Re: Atheism as a spandrel? (was Re: Deep River/Deep Sleep etc)

From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@optusnet.com.au)
Date: Sun Jun 08 2003 - 01:19:31 MDT

  • Next message: Anders Sandberg: "Re: [Para-Discuss] faster than light?"

    >> Spudboy100@aol.com writes:
    > >
    > > Brett, what is disturbing to me is my sense of how few
    > > bench researchers have interest in Transhumanism or cryo,
    > > or uploading. Maybe its too new a concept for them. Or
    > > maybe we are all deluded and everything is hopeless, or
    > > maybe there are other answers.

    First I think transhumanism and posthumanism have a
    surface tension about them that say humanism did not.
    It takes a bit of a commitment to punch through the
    superficial oddball nature and naming of some of those
    groups to get at the essentially sensible propositions that
    lie behind the names. Propositions such as that homo-
    sapiens are not the end point of evolution but are works
    in progress collectively and individually are not that hard
    or too radical, imo for most people with a scientific
    background to agree with. Nor is it hard to conclude that
    technology sensibly applied can improve the human
    condition. But what is perhaps harder is to get newbies
    to take the time to look beyond the labels that don't
    immediately resonate.

    Second if a newbie puts a toe in the water to see what
    trans-humanists are talking about and they happen to
    investigate the wrong list on the wrong day they are likely
    to find that much of what is discussed is pretty much the
    sort of stuff they could find discussed anywhere. And they
    may also ask themselves if they would want their peers to
    do a google on them and find what sort of circles and
    conversations they are involved in.

    Third I encourage folks to remember that there are some
    commercial ideas that cannot be posted to an open list
    without harming their chances of being realised. There
    really is more going on beneath the covers than probably
    most realist and I would not be surprised if many trans-
    humanists have double lives including plenty of non-card
    carrying mainstream scientists and "movers and shakers"
    that are interested in getting things done.

    But more specifically your question seems to go to why
    aren't the bench scientists rallying to the flags that seem
    so sensible to those that have already climbed on board.
    I think the answer to this is not all that mysterious. First
    some of the bench scientists *are* coming around in their
    personal capacities but they are weary of being judged
    by who they hang out with in their professional capacity.
    They worry about the "baggage factor".

    This applies even more so for commercial companies
    like stem cell companies for instance. Most of the stem
    cell CEO's I know are former bench scientists that were
    bright enough to have gone out and acquired business and
    financial management skills. But in the last few years they
    have all undergone something of a ordeal by fire in the
    need to acquire political skills as well. If day in and day
    out the media is hounding you for controversial political
    copy about subjects such as embryonic stem cell research
    and you are trying to keep investors in line and your
    company focused on achieving political milestones you
    simply don't have the time to take on more controversy
    that you absolutely have to. Human nature being what it is
    I have seen one particular stem cell CEO seek to
    differentiate the credible mainstream nature of stem cell
    science by contrasting what his company was doing with
    the blatantly unethical practices of the Raelians. But before
    the Raelians were on the scene his diversion of choice were
    the cryonicists. I am pretty sure this particular scientist/CEO
    has no deep understanding of cryonics (nor I hasten to add
    do I) but by invoking the concept of cryonics and Raelians
    in his public speeches he sought to differentiate legitimate
    science (what he was doing) from the real oddball science
    as he hope the media would see it. People under political
    pressure and pressure from investors to deliver against
    milestones often find it appealing to offer the press alternative
    targets.

    The trade off is essentially possible long term gain for short
    term relief.

    > >
    > > When I first climbed aboard the Extropian list, I was
    > > hoping to see some scientists promoting Transhumanism,
    > > some cosmologists or astronomers writing about new,
    > > wondrous, essays; such as Moravec or Tipler. Basically,
    > > it ain't happening and I am not sure why this is? But we
    > > seem to have a dearth of interested theorists. Harvey
    > > Newstrom had a similar question about this last week.
    > > I dunno. :-(

    I don't quite agree with this. I think the pop science writers
    like Broderick and others have done almost as much good as
    the bench scientists as you call them in getting the sorts of
    memes that are contained in most transhumanist circles
    discussed in the public domain.

    I think there is a tendency for those who understand science
    a little better than average to overestimate the extent to which
    "truth" as it is understood in scientific circles matters in the
    courts of public opinion. ie. "Truth" is an irrelevance when one
    is sick or ones relatives are sick.

    Joe and Jane public and Jill and Jack congressman are not
    typically scientists. The skills that get Jill and Jack into congress
    are not typically the ones that they acquired at the lab benches.

    Jill and Jack congressmen can't take lead public opinion and
    make better public policy relating to biotechnology unless they
    understand it, and for the most part they don't. For the most
    part politicians come from the ranks of lawyers, or teachers
    or union representatives. Their people skills are good but
    their science is generally pretty lousy.

    Getting even a few science savvy exceptions into the congress
    can make a different. Lord Robert Winston of the English house
    of Lords is a science and biology populariser almost of
    Saganesque proportions in the UK. And his opinions were
    respected and sought out by his colleagues. This helped get the
    UK one of the most liberal stem cell research regimes in the
    world.

    But when Jill and Jack congressman don't have enough science
    to lead public opinion quite naturally that take notice of the
    opinions of Joe and Jane public. After all if they don't know the
    right answer they may as well do the popular thing. So Joe and
    Jane public whether they know it or not end up influencing the
    sorts of policy that is set at national level on biotechnology.

    Now Joe and Jane public have others things on their minds in
    their busy lives than "how many angles can dance in a sim" they
    care about their aged parents with Alzheimer's and their son
    with diabetes and quietly at times though they don't talk about
    it much they miss their dead parents and worry about the health
    of their friends. They will take faith in religion is their is nothing
    else to ease their pain but they will quickly re-organise their
    religious beliefs to integrate real technological advances that can
    improve the human condition of themselves and their loves ones
    if they can find it.

    Problem is they are busy and those who are pursuing truth don't
    seem to think it is worth taking the time to break down and
    simplify the truths so that they can see how what is going on
    with stem cells and gene therapy is not something remote and
    far away it is something that has the real potential to effect the
    lives of them and those they care about.

    The meme war is a war for the hearts and minds of Joe and
    Jane average. Get Joe and Jane averages attention and the
    media will stop lampooning and the politicians will follow the
    votes.

    What's needed I suspect is an architecture or an infrastructure
    for prioritising extropic projects. There are many extropes
    and transhumanists that would gladly contribute time within
    an architecture of general societal improvement if they were
    convinced that one could be constructed and one does not
    have to be a 2003 polymath equivalent of a Leonardo Da
    Vinci to make a real contribution. But the architecture is
    important to make people look out a little further than they
    currently do. To make things less of a zero sum game. The
    architecture I suspect needs to take into account patents,
    and politics, and international law.

    I take as a basic premise that most transhumanist are more
    concerned about their own survival than about the survival
    of strangers. This throws up a problem. Transhumanists
    fall into a number of different ages categories. It could be
    that for the average 60 year old or greater the most sensible
    effort for them would be a massive scientific push to try and
    make cryonics work (as well as possible) and to be as socially
    acceptable as possible. If one is 30, perhaps the priority is
    in winning funding and research into stem cells and nanotech
    because that might avoid the cryonics thing all together.
    If one is in ones 20's or younger one may be able to spend
    ones life on the beach or in complete indifference knowing that
    motivated others are going to be working their buts of trying
    to find solutions that will then be available to you.

    Problem is it seems that the interests of the different age
    cohorts do not align. The best way to make them align might
    be to produce an architecture where the resources of the
    many are directed in optimal average fashion but not optimal
    personal fashion to the desired outcome. But that is a heck
    of an architecture to come up with.

    Sorry for the rant I've digressed considerably from your
    question.

    - Brett Paatsch



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 08 2003 - 01:35:16 MDT