[ExI] Wrestling with Embodiment

Natasha Vita-More natasha at natasha.cc
Mon Jan 23 03:47:47 UTC 2012


Let's please be civil on this list Alan. I am speaking theoretically.
Nevertheless, the human biological body is not what transhumanist seek, no
matter what flavor. If this is not your view of transhumanism, then maybe
you might revisit the definition:  "human in transition" to becoming
posthuman.

I am 100% for individuality, multiplicity, plurality, diversity within
transhumanism; however, the human biological body with its limited lifespan
simply is not the transhumanist vision. And, furthermore, it is not what is
wrong with transhumanism. Human enhancement is mainstream, as is the cyborg.
This is not my opinion, it simply is reality.

Natasha

Natasha Vita-More
PhD Researcher, Univ. of Plymouth, UK
Chairman, Humanity+ 
Co-Editor, The Transhumanist Reader


-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Grimes [mailto:agrimes at speakeasy.net] 
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 7:35 PM
To: ExI chat list
Cc: Natasha Vita-More
Subject: Re: [ExI] Wrestling with Embodiment

Natasha Vita-More wrote:
> Of course a human body, not matter how augmented, enhanced, morphed, etc.,
> is most definitely not the final aim.

SPEAK
FOR
YOUR
SELF.
=|

When you speak in an infinitive "is not the final aim" instead of the 
personal "isn't what I want to end up as" you make me angry.

Furthermore, I think that this is a huge obstacle for the promotion of 
transhumanism and collaboration between people who simply have different 
ideas about what they want to be in the future.

 > But if we are multiple selves existing in multiple enviorns, why oust 
this option? Choice.

=)

-- 
E T F
N H E
D E D

Powers are not rights.




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list