Re: The Education Function

Michael Lorrey (
Tue, 08 Dec 1998 13:04:37 -0500

Samael wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Lorrey <>
> To: <>
> Date: 08 December 1998 15:12
> Subject: Re: The Education Function
> >Andrew Ducker wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Terry Donaghe <>
> >> To: <>
> >> Date: 07 December 1998 18:46
> >> Subject: Re: The Education Function
> >>
> >> >Cool! A collectivist extropian!
> >> >
> >> >Isn't that an oxymoron? Shouldn't it be?
> >>
> >> A neophobic extropian would be an oxymoron.
> >>
> >> Other than that, almost anyone can believe in the reduction of entropy
> and a
> >> technology based positive future.
> >
> >Hardly. A socialist extropian wants to limit extropy from entering the
> economic
> >realm. Extropic society, extropic technology, but not an extropic economy.
> >Sounds like nothing but a mere democrat to me.
> I feel vaguely insulted. I think democracy is a ridiculous idea (I've been
> known to refer to it as 'the politics of gang rape').

Sorry, I should have typed 'Democrat' as in a member or adherent to that particular American political party.

> I don't believe large scale direct control of the economy is possible or
> necessary (it's far too much of a chaotic system for that kind of thing).
> I believe in maximising the potential of _individuals_, but on a large scale
> and that the easiest and most efficient way of doing so is by generalising -
> but as little as possible. I beleive there are certain basic functions that
> should be available to all people, but above those there should be as few
> limitations as possible.

Who decides how available they are? How do they enforce what they decide? Who controls the resources for those basic functions?

Extropy puts the primary source of control in the individual, which is why it is associated with American style libertarianism. Socialist Extropianism is more properly described as European style Transhumanism, or as Socialist Transhumanism. Extropy recognises no limits for the individual outside of not harming other individuals. Socialism limits the individual first, putting control in the hands of the controlling authority which claims to represent the majority.

If a society cannot trust the individual, how can it trust a group of individuals? I can always trust myself to look out for me, and you can trust yourself to look out for you. I cannot always trust you to look out for me, especially when our interests are in conflict. Applying this principle to one thing and not another is hypcritical. Applying it to technology, or to social/cultural issues, but not to economic relationships reflects a lack of integrity which I find disturbing, and untrustworthy.

Mike Lorrey