[ExI] Question from a neophyte

[Giulio Prisco]

I do, indeed, favor unPCness. Our world is becoming too much of a PC
nanny-state benevolent dictatorship, and this disturbing trend must be
countered with some healthy unPCness.

As far as bridges are concerned: I am in favor of building bridges,
but they must be built from both sides. Unilaterally building a bridge
is always seen as a weakness from the other side, which replies with
more and more, less and less reasonable demands. Look at those
pathetic ex-transhumanists who have tried to build bridges, and then
have been forced into renouncing transhumanism.

No, I say we continue to affirm the disruptive, promethean, radical
and revolutionary vision of transhumanism, of which this list has been
the main, the best, and for many years the only example. I want
transhumanism to become a mass movement -- but it must remain
transhumanism. We want to win minds and hearts by kicking ass, not by
kissing it.

G.

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:54 PM,  <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
> What is quite confusing to me is to have to defend my views concerning the
> future human after I years in this area and have written, lectured and
> designed a concept for a future human which is not sequestered to a meat
> body (but does not denounce *a* body) and in fact, suggests multiple shapes
> and substrates with which to house, if you will, identity for the extension
> of personal identity over time and space.
>
> Be it that I do not favor Moravec specific design; it does not mean that I
> am blind to the well-known transhumanist far future noosphere-istic type
> environment that we have long discussed.
>
> Morphological Freedom?
>  hrart.wordpress.com/.../natasha-vita-more-us-?morphological-freedom?-4-photographs-2008-wwwnatashacc/
> , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphological_freedom ,
> www.natasha.cc/designwar.pdf
>
> Anyway, the issue seems to be socio-political. From what I understand, and I
> could be wrong, Giulio actively favors being politically incorrect.   As an
> artist, I have been pretty much politically incorrect most my life! :-) and
> would rather build bridges these days by just trying to be as correct as
> possible (given my human intellect which is not much to write about) and by
> being kind-hearted.
>
> Best,
> Natasha
>
>
> Quoting Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com>:
>
>> I certainly agree that Moravec is not the only entry point. But for
>> me, he is one of the main entry points. Transhumanism is not _only_,
>> but _also_ about robots and bush people. As a philosophical position,
>> we are for self ownership and morphological freedom, the freedom to
>> modify one's body at will. I interpret morphological freedom in its
>> widest sense, inclusive of escaping biology, or living as pure
>> software.
>>
>> Of course these options will become available much later than the
>> options, being developed, for improving our biological bodies by
>> biotechnology. But for me the ultimate objective is, to use now
>> politically incorrect words, to escape the meat.