Re: Posthuman Politics

From: Mike Lorrey (
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 08:13:29 MDT

> From: Steve Nichols
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 11:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Posthuman Politics
> >
> > Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 23:58:08 -0400
> > From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <>
> > Subject: Re: Posthuman Politics
> >
> > First of all, let's get one thing completely straight. The term
> > "transhuman" is sometimes used as if it meant "transhumanist", which I
> > object to, but is nonetheless an existing usage. The term "posthuman" is
> > absolutely reserved for genuine posthuman entities. You can be a
> > posthumanist, but not a posthuman.
> Who are you to tell ME what I can or cannot be! I am not a "human" but
> am "after" (post-) that species, although I acknowledge my human ancestry

The consensus of transhumanists is that not only are transhumans only
just on the verge of developing, posthumans do not exist and will not
exist for a while yet. Furthermore, if you still have a human DNA
pattern, you are still quite human.

Continuing to use such a term for yourself in violation of consensus
opinion on the matter only impunges your credibility toward the
'fruitcake' end of the scale.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:13 MDT