The idea that we can (and should) alter the most fundamental aspect of nature and biology to suit a cadre of wealthy elitists with god complexes is dangerous.
Before I answer that, let me note that is a completely separate issue from whether or not transhumanists are pushing radical transsexualism (they're not) or funding it (ditto). Good. We've established that.
One question about the rest of this: Why? What is wrong about altering the "most fundamental aspects of nature"?
What are you talking about? Agriculture? Look at any country in Europe, you will see how much Agriculture has changed every aspect of nature. Electricity? Ditto. Steel? Plastics? Industrialisation? (Good luck having women's emancipation without that!) Transport? Telecommunications?
Or is it changes to human biology that are yucky to you? Like, what? Antibiotics? Antiseptics? (think how much of the natural mortality rate is reduced by those!) How about contraception? Doesn't get much much fundamental to biological than that. Incubators? Or what about modern prosthetics that allow the crippled to dance? Or the lame to walk?
I am doing you the courtesy of ignoring that line about "wealthy elite", because in my experience that leads to a level of discourse nit far removed from sticking (((triple parentheses))) all over the place.
I enjoy your writing and podcasts. You're an honest voice, a reasonable one and that is rare on the website. You just seem uniformed about transhumanism. Which is fine; no one can be informed about everything. I am uninformed about tons of things.
Let me know if you ever want a recommendation for a guest for your show who is a transhumanist.
Aella I don't know. I would dearly like to know what on earth earns Fleischman the term "sociopathic".
(I can't resist adding this: when looking up her transhumanist views, one of the top hits was a page dunking on her for, wait for it, her anti-trans views).
It looks like she is I'm favour of free experimentation. But you know how this goes: if you don't support 100% every looney demand - pre-ops in girl's changing rooms etc etc. - you are anti trans. ЁЯЩД
The idea that we can (and should) alter the most fundamental aspect of nature and biology to suit a cadre of wealthy elitists with god complexes is dangerous.
Before I answer that, let me note that is a completely separate issue from whether or not transhumanists are pushing radical transsexualism (they're not) or funding it (ditto). Good. We've established that.
One question about the rest of this: Why? What is wrong about altering the "most fundamental aspects of nature"?
What are you talking about? Agriculture? Look at any country in Europe, you will see how much Agriculture has changed every aspect of nature. Electricity? Ditto. Steel? Plastics? Industrialisation? (Good luck having women's emancipation without that!) Transport? Telecommunications?
Or is it changes to human biology that are yucky to you? Like, what? Antibiotics? Antiseptics? (think how much of the natural mortality rate is reduced by those!) How about contraception? Doesn't get much much fundamental to biological than that. Incubators? Or what about modern prosthetics that allow the crippled to dance? Or the lame to walk?
I am doing you the courtesy of ignoring that line about "wealthy elite", because in my experience that leads to a level of discourse nit far removed from sticking (((triple parentheses))) all over the place.
I enjoy your writing and podcasts. You're an honest voice, a reasonable one and that is rare on the website. You just seem uniformed about transhumanism. Which is fine; no one can be informed about everything. I am uninformed about tons of things.
Let me know if you ever want a recommendation for a guest for your show who is a transhumanist.
I'll think about it for sure. Though all the transhumanists I've encountered (Aella, for example, Diana Fleischman...) strike me as sociopathic haha
Aella I don't know. I would dearly like to know what on earth earns Fleischman the term "sociopathic".
(I can't resist adding this: when looking up her transhumanist views, one of the top hits was a page dunking on her for, wait for it, her anti-trans views).
Ha! How strange. I've never gotten the impression she's 'anti-trans'? https://twitter.com/sentientist/status/1625446917080772610
Literally my third Google hit:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.transgendermap.com/politics/psychology/diana-fleischman/%3famp
It looks like she is I'm favour of free experimentation. But you know how this goes: if you don't support 100% every looney demand - pre-ops in girl's changing rooms etc etc. - you are anti trans. ЁЯЩД