Re: Max clarifies the FAQ (was Re: The FAQ is (not) completed! ;-)

Tim Bates (
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:39:35 +1100

Max noted
>>>If someone wants to be known as a transhumanist who
>>>rejects the idea of subordination to the collective, they can call
>>>themselves an Extropian transhumanist
I thought
>>OK. I am an extropian transhumanist. I am really happy about that but xxx
>>xxxx and xxxx and maybe xxxxxxx, as well as xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx are not
>>going to be.

Natasha Vita-More replied
>Yet you attempt to declare others be subordinate to your line of thinking.
Not at all. Please do not be.

>I don't like to be a pawn in your game, so kindly be respectful of me and
>don't try use me as such.
I intended merely to set the context of people with considered thoughts who feel that extropy does not entail other, political, beliefs.

I shall respect your wish and refrain in future ( i would refrain in the past also but that is too hard a trick ;-)

For what it is worth, i think that i will not use the word libertarian anymore. We don't have a party of that name here in Australia, but it is clearly synonymous with the US party in enough people's minds that it is confusing. I will use instead the principle of never initiating force.

All I meant in the quote of me above was that, as i interpreted Max, extropian transhumanists are going to oppose all first-use force (as he and i both happen to do) and that a number of people (you among them) had said that that did not follow.

I guess it comes down to whether the principle "extropian transhumanists believe it is immoral to achieve even moral goals by the use of force over other individuals" is true of extropy.

It does not really matter. I am a bit sad that it is not true in practice but more than willing to accept that extropy does not entail this moral: after all, it is just a human construct. Max as "copyright holder" can use it as he sees fit and others will adopt it or not as they see its utility. I believe that this extension is would be reflective of extropy and would increase its utility as a full philosophical system. Clearly, however, I it is not to be.

best as always,

(looking for a new word that means extropy plus non-initiation of force ...)