TYPO CORRECTION (was Re: ExI: Cognitive Extropians)

Michael Butler (mbutler@ocv1.ocv.com)
Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:26:17 PST

From: "Michael Butler" <mbutler@ocv1.ocv.com>
Organization: On Command Video Corporation
To: extropians@extropy.org
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:36:48 PST
Subject: Re: ExI: Cognitive Extropians
Priority: normal
Reply-to: extropians@extropy.org

>Well, that sure attracted comment! Not so much by so many people, as by
>so many (2) Extropian heavyweights. Which in itself is cause for
>comment; why did only the Extropian elite notice this statement? But
>forget that.

Well, gee, I guess I'd better comment. Especially if I can get credit
by association. :)

As I hope my recent posts will support, I'm concentrating on the
social/societal issues facing those who would lead very different
lives facilitated by anticipated technologies which free us from old
limitations. Part of that is addressing _what it means to be human_
rather than assuming I know what to leave out.

Does that make me a capital-E Extropian? or a capital-T
Transhuman? Or just a propeller-head with a bent for moral
philosophy? Should I care, as long as I'm doing my best?

>The point being, oh James Rogers, oh Max More, that you two are, as I
>said, the few Extropians who think about IA.

See above. I'd rather be doing the thinking and exploring I'm doing
than earn your capital-E rating. :) :) And how does two people
posting equate to only two people thinking about it? I think I see an
questionable chain of reasoning here...

And then JR said:

My definition of an ism:
ism, -ism n A body of beliefs with a toe tag.

MMB, at but not for OCC