[ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 93, Issue 30
stefano.vaj at gmail.com
Thu Jun 23 14:19:44 UTC 2011
On 23 June 2011 01:57, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> Many of us can and have argued (I think not badly) that many key
> libertarian ideas are essential to continued well-being and to the freedom
> to push the envelope to bring our dreams into reality. To the extent we are
> right then eschewing being a libertarian / anarchist is not helpful. The
> term "well-being" is meaningless without teasing out what that takes. Is
> "life expansion" the same as "life extension" or everything that is needed
> for a fuller life which very much pulls in the nature of the kind of beings
> we are and ethics and politics. I could be wrong but I rather doubt any
> old ethics and politics will do or that all are equally likely to get us
> where we want to be.
The space of things which can be provisionally deemed as *compatible* with
transhumanism is however much broader than that of things which
transhumanism arguably requires.
I am inclined to grant the benefit of doubt to the first category, and to be
on the contrary very prudent with the second, and with claims that
"consistent transhumanism compels adoption of doctrine X".
So, while nothing prevents one from being a transhumanist looking with
simpathy to X, we probably do not render too good a service to the movement
by tethering it to other existing currents.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat