From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Mon Jan 14 2002 - 15:34:54 MST
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 01:31:17PM -0800, Reason wrote:
>
> ---> Mike Lorrey
>
> > Yes, how is it, again, that you can claim that humanism is not an
> > existing failed political model?
>
> I wasn't.
>
> Humanism in the sense of individual creed for dealing with people that leads
> to general sets of prescriptions when filtered through whatever political
> model you're using. But not a political model itself. I wasn't performing a
> left side = right side sort of of paragraph there.
Humanism has also suffered quite a bit of definition drift too, see
http://www.jcn.com/humanism.html - in this set of definitions, the
humanism Reason and I are mentioning is Cultural Humanism (although I
Renaissance and Enlightenment Humanism might be suitable terms too). A
lot of the other humanisms have quite divergent agendas.
I think the fate of the term humanism is a bit of a warning to us
transhumanists.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:34 MST