Spudboy100@aol.com writes:
> Cogently said, Robert. Yet, where are the science/philosophy papers to light
> this candle? Example: how common is it for a scientists or other thinkers
> like a Moravec or a Tipler to publish something, for want of a better word,
> "dramatic" or dynamic?
Do you want papers loudly proclaiming transhumanism or *doing*
transhumanism? Over the last years a lot of the science journals have
becuome much more transhumanism-friendly, Nature runs a series of
science fiction "essays" of which many are transhumanist or deal with
transhumanist issues, there was a debate essay in Science about the
effects of radical life extension - and of course reading Nature,
Science or PNAS these days almost feels like a Greg Egan story.
The important things are done by the creeping acceptance of
transhumanist visions and memes in the mainstream. The loud Moravecs,
Tiplers and Kurtzweils are good for attracting attention to themselves
and bring the questions into the open, but unless there is a good base
of transhumanesque ideas widely spread nothing will come of it.
As for myself, my research is moving in the direction of modelling
cognitive enhancements.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:30 MDT