X-Message-Number: 20070 From: "Mark Plus" <> Subject: Re: Religion and Secularism Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 12:22:39 -0700 In Message #20063, Mike Perry writes, >I am "godless," yes, but, I would say, not at all lacking a "concept of >divinity"--you can read about it in my book, ch. 10. I am also an immortalist, of course, not a death-accepter, in contrast to most who call themselves atheists. So far, with a few exceptions, they have not seemed much interested in cryonics or radical life extension. This addresses something I've been thinking a lot about lately. The older I get, the more I'm struck by the inapplicability of the prevailing worldviews & social models to what I'd like to do as a cryonicist & immortalist. Secular Humanism & Objectivism have some good ideas, but also some literally fatal deficiencies. That's why I find reading their literature so exasperating. Most of the people in my society only halfway "get it" at best. Even the handful who've figured out what I think is really important often make critical mistakes (as we've seen from recent examples). I'd like to have an off-the-shelf "Transhumanism" to plug into my life, just as Christians have a whole library of how-to literature for their lives (setting aside the question of the value of much of this advice). However, while there are people around who call themselves Transhumanists (as I often do, for want of a better term -- "Venturist" as yet doesn't have much name recognition), in general Transhumanism has generated more enthusiasm & speculation than workable solutions to some hard practical problems for trying to survive in a society that is nowhere near optimal for our purposes. (It could be worse, I suppose. I'd hate to be a would-be Transhumanist in some Koranistan.) I think it is WAY too early to put Transhumanism onto the market as a competitive life stance, until the state of technology catches up to the task of making human enhancement (including radical life extension) plausible & desirable. So I'm finding myself in a making-it-up-as-I-go-along mode, testing, picking & choosing ideas & practices from a variety of sources. One of my tentative conclusions is that I find it better to work towards tangible goals regarding health, savings & investments than to obsess over quality-of-life fantasies like "self-esteem," personal fulfillment & such. Objectivists like Nathaniel Branden can esteem themselves all they want, but their esteem won't keep them alive in the long run. (Ironically, in Rand's novels the heroes emphasize tangible activities like building, inventing, running businesses etc. over subjective indulgences.) Money may not buy you "self-esteem," but its proper application can go a long way towards buying a better chance of survival. Applying measurable physical or behavioral criteria to my goals seems to be simplifying my practical decision-making. (Materialism, utilitarianism and behaviorism might not be completely defensible as philosophies, but there's no denying that they can suggest some useful approaches to certain real-world problems.) That's why I've been a bit disappointed with Alcor's magazine lately. I'd like to read more articles about the real aspects of using cryonics to survive -- how to avoid autopsy, what's happening with vitrification research, what Alcor's financial needs are, etc. -- and fewer ones about science-fictional speculations, what happened at parties, philosophical discussions of the nature of identity, etc. Basically I want to learn about things that are doable or useful now, where cryonics service providers with enough money can attain something tangible to show for their efforts. The magazine seemed much more informative 10-15 years ago than it has recently. Mark Plus It's not "religious" or "science fictional" if you can do it. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=20070