At 05:41 PM 10/26/98 -0800, Kathryn wrote:
>I have not seen any further comments on the proposed two-part definition, so
>unless I see something in the next day or so I'm going to run with it on
>drafting something for the FAQ. People can, of course, comment later but it
>would be easier to deal with suggestions early.
Is this what you are referring to?
At 01:50 PM 10/20/98 -0700, Max wrote:
>Taking into account everyone's thoughts, and keeping in mind the idea of
>having more than one sense of the term "transhumanism", I've come up with
>two definitions that I prefer to the one I was using. In doing so, I've
>attempted to stick close to how the dictionary defines a term like
>1. Any system or way of thought or action concerned with the rational use
>of science, technology, creativity, and other means to overcome human
>limitations by extending maximum lifespan, augmenting intelligence, and
>enhancing humans physically and psychologically.
>2. The intellectual and cultural movement that shares with humanism a
>commitment to human progress especially through applied reason rather than
>faith; it differs from humanism in affirming the possibility and
>desirability of fundamentally altering the human condition for the better,
>such as by using technology to eliminate aging and greatly enhance human
>intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.
>If a non-normative definition is needed, as distinct from one referring to
>transhumanism as a system of values or a cultural movement:
>TRANSHUMANISM: The view that it is both possible for us in the next couple
>of centuries to use science, technology, and any rational means to overcome
>human limitations by extending our maximum lifespan, augmenting our
>intelligence, and redesigning ourselves physically and psychologically.