[ExI] Transhumanism defined, 1937.

[Michael LaTorra]

*PREFACE:* *I came across the (rather lengthy) definition of Transhumanism
below, which I thought I'd share with everyone, since the topic of naming
our common overlapping set of beliefs, aims and goals has been raised again
by the discussion launched on Russell Blackford's blog*  that drew comments
there from Greg Egan, James Hughes and probably several others by now.
Additional discussion has appeared on these lists (ExI and WTA-Talk). I
maintain that definitions are somewhat arbitrary, but I believe the name
Transhumanism is worth keeping.*

*-- Mike LaTorra*
**
** Russell's blog:  **
http://metamagician3000.blogspot.com/2008/04/transhumanism-still-at-crossroads.html
*<http://metamagician3000.blogspot.com/2008/04/transhumanism-still-at-crossroads.html>


-= ((( . . . ))) =-
......................................................................................................................................................................................


"I am well aware that several philosophies affirm or imply that all
consciousness is of necessity time conditioned. But since this is
undemonstrable, it has only the value of arbitrary assertion, which is
countered by simple denial. This affirmation or implication is incompatible
with the basis realized or assumed here—whichever way it may be taken. At
this point I simply deny the validity of the affirmation and assert that
there is a Root Consciousness that is not time conditioned. It may be valid
enough to assert that human consciousness qua human is always time
conditioned, but that would amount merely to a partial definition of what is
meant by human consciousness. In that case, the consciousness that is not
time conditioned would be something that is transhuman or nonhuman. I am
entirely willing to accept this view, but would add that it is in the power
of man to transcend the limits of human consciousness and thus come to a
more or less complete understanding of the factors that limit the range of
human consciousness qua human. The term 'human' would thus define a certain
range in the scale of consciousness—something like an octave in the scale of
electromagnetic waves. In that case, the present system implies that it is,
in principle, possible for a conscious being to shift his field of
consciousness up and down the scale. When such an entity is focused within
the human octave it might be agreed to call him human, but something other
than human when focused in other octaves. Logically, this is simply a matter
of definition of terms, and I am more than willing to regard the human as
merely a stage in consciousness, provided it is not asserted dogmatically
that it is impossible for consciousness and self-identity to flow from stage
to stage. On the basis of such a definition this philosophy would not be a
contribution to Humanism but to Transhumanism."





-- Franklin Merrell-Wolff, *The Philosophy of Consciousness Without an
Object.* (1937). Chapter 5, pp. 121-122. Quoted from the 1973 edition,
Julian Press, New York. The work is currently available within the
compilation titled *Franklin Merrell-Wolff's Experience and
Philosophy.*State University of New York Press (1994).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080425/70082969/attachment.html>