At 05:44 AM 6/8/00 , you wrote:
>Extropian principles: I was just rereading them in recent days. I agree with
>them all, I think, except the first:
>1. Perpetual Progress - Seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and
>effectiveness, an indefinite lifespan, and the removal of political,
>cultural, biological, and psychological limits to self-actualization and
>self-realization. Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and
>possibilities. Expanding into the universe and advancing without end.
>Of course, I like a lot of the sentiment. Yet, it reeks of modernism;
>perpetual progress? more intelligence and wisdom? Perpetually overcoming
>constraints on our progress, advancing without end? All very linear stuff;
>as simple as A to B:
> A: Where you are now --------------> B: Glorious Posthuman future
Emlyn: You've lost me here. How is "perpetual progress" a linear
progression from point A to point B? The whole idea of this principle is to
communicate the idea of a *process* of continual improvement, *not* the
reaching of some final endpoint of posthumanity, utopia, or whatever.
Did anyone else misunderstand this? If so, I need to rewrite it to avoid
that idea. However, I do think it should be clear as it stands.
Besides this misunderstanding, what exactly is your objection in calling it
"modernist". Modern as opposed to what? Is this a bad thing? If by
"modernist" you simply meant a linear move from the present to a final
point of perfection, then I've already shown that to be a misconception.
Did you mean something else?
Max More, Ph.D.
President, Extropy Institute. www.extropy.org
CEO, MoreLogic Solutions. www.maxmore.com
email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:12:57 MDT