[ExI] Social implications of widespread extropian/positivist ideals

JOSHUA JOB nanite1018 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 5 21:21:33 UTC 2010


On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Will Steinberg wrote:
> Problem 1 (The Thinkularity): How do we get from today, where religion is widespread and science is often seen as "the badguy" to a world where people embrace mindnets and space travel and good energy solutions?

On this question, I think the only real answer is to try to convince people they're wrong, keep trying to publicize extropian and transhumanist ideas, etc. As technology advances, I think that bioluddite vs. transhumanism will come to play as important in a role in politics as views on economics do today. The way I see it is either we, i.e. transhumanists, win the battle for ideas, or humanity dies. The exact strategy, for now, is amorphous, but as these issues come more and more into the forefront of people's minds, it will get more and more obvious. I'm thinking the forming of think tanks, political parties/organizations, lobbying groups, etc. will play a major role. As well as books, tv, and other media.

> Problem 2 (Post-Thinkularity):  Are there unforeseen complications with the entire world doing away with free will and all that stuff associated with positivism?  Might we see an increase in crimes because people see that they are no longer bound by choice (heh, bound by choice)?  And will the relatively "cold" mindset associated with science in comparison to religion cause more people to lose their proverbial marbles?

I don't get why people say free will is a fiction, in any meaningful sense of the word. We deal with people as macroscopic entities, with thoughts, beliefs, ideas, etc., and it is literally impossible for us to deal with them, or ourselves, in any other manner. So while physics might be deterministic, viewing people as collections of particles, or synapses (the necessary region where determinism exists), isn't meaningful at all. The world without free will is a world of particles and fields, not of macroscopic entities and things with beliefs, values, ideas, concepts, symbols, knowledge, etc. That "higher" world, the world in which we must operate and exist (and I think always will), is one in which determinism does not exist (do to the abstraction). And in that world, you have free will, are responsible for your actions, and all the rest.

That being said, I don't see anything that might go wrong if everyone dumped their religious views, or beliefs in a metaphysical soul, etc. in favor of a naturalist view of themselves, of ideas, concepts, etc. It strikes me as a definite plus.

Btw, what exact definition of positivism are you using? There are a number of different ways of looking at the term (logical positivism, Comte's positivism, scientific positivism aka 'scientism', etc.).

Joshua Job
nanite1018 at gmail.com






More information about the extropy-chat mailing list