Re: Offending People's Minds
p 25 Aug 95 14:23:53 GMT

Sarah Marr wrote:
>How can one speak in a way which is uncompromisingly
>objective and yet intend to from clearly subjective
>feelings of repugnance?

I think you have a point there. What I meant was that if
somebody speaks uncompromisingly objectively, and by doing
so sometimes utters things which by normal standards are
repugnant, than I get delighted because I see intellectual
honesty triumphing over prejudice. I do not mean that the
ideal communication should positively seek to be

>"Stupid" is a highly emotive word.

Exactly. But if we used it as if it weren't, then the
emotive connotation might wear off.

>---collateral damage to Extropianism as a whole

Yes, that's what I'm concerned about. Transhumanism is weird
enough anyway; perhaps we should not make it even stranger
by adopting an offensive jargon.

Now, I am saddened by the reception of my message by some of
the other people on this list. It's my fault. In order to
make my point I thought that I should pick an example that
really was offensive. Well, it seems I succeeded only too
well. Let me say again, just to make sure that there be no
misunderstandings: I am NOT a racist. And I do not think we
should discuss the topic further. My apologies to "Damaged
Justice", Howard Julien, Pat Hardy and anybody else whom I
may have misled by my original reply to David Musick.

Nicholas Bostrom