[extropy-chat] Still confused:)
Rik van Riel
riel at surriel.com
Mon Sep 4 03:28:27 UTC 2006
Samantha Atkins wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
>>> Why? Because this is the native language of the majority of people
>>> that we want to reach.
>> Could that be religious?
> Define please. I don't see why a shift of language modality is or is
> likely to be religious.
A lot of people seem to think and talk in beliefs, not
>> If I phrase my own transhumanist beliefs in a religious framework,
>> I end up with something like the following (feel free to copy it):
>> "If we are God's children, I believe we should grow up. If there
>> are no gods (yet), I believe we should try to fill that void."
> I have been asking "What happens when the 'children of God' grow up?"
> since I was 10. The question is usually not taken kindly much less
> pondered. Religions largely don't seem to be about any real
> exploration or truth seeking, oddly enough.
They're about beliefs...
>> Yeah, I realize that might not actually help much to convince
>> the masses :)
> Increasingly I believe the masses are irrelevant and the attempt to
> convince them is an utter waste of precious time and resources.
What I wonder is whether extropian goals can be achieved without
the momentum of supporters/believers. Not necessarily the blind
faith believers you see in many other religions, but it might be
useful/necessary/fun to organize extropian resources a little
OTOH, anything organized tends to take on a life of its own, and
eventually run counter to its original goals and philosophy...
What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?
More information about the extropy-chat