[ExI] the ethics of the Vile Offspring

Stefano Vaj stefano.vaj at gmail.com
Sun May 22 21:13:38 UTC 2011


On 22 May 2011 18:19, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> He is not basing it on qualia, he is using qualia as an example. Maybe the
> real value resides in something else, but his point still stands: the kind
> of evolution we might engage in in the future might push us away from
> whatever the real value is.
>

It is hardly debatable that at least some evolutionary directions may appear
undesirable to some of us depending on our personal values and beliefs. Take
for instance what is somewhat vaguely defined as involution, betraying a
(aesthetic?) value judgment by the observer on what might actually be a
positively adaptive change. See for instance the potentially dysgenic
effects of technology and medicine.

I think however that Bostrom's argument is subtler and more far-reaching
than that.

He seems to imply that Darwinian mechanisms, not to mention a deliberately
pluralistic and agonistic worldview, are *bound* to push us away from the
"humanist" values that he appears to take as absolute and universal and call
for what is in fact a purely reactionary fight where the real issue would
simply be that of protecting them, be it at the price of freezing or
resisting further changes.

Now, not only does this sound very parochial in transhumanist terms and
impresentable in "critical" circles, but this is not even true from a human
point of view, since one can well embrace a stance, along a time-honoured
tradition, where self-overcoming, amor fati and quest for greatness are
considered as (meta?)values per se, thus involving the joyous acceptance and
even a keenness for future Umwertungen aller Werte, transvalutations of all
values.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110522/275e70eb/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list