At 03:30 PM 1/14/99 -0800, Robin wrote:
>The related thing that most strikes me is the unfortunate
>lack of paper-length contributions on the topics which
>frequently appear on this list.
Good points, Robin. And, if you don't mind, I'll take that as a cue for this...
I recently completed a draft of a paper that I'm going to send to philosophy
journals. I want to get it off ASAP, but I'd appreciate feedback before doing
so. The topic is definitely of extropian interest (see abstract below). I
prefer offer to read from those list members who are familiar with the style of
philosophy journal articles (or academic articles in any subject area).
Please let me know if you would like to see a copy of my draft.
Here's the abstract:
Max More, Ph.D.
The species concept is central to modern evolutionary biology. Most biologists and philosophers of biology have decisively settled on the particular concept of a species as a protected gene pool. While borderline cases do arise in applying the concept, mostly it has worked well for the biological world up until now. This paper examines how well the biological species concept can handle some possible future developments among Homo sapiens. These changes, being driven by the interface of biology and technology, raise boundary problems unprecedented in evolutionary history. I argue that the current species concept can handle some of these possibilities, but runs into serious difficulties in classifying the results of imaginable technological modifications of the human species. The paper suggests a range of responses to extend or supplement the protected gene pool species concept.
Philosophical issues of technology
President, Extropy Institute: