Re: Why I think extropianism is hardly a new philosophy

From: Natasha Vita-More (natasha@natasha.cc)
Date: Sun Aug 03 2003 - 19:12:52 MDT

Next message: Samantha Atkins: "Re: How transparent should transparency be?"

Previous message: Natasha Vita-More: "Re: Are Extropians promoters of an ascetic ideal and alienation?"
In reply to: Anders Sandberg: "Re: Why I think extropianism is hardly a new philosophy"
Next in thread: Natasha Vita-More: "Re: Why I think extropianism is hardly a new philosophy"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

At 12:18 AM 8/4/03 +0200, you wrote:
>Yes, there are plenty of antecedents to transhumanism. It would be a
>mistake to assume that it all started with Max More or FM 2020. The FAQ
>contains a partial list of forerunners
>(http://www.transhumanism.org/resources/faq.html#View). It mentions
>Condorcet but not Fourier.

Precisely. Each philosophy or cultural movement has antecedents. (By the
way, it's 2030 :-).) Ideas change according to the times and we rework
already established ideas. We take ideas and add to them and subtract from
them to fit the specific needs of the time in which we live.

Natasha

Next message: Samantha Atkins: "Re: How transparent should transparency be?"
Previous message: Natasha Vita-More: "Re: Are Extropians promoters of an ascetic ideal and alienation?"
In reply to: Anders Sandberg: "Re: Why I think extropianism is hardly a new philosophy"
Next in thread: Natasha Vita-More: "Re: Why I think extropianism is hardly a new philosophy"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 03 2003 - 17:23:40 MDT