[ExI] sports blammisphy

Stefano Vaj stefano.vaj at gmail.com
Mon Feb 7 16:54:44 UTC 2011

On 6 February 2011 06:55, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> spike, I think this points out a recurring trans-humanist, cyborg and
> even fyborg theme. What is cheating in the brave new world we are
> making? If the Olympics are only open to original unenhanced human
> beings, then it just becomes a race to figure out who is enhanced, and
> who is not. It's already happening at the top level of sports, of
> course. But when we start talking about enhancements that are
> "built-in" to people, especially in the context of intellectual
> pursuits, is that really cheating any more?

No. In fact, it could be argued that the purpose of the prohibition of
"cheating" is in most case to guarantee that possible successful
cheaters need be so ingenuous as to deserve to win... :-)

More practically, as long as games and sports and exams aim at
reproducing scenarios which should be relevant to real-life
situations, when the everyday availability of the "tricks" and
"enhancements" become ubiquitous, I think it is reasonable to allow
them on a general basis. Is it really important anymore to test the
skill of human beings in performing very large multiplications, eg?

Of course, nothing prevents people from creating as well purely
artificial contests where some "handicap" or other is imposed on
contestants. Such as fighting a boxe match with one hand behind your
back, or run a marathon without drinking, or resolve math problems
without calculators, or not taking supplementation aimed at increasing
one's performance, or fishing with bamboo canes. As long as there is
somebody interested, for instance as it may reproduce what one was
faced with in bygone days, nothing wrong with that...

Stefano Vaj

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list