[ExI] transhumanism as a philosophy

Giulio Prisco giulio at gmail.com
Wed Jun 23 16:48:59 UTC 2010

I definitely agree with the idea to re-launch Extropy and the Extro
conferences. Of course the decision belongs to Natasha and Max. I have
already told them that, if they wish, I will do my best to support the
initiative, and I am sure I am not the only one.

About conferences: in a few days I will formally announce the next
cycle of Transvision conferences, now independent of WTA/H+.


On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:31 AM, John Grigg
<possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Giulio Prisco wrote:
> Believe me Natasha, I perfectly understand your reaction. But Damien's
> "accusation" is not an accusation, but a statement of fact.
> It is a fact that Max has not been as publicly and visibly active as
> he used to be. It is a fact that the Extropy Institute has been closed
> down for a long time now. It is a fact that the old issues of
> "Extropy: A Journal of Transhumanist Thought" cannot be found online.
> BTW I am sure you have seen RU Sirius' "Mondo 2000 History Project",
> perhaps we should do something similar for Extropy.
> It is a fact that others have taken advantage of the perceived absence
> of Max and the Extropy Institute, and promoted their favorite
> interpretation of transhumanism as _the_ interpretation of
> transhumanism. I and many others are not satisfied with this. There
> are certainly many exciting transhumanist projects around, but without
> the central hub that the Extropy Institute represented.
> Natasha Vita-More wrote:
> I have been a big cheerleader and a pain in the neck to get Max up and
> running again and I am clearly and most definitely not in denial about
> his absence and the absence of all the frick'n hard work. THAT IS A
> Whew!!! lol  I admit to scratching my head when the Extropy Institute
> officially closed it's doors and said it's goals had been achieved.
> But I am very grateful for this list and my continued association with
> Max and Natasha.   I only got to attend one Extropy conference
> (Extropy 5) and dearly wish there were more to come.  I realize the
> WTA (errrr...., I mean H+)   has some excellent gatherings, but give
> me that old-time Extropian religion! hee
> Giulio Prisco continued:
> The question is, how to recover the spirit and practical organization
> of a few years ago.
> I agree.  And with Natasha's ever increasingly high profile on the
> conference speaker circuit, and Max's great skill as a diplomatic
> debater (I've seen him in action), we should start having Extropy
> Conferences again.  An Extropy Institute website reboot (maybe
> something along the lines of what H+ or the Imminst are doing) would
> be a good way to galvanize interest in a resurrected ExI.  But I do
> hope the Extropy mailing list never goes away, because it's one of my
> very favorite internet watering holes.
> John  : )
> P.S.  We will need everyone to buy ExI memberships and/or have an
> extremely wealthy patron to fund things.  And I want a quantum
> computer decoder ring in exchange for joining up!
> On 6/22/10, udend05 at aol.com <udend05 at aol.com> wrote:
>>>What I kept talking about was its status as *formal* philosophy.
>> A fourth tier? Oh dear.
>> But I think I agree again: a 'formal' philosophy sounds like something
>> studied, published and debated in the usual circles. The first suggestion
>> that pops into my mind is akin to Dickie's 'Institutional' definition of art
>> - that an artifact becomes art when it is placed in a context (say, a
>> gallery). Would a 'formal' philosophy be one, then, that is in such a
>> context - i.e., a univeristy? As such, would not Bostrom's research centre
>> at Oxford not count towards that definition? (T
>> Anything other than the above would seem to suggest 'formal' was a synonym
>> of 'systematic'. Or am I missing your point, Damien? What do you mean by
>> formal?
>> Another thing, tangentially: perhaps a reason for the slowness of
>> transhumanism's development into a formal or systematic philosophy is to do
>> with the fact that so much attention has been paid recently to the notion of
>> existential risk and the possibility/probability of the kinds of technology
>> conceived. Let's face it, is there a precedent for a philosophy having to
>> cover so much territory and being linked with such experiential ideas (that
>> are in constant flux - with apologies to Heraclitus)? These are exciting
>> times: we are on the threshold of something entirely new on many levels.
>> I'm off to read the Reader, kids willing. (Talking of whom... they have
>> injections today - another good reason to hope for a time when gene-therapy
>> rids us of the need for these invasive, painful and tortuous methods.)
>> Best,
>> Damian U.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list