> Lee Corbin wrote:
>> Anders wrote
>>> But [does anyone here] view the material world as something
>>> inherently bad, and the uploaded state as inherently good?
>> Let's agree that thinking the material world as something "bad" is a
>> very strange notion (to say the very least), and that we do not think so.
> I think the material world is inherently neutral, which in some ways is
> almost as bad as active hostility. I think that a lot of the problem can
> be ameliorated by putting at least one layer of abstraction between
> yourself and physical reality.
I think that we should always emphasize that everything
depends on the the material world. There are a number of
very good reasons to resist the ideas of those who would
complain about it (going all the way back to the Church
whose tendency was to minimal this mundane life in favor
of the next). So I wouldn't even begin to play this game
of "judging" the material world (bad, neutral, or hostile).
I had been supposing that there already were levels of implementation
(or abstraction) between me and the physical world. I see my body
as just a device that allows my actual living to take place; that's
why I look forward to an upgrade to distributed hardware. The
material world will be no more abandoned then than it is now: if
I have my way, I'll have sensors throughout whatever solar systems
I live in that keep me posted on the slow-moving physical world.
If all goes well, then I'll have to pay even less attention to it
than I do now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:12 MDT