[MD] Transhumanism

[Matt Kundert]

Krimel said:
> OK that's all. I know this was totally incoherent. I really only wrote this
> so I could kind of sketch out an overview of all of this weirdness for later
> review. And my only point for the MoQ is: for Christ sake we are arguing
> about bullshit that has not amounted to diddly squat for 2500 years. In the
> mean time the world is transforming itself into something astounding.
> Butterfly stem cells my ass. The MoQ if it is relevant at all ought to have
> something to say or some way to deal with cyborgs and chimera, nanotech and
> 3D printing. In case you missed the point a 3D printer is like the
> replicators on Star Trek. The world is becoming science fiction and we still
> don't know what the intellectual level is. You can call me a gearhead,
> motorhead, geeky nerd all you want but this stuff matters. 

Okay, (1), that's not true about philosophy's 2500 year history 
(as you well know, given that Newton was a "natural 
philosopher"), but (2), I take your point, and (3) I _hope_ 
technology increases at a geometric rate because it's the only 
hope for humankind to feed the stupid numbers of them we've 
produced recently, and (4) why on earth would anybody think 
that the Metaphysics of Quality should have something to say 
about cyborgs and holodecks?  Isn't that like demanding that 
the literary critic have something relevant to say about gluons 
or carburetors?  Even if philosophy is about including 
everything, once you reach the level of abstraction that it 
takes to do so, what kind of "relevance" are we exactly talking 
about here?

Matt
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4