Re: What is to be done?

Mike C. (
Tue, 25 Mar 1997 13:27:44 -0500

>From: (The Low Golden Willow)
>Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 21:22:27 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: What is to be done?
Damien R. Sullivan wrote:

>On Mar 24, 3:54pm, Robin Hanson wrote:
>} but that most people don't feel very compelled to accept the axioms.
>} Thinking that these axioms will persuade very many people also seems a
>} sophmoric cognitive blunder, and does not encourage people to take the
>} other extreme views of these folks seriously.
>"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

Everything in existence is ordinary.
Everything in nature is natural.

>That they can't identify itisn't important; the
>fact that they do have inductive experience countering our argument
>strongly suggests that there is a missing factor.

They lack the will to survive.

>(Was it this list or the transhumans -- Rich Artym? -- where the utility
>and quality of the social sciences were challenged?)
>} Here I also have to agree with the critics, at least when they refer
>} to people who expect remarkably rapid progress toward transhuman
>} technologies in the next few decades. This stuff will take a while to

Robots are cross-country drivers, runners, and janitors.
AI can follow a conversation better than some humans can.
Arms, legs, hearts, and some parts of brains are replaced with in/organics.
Communications are sent to other galaxies.
Packages can be sent to other planets.
People are brought back from the dead after an hour.
"This stuff will take a while"?

>} I have heard a related criticism that anyone who would especially want
>} to become transhuman is excessively selfish.

Every human dies.
to stop others from dying,
to continue to do good things instead of being dead?