.   To be responsible to our
intentions of a better world, we are compelled to look not only at
external, but also internal changes; if we can safely deliver these
internal *choices*, how could we morally squander such leverage?  It's
all about getting there (a better world), from here.  Safely and
responsibly, of course.  Transhumanism is a rooted sub-goal of seeking
a better future.