From: "Russell Blackford" <RussellBlackford@bigpond.com>
> But I *am* getting impatient with the use of the word "liberal" (in the
> sense of social democrat/ic) as one of abuse. The way this is done, day in
> day out, suggests that some people here believe that liberal ideas in that
> sense are somehow contrary to extropianism or to transhumanism or to the
> list's traditions and are illegitimate on this list.
Ideas that are good enough to have persuaded _you_ of their worth ought to be
good enough to stand on their own ('cause your a savvy guy), without being
bolstered by association with social democrat/ic politics. What makes an idea
a "liberal" idea, as opposed to being an idea that promotes health,
prosperity, beauty, freedom, practicality, excellence, and competence? AFAIC,
really good ideas transcend the left/right, liberal/conservative dichotomies,
so calling an idea "liberal" is no worse than calling one "conservative."
Either label is inappropriate for transhumans because they've gotten beyond
that stage.
For example, teaching kids science is a good idea (as long as it's not
"political" science, which is a self-contradictory term), and it gets even
better when it's taught without polluting it with any political labels
whatsoever, including liberal, conservative, socialist, libertarian,
anarchist, or zenarchist.
--J. R.
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego
Everything that can happen has already happened, not just once,
but an infinite number of times, and will continue to do so forever.
(Everything that can happen = more than anyone can imagine.)
We won't move into a better future until we debunk religiosity, the most
regressive force now operating in society.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:18 MDT