[ExI] Blackford and Egan on >H
lcorbin at rawbw.com
Thu Apr 24 15:00:18 UTC 2008
> From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > "I always thought the "Extropy" label is very strong because it does
> > not have an "old" meaning and by itself does not trigger any image, be
> > it positive or negative. But over the year the E word has became more
> > and more identified with a specific political flavor of the T word
> > (perhaps this is not what Max More and the first Extropians would have
> > wished).
> > Perhaps the T word will lose its negative connotations over time, or
> > perhaps we should think of a new label."
> I think you may have hit the nail on its head.
I agree. Giulio has struck exactly the right chord.
> WE MUST be careful in what we decide and how we package it.
> This is not for any one group, but for as many of us as possible to
> consider what the heck to do.
For the reason you state next, I am perfectly agreeable to
whatever you and the others decide. I never used the
word "transhumanist", and usually shy away from it how
(despite the convenient abbreviation ">H"). In principle,
there *should* be nothing wrong with it. "Trans" need
not implying discarding all that came before.
> Mind you, I am not in Spain and just completed a talk on "Deconstructing
> Transhumanism" and got considerable feedback. Most people do not like
> transhumanism. At all. We have a very big problem to work out and it
> cannot be done, again, by any self-proclaimed organization as being a
> "turn-key" or "overseeing" of H+, but by a clearly a strategy that needs a
> meeting/conference about.
Very telling, IMO.
> I propose that we create a conference in real time or virtual to deal
> with this. Everyone ought to come and participate. We need our
> thought leaders there and all participants.
> This is my proposal.
Best of luck. I'll happily go along with whatever is decided. I'm
sure I speak for many.
More information about the extropy-chat