addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Re: [new-tampa-philosophers] Fukuyama's Transhumanism

From: Galen M.
Sent on: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 7:58 PM
That is an excellent point Rob.  I see no duality regarding love.  I think love and hate are not opposite sides of an emotional state, and that love exists without hate and vice versa.  Consider, if a man loves a woman and that man also loves their children does that ever cause jealousy in the woman?  Is his love for the woman diminished by the presence of children?  Should she feel threatened?  I have never heard of this being the case and in fact I believe it is the opposite.  If, for example, we made changes to our minds which extended our primal in-group to include everyone, who would we then feel threatened by?  Would this be a bad thing?  Fukuyama's point seems to be, we don't know, we aren't good enough to be trusted, any attempt will invite mad scientists to create consumerist zombies.  This is not a convincing argument.  

Cheers

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 04:52, Rob Curry <[address removed]> wrote:
Ignoring (with some effort) the obvious bias this author brings at the very start of his brief essay, I notice that he seems to confuse the concepts of "equality" and "equal rights." People have never been strictly equal, even without the additional new technologies that we see being used today, plus improvements we expect to see even more frequently in the future.

The thrust appears to be fear-mongering based on ignorance, made worse by glib aphorisms which look clever despite being shallow. Is it really true, for instance, that there could never be love without jealousy? My reading of Spinoza suggests that this is not something a philosopher would (let alone ought to) take for granted.

Fukuyama looks like an incredibly hostile opponent, indeed. I'm not impressed by what he wrote in the linked article.


My two cents,

Rob Curry



On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Anna <[address removed]> wrote:
The limited group of Thinkers on Facebook are not replying, so I figured I'll ask here: so, the most vocal opponent of transhumanism is Francis Fukuyama. Though I myself disagree with him on this, I would like to hear other opinions on his position. Please, take a look at his article on this topic and let me know if you agree or see any flaws:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2004/09/01/transhumanism






--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Rob Curry ([address removed]) from Tampa Bay Thinkers.
To learn more about Rob Curry, visit his/her member profile

Set my mailing list to email me As they are sent | In one daily email | Don't send me mailing list messages

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York[masked] | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy