>From: scerir <email@example.com>
>To: extropians <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: The foundation of transhumanism
>Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 00:11:03 +0100
>Waldemar Ingdahl wrote:
><The central questions for the future tell us who we are, as individuals
>as society. Do we seek stasis - a regulated, constructed world? Or do we
>welcome dynamism, a world of constant creation, constant discoveries, and
>That is a good and fundamental question.
>If I remember well, In Aristote the dynamism [dunamis] is the potentiality
>of the substance [ousia]. So dynamism needs a shape [eidos] or a form
>[morphé] to gain the actuality [energeia].
Exactly, I showed dynamism as the important foundation which brings a lot of
But as you could see from some of the answers these important political
questions were incomprehensible to some on the list, simply because the
present transhumanist culture is about evading these questions (more about
>Potentialities (from the Schroedinger wave function to the genome and,
>perhaps, to the financial futures) are well estabilished in our world.
>This is not my field (and this is not my language!) anyway I think that
>dynamism is essential, for sure, but it is not enough.
>We also need some *eidos*: power of persuasion, engineering for happiness,
>political attitude, modern values, strong philosophy. And, of course, the
>extropy and the singularity.
These are later steps, extropianism, as I pointed out lacks essential
analysises in vital matters.
But I am writing on a new text on that, soon to come
>Otherwise the dynamism (alone) would be like the *movimento futurista*
>(Marinetti, ect.). That is to say: just art.
But remember that in the basic political analysis of the futurists a bad
seed was already present...
It wasn´t that strange that they turned to fascism to realise their goals.
What did they belive in?
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:46 MDT