Joe E Dees wrote:
> Date sent: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 02:15:49 -0500
> From: Robert Owen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Organization: The Orion Institute
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: mapping religious thought space
> Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Positivist-Humanist-Liberal-Orthodox-Fundamentalist-Atheist-Nihilist
> > What do you think?
> Sceptic and cynic need to be fitted in there somewhere.
One more datum in support of my hypothesis that there exists a
Variety of our Species the members of which are connected by
internal, in additional to external, relations.
If we take "skeptic" in its most constructive sense, and "cynic" in
its most pejorative, non-Diogenian, sense, this is how I'd do what
we both think needs to be done; to avoid word-wrapping, I'll write
it this way:
 Humanism, as the secularization of Christianity, affirms the
basic social values of Christianity but grounds them optimis-
tically in human nature; Atheism is not only a theological,
but an ethical negation of Christianity. It belongs close to
nihilism for the reasons I stated earlier: it is essentially a
anti-monarchical/anti-christian term adopted by Marx,
Engels, Lenin and Trosky to characterize the strategy of
radical revolution. For this reason, an Orthodox during the
Cold War almost always referred to "Godless Communism".
While this same Orthodox is somewhat suspicious of the
Humanist, I have never heard the phrase "Godless Humanist".
 I am using "Positivist" in its cultural rather than logical sense
as one who affirms the values of the humanist, more-or-less
but emphasizes the critical role of science and technology
as a tactic of choice.
 We really don't need the term "agnostic" -- it is an epistemo-
logical concept that specifies certain irreversable limits to
human knowledge. "Gnosis" means "ultimate or absolute
knowledge", and "a" its negation. Its venacular use as a
"religious" concept is a corruption. When Kant discussed
the termination of certain transcendental postulates in what
he called "Antinomies", he was being an "agnostic".
 I would suppose that Classic Transhumanism would be
placed between "Skeptic" and "Positivist" and "Extropianism"
as indicated in the diagram. Of course this will promote
howls of protest, but I think I can defend this choice.
Robert M. Owen
The Orion Institute
57 W. Morgan Street
Brevard, NC 28712-3659 USA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:36 MDT