<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16850" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN lang=EN>
<P>Yes, this may all be true, but it does not change the circumstances if it is
only written about on Transhumanist mailing lists. The issue I am referring to
is outside our internal environment.</P>
<P>Best,</P>
<P>Natasha </P></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal align=left><SPAN
style="mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-no-proof: yes"><IMG
height=48 alt=Nlogo1.tif src="cid:296072316@17062009-04AF" width=23
v:shapes="Picture_x0020_0"></SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 18pt; COLOR: #404040; FONT-FAMILY: 'Freestyle Script'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 191"><A
href="http://www.natasha.cc/"><SPAN
style="COLOR: #404040; mso-themecolor: text1; mso-themetint: 191"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>Natasha Vita-More</FONT></SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns
= "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Stefano
Vaj<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:01 AM<BR><B>To:</B> ExI chat
list<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [ExI] Posthumanism vs.
Transhumanism<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:48 AM, <SPAN
dir=ltr><natasha@natasha.cc></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Hayles
set it up and academia too a big bite into her literary theory of the
posthuman. Fukuyama brought posthuman into ethics and policy of human futures
without knowing what it means, or transhumanism for that matter. Ever
since, there has been a growing interest among academics (and others) to turn
the posthuman into a theory, and now a philosophy.<BR><BR>There are many
similarities in posthumanism's advocates' ideas and suggested findings.
Many of these similarities link directly to transhumanism.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>I think it is difficult to make a comparison. Apples
to oranges.<BR><BR>Transhumanism, thank to the vision of some individuals, a few
pivotal works, and some organised efforts, developed into a proper "culture",
not to mention an active movement, with relatively well-defined boundaries, a
shared jargon and mentality, and a "social", albeit small, following. Philosophy
is only one of the field where it expresses itself, and by far not the main
one.<BR><BR>I would say that posthumanism is instead a broad definition
encompassing the various stances of intellectuals and philosophers, mostly
European or deeply influenced by the European academic scene, who think that
old "humanist" views should be revised, and possibly overcome.
<BR><BR>This is already an opportunity for misunderstanding, since AFAIK
"humanism" is a word that in the US common usage has strong secular undertones,
which are almost entirely absent, e.g., in Italy (where "christian humanism" is
a very widespread phrase), so that in the US to speak of "posthumanism" may
suggest a going back to thinly disguised religious views. Add to that the
perspectivist and relativist penchant adopted by many "posthumanists" and this
is bound to generate a wariness by many transhumanists who may implicitely or
explicitely adhere to more "neopositivistic" attitudes, especially at an
epistemological or political level. Especially given the undeniable temptations
in close quarters to slip in oracular nonsense, cosmic pessimism, and
anti-science postures (see, e.g., <A
href="http://www.amazon.com/Fashionable-Nonsense-Postmodern-Intellectuals-Science/dp/0312204078/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245243331&sr=1-1">Fashionable
Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science</A> <SPAN class=ptBrand>by
Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont</SPAN><SPAN class=binding>)</SPAN><BR><BR>Having
said that, my personal opinion that posthumanism and transhumanism besides the
differences of nature and language are already strictly intertwined by their
ultimate roots and by the basic idea that a fixed, essentialist, specieist view
of the man, which we inherit from judeochristianism, is not adequate any more to
epochal changes currently in place, namely those which pertains to the impact of
technology on our own worldview, life and destiny. And that a posthuman changed
should be embraced. This is very explicit also in American posthumanism, and I
routinely recommend to everybody in this respect <A
href="http://www.amazon.com/Viroid-Life-Perspectives-Nietzsche-Transhuman/dp/0415154359/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245240711&sr=8-1">Viroid
Life: Perspectives on Nietzsche and the Transhuman Condition</A> <SPAN
class=ptBrand>by Ansell Pearson as well as </SPAN><A
href="http://www.amazon.com/Posthumanism-Readers-Cultural-Criticism-Badmington/dp/0333765389/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245240769&sr=8-1">Posthumanism
(Readers in Cultural Criticism)</A> <SPAN class=ptBrand>by Neil
Badmington.</SPAN><BR><BR>Moreover, even though some routine criticism of a few
"philosophically naive" traits of popular transhumanism exists in most of the
authors concerned, bridges already exist, and become ever more
numerous.<BR><BR>To make a few examples, I think that it is difficult not to
consider explicitely transhumanist the positions taken by Peter Sloterdijk on
evolution, biotech and reprogenetics, positions which did not go unremarked by
the neoluddite camp and unleashed a harsh response. See the very controversial
"Rules for the Human Park" (in German included in <A
href="http://www.amazon.de/Nicht-gerettet-Versuche-nach-Heidegger/dp/3518412795/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245240293&sr=1-1"><SPAN
class=srTitle>Nicht gerettet: Versuche nach Heidegger</SPAN></A>, in Italian in
<A class=ahhb
href="http://www.ibs.it/code/9788845212093/sloterdijk-peter/non-siamo-ancora-stati.html">Non
siamo ancora stati salvati. Saggi dopo Heidegger</A>, and published alone in
Spanish, <A
href="http://www.amazon.com/Normas-parque-humano-Biblioteca-Ensayo/dp/8478445358/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245240134&sr=1-15">Normas
para el parque humano</A>, and in French, <A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/R%C3%A8gles-pour-parc-humain-lhumanisme/dp/2842054636/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245240559&sr=8-1">Règles
pour le parc humain : Une lettre en réponse à la Lettre sur l'humanisme de
Heidegger</A>; in English? no chance... :-(<BR><BR>In France, to mention very
diverse writers, the proto-transhumanist penchant of Lyotard (see <A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/Moralit%C3%A9s-postmodernes-Jean-Fran%C3%A7ois-Lyotard/dp/2718606827/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245241130&sr=1-11">Moralités
postmodernes</A>, <A
href="http://www.amazon.com/Postmodern-Fables-Jean-Francois-Lyotard/dp/0816625557/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245241268&sr=8-8">Postmodern
Fables</A>) has repeatedly remarked in our camp, e.g., by Riccardo Campa in <A
href="http://www.uomo-libero.com/articolo.php?id=407">Dal postmoderno al
postumano. Il caso Lyotard</A>, and also come to mind Yves Christen (<A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/ann%C3%A9es-Faust-science-face-vieillissement/dp/2710704706/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245241025&sr=1-8">Les
années Faust, ou, La science face au vieillissement</A>, <A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/Lhomme-bioculturel-Yves-Christen/dp/2268004384/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245241025&sr=1-4">L'homme
bioculturel</A>, <A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/Lanimal-est-il-personne-Yves-Christen/dp/2081224879/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245241025&sr=1-1">L'animal
est-il une personne ?</A>) as well as Guillaume Faye (see especially the seminal
<A href="http://www.uomo-libero.com/images/file/heidegger_faye.html">Pour en
finir avec le nihilisme. Heidegger et la question de la technique</A>
[full-text], in Italian <A
href="http://www.uomo-libero.com/articolo.php?id=369">Per farla finita con il
nichilismo. Heidegger e la questione della tecnica</A>). The latter, who also
discussed transhumanist subjects both of a "wet" and a "hard" nature in
L'archéofuturisme (in Italian <A
href="http://www.uomo-libero.com/articolo.php?id=313">Archeofuturismo</A> [full
text]), accepted to write the appendix to my own book <I><A
href="http://www.biopolitica.it">Biopolitica. Il nuovo paradigma</A> </I>(full
text), that is <A href="http://www.biopolitica.it/biop-appendice.html">La
soluzione di di Prometeo</A> (<A
href="http://www.uomo-libero.com/articolo.php?id=312#SOLUTION">La solution de
Promethée</A>), and is now about to publish a long essay on Futurismo e
modernità in the third issue/volume of <A
href="http://www.divenire.org">Divenire. Rassegna di studi interdisciplinari
sulla tecnica e il postumano</A>, the peer-reviewed "unmagazine" on paper of the
<A href="http://www.transumanisti.it">Associazione Italiana Transumanisti</A>.
Lastily a study in French of ideas and fashions that can be found at the
crossroad of posthumanism and transhumanism is the subject matter <A
href="http://www.amazon.fr/utopies-posthumaines-Contre-culture-cyberculture-culture/dp/2916097015/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245243496&sr=1-1">Les
utopies posthumaines : Contre-culture, cyberculture, culture du chaos</A> <SPAN
class=ptBrand>de Rémi Sussan, who I believe might be reading this
list.</SPAN><SPAN class=binding></SPAN><BR><BR>Coming to Italy, a very
influential representative of posthumanist thinking, besides of course... yours
truly ;-), is Roberto Marchesini who wrote the fundamental <A class=ahhb
href="http://www.ibs.it/code/9788833913797/marchesini-roberto/post-human-verso-nuovi-modelli.html">Post-Human.
Verso nuovi modelli di esistenza</A>, where he distanced himself a little from
American transhumanism, only to become at a later stage a honorary member of the
AIT itself, the author of an article (Oltre il mito della purezza) published
again by Divenire, in <A
href="http://www.sestanteedizioni.com/index.php?pagename=product_info&products_id=198">its
second issue/volume</A>, and probably to be one of the speaker at Transvision
2010. <BR><BR>Of course, the language, approach and primary concerns of all
those thinkers and writers is quite different from that of, say, Ray Kurzweil or
Gregory Stock or our Damien Broderick.<BR><BR>But I am absolutely persuaded that
a significant chunk of posthumanist ideas have transhumanism as their only
consistent conclusion.<BR><BR>-- <BR>Stefano Vaj<BR></BODY></HTML>