tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post853650841043905623..comments2023-11-22T01:14:54.298-08:00Comments on amor mundi: Optimist or Pessimist? A Futurological Ramble, With Occasional RantingDale Carricohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-2735779095700927892010-08-20T13:34:34.938-07:002010-08-20T13:34:34.938-07:00Factory farming is an abomination -- one more mis-...Factory farming is an abomination -- one more mis-application of the disastrous high-energy-input intensive hierarchical-authoritarian-capital intensive brute-force-monocultural industrial paradigm to agriculture. You might recall, also, that I am an ethical vegetarian, and touch on some of the complex identity politics of this position <a href="http://amormundi.blogspot.com/2006/03/animal-rites.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-87217824535794398842010-08-20T13:31:01.092-07:002010-08-20T13:31:01.092-07:00Wish-fulfillment fantasizing about techno-immortal...Wish-fulfillment fantasizing about techno-immortalization is far from the same thing as advocating for global access to basic healthcare, clean water, real-world medical r & d, and so on. This opportunistic parasitism on legitimate science, this ednless sensationalization undermining scientific literacy and then peddling yourselves as "champions of science" and Enlightenment -- from nanoscale science, automation transformed techno-utopian <i>superabundance</i> via ubiquitous slavebots and sexbots and personal robot bodies and desktop nanotech everything-for-nothing machines and nanofog magicks; from network security and user-friendly software issues transformed into dead-ender GOFAI and post-biological <i>superintelligence</i>, the Robot God Singularity; to harm reduction and healthcare access and medical r & d advocacy transformed into techno-immortalization and <i>superlongevity</i> -- is the quintessential and indispensable gesture of the superlative sub(cult)ural futurology of the Robot Cult. Shame on you Michael, and all you robot cultists for your peddling of ignorance and appeals to hyperbolic fears and greed and derangement of sensible technodevelopmental deliberation at the most urgent historical moment possible.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-75004968799106150452008-03-13T12:29:00.000-07:002008-03-13T12:29:00.000-07:00Jackie, because if it were the 18th century, you'd...Jackie, because if it were the 18th century, you'd be saying the same thing about smallpox. Either you take an attitude that accepts shitty things, or you don't. I prefer the latter.<BR/><BR/>Btw Dale, what's your take on factory farming?Michael Anissimovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06217926458888484768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-85617212378848419642008-03-13T12:25:00.000-07:002008-03-13T12:25:00.000-07:00I don't know where this lust to exist comes from -...I don't know where this lust to exist comes from - just read some good literature and/or philosophy and make peace with death already! <BR/><BR/>There's that good Montaigne essay: "To do philosophy is to learn how to die". <BR/><BR/>Better yet: do something innovative or intelligent so that your work will live on after you, rather than your crippled and frozen bodily form!Jackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11778115312295750379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-59540987130806859962008-03-13T11:48:00.000-07:002008-03-13T11:48:00.000-07:00The answer to your paragraph: cryonics.And who say...The answer to your paragraph: cryonics.<BR/><BR/>And who says Eliezer is a guru cult leader? Where are all his followers?<BR/><BR/>*looks at shirt and sees "Eliezer is #1!" button on it*<BR/><BR/>Oh crap, nm.Michael Anissimovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06217926458888484768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-32116973210297149922008-03-13T11:41:00.000-07:002008-03-13T11:41:00.000-07:00Only somewhat relevant, but I just ran across this...Only somewhat relevant, but I just ran across this and it is too good of a quote not to be made known:<BR/><BR/>"Religion restricts this play of choice and adaptation, since it imposes equally on everyone its own path to the acquisition of happiness and protection from suffering. Its technique consists in depressing the value of life and distorting the picture of the real world in a delusional manner---which presupposes an intimidation of the intelligence. At this price, by forcibly fixing them in a state of psychical infantilism and by drawing them into a mass-delusion, religion succeeds in sparing many people an individual neurosis. But hardly anything more. There are, as we have said, many paths which may lead to such happiness as is attainable by men, but there is none which does so for certain. Even religion cannot keep its promise. If the believer finally sees himself obliged to speak of God's 'inscrutable decrees', he is admitting that all that is left to him as a last possible consolation and source of pleasure in his suffering is an unconditional submission." <BR/><BR/>From "Civilization and Its Discontents" by Freud <BR/><BR/>Could 'religion' here be replaced with 'superlative robo-cults'?Jackiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11778115312295750379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-39862971164706313162008-03-13T11:21:00.000-07:002008-03-13T11:21:00.000-07:00If you are in the US, San Francisco is definitely ...If you are in the US, San Francisco is definitely one of the best places to live in.<BR/><BR/>PS: You are absolutely and most certainly going to die, as will everybody else reading these words. Genetic/ prosthetic technique will likely increase human longevity for some lucky humans, possibly in quite unprecedented ways, but that is another story (and I doubt very much even the luckiest beneficiaries of such technique will acquire sufficient superlongevity to feel less keenly the existential dilemma of mortality as such). It is a good idea to come to terms with mortality sooner rather than later, else one become one of those unfortunate people who are not only mortal as we all are, but manage to become less alive in life than they otherwise could be either for the obsessive concern with mortality (a concern that distorts priorities outward from there) or hysterical denial of the facts of mortality (a denial that spreads ignorance outward from there) that are the usual unfortunate and altogether unnecessary alternatives to coming to terms with it.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-23398477334522077962008-03-13T10:56:00.000-07:002008-03-13T10:56:00.000-07:00San Francisco is the best! Bwuahaha!PS. I'm goin...San Francisco is the best! Bwuahaha!<BR/><BR/>PS. I'm going to live forever, and I hope you all join me.Michael Anissimovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06217926458888484768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-12454101190374465202008-01-14T09:29:00.000-08:002008-01-14T09:29:00.000-08:00And another:"The nanotech stuff I've read or heard...And another:<BR/><BR/>"The nanotech stuff I've read or heard about in cryonics venues<BR/>for the past 20 years has gotten old, with little or no tangible<BR/>progress to show for all the nano-fantasists' "work,"<BR/>[link to an unflattering article by John Bruce about Ralph Merkle,<BR/>http://mthollywood.blogspot.com/2006/04/who-is-ralph-merkle-ii-although-merkle.html ]<BR/>. . .<BR/><BR/>The de-emphasis on nanotech in favor of demonstrable science and<BR/>engineering seems to fit into a pattern I've noticed lately, where<BR/>cryonics leaders also want to downplay cryonics' long associations<BR/>with transhumanism and the I-word [he means "immortality"].<BR/>It almost looks as if something happened behind the scenes<BR/>to spook cryonics organizations' leaders into making them reframe<BR/>the whole cryonics idea."<BR/>http://transsurvivalist.blogspot.com/2006/11/cryonics-organizations-distancing.html<BR/><BR/><BR/>What might that have been, I wonder?jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-47076590474302983112008-01-13T10:57:00.000-08:002008-01-13T10:57:00.000-08:00> The immortalists have latched onto and co-opted ...> The immortalists have latched onto and co-opted the latest<BR/>> superlative SFnal or fringe-science dream (or nightmare)<BR/>> "technologies" as the roadmap for how their hopes for eternal<BR/>> life are going to pan out.<BR/><BR/>Another observation from the same (jaded) observer mentioned<BR/>above:<BR/><BR/>"In the real 21st Century, Drexler has become nearly an unperson within<BR/>the mainstream nanotechnological community.<BR/><BR/>I find that unfortunate, because cryonics organizations (Alcor more than CI,<BR/>or so I get the impression) starting in the mid 1980's latched onto Drexler's<BR/>ideas as the Big Fix for our survival problems. Alcor's Web footprint shows<BR/>how much Drexler has influenced the way cryonics has presented itself since<BR/>he started to publicize his ideas around a quarter century ago. Lately some<BR/>alpha cryonicists seem to realize they've made a mistake by investing too<BR/>much in Drexlerian nanotech, and they have quietly started to frame cryonics<BR/>more in terms of what we have to do now with current and foreseeable technologies<BR/>(like vitrification) instead of invoking recycled, still-unsubstantiated<BR/>nanotech speculations from the 1980's and 1990's. Cryonicists' temptation<BR/>to try to associate cryonics with the latest geek trends<BR/>(current example: the singularity) still persists, however."<BR/><BR/>http://transsurvivalist.blogspot.com/2007/09/nanoconvergence-as-strategy-to-overcome.htmljimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-34843748389189541572008-01-11T08:36:00.000-08:002008-01-11T08:36:00.000-08:00I wrote, above:> The immortalists have latched ont...I wrote, above:<BR/><BR/>> The immortalists have latched onto and co-opted the latest<BR/>> superlative SFnal or fringe-science dream (or nightmare)<BR/>> "technologies" as the roadmap for how their hopes for eternal<BR/>> life are going to pan out.<BR/><BR/>It would seem that at least some immortalists have begun to<BR/>detach from some of the (now somewhat long in the tooth)<BR/>superlative SFisms, at least according to one (rather jaded)<BR/>observer:<BR/>http://transsurvivalist.blogspot.com/2008/01/cryonics-meets-future-fatigue.html<BR/><BR/>Warp drive, anyone? ESP?<BR/><BR/>Ah, well. Hocus pocus boner-ocus.jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-7669715948435673192008-01-10T12:43:00.000-08:002008-01-10T12:43:00.000-08:00Dale wrote:> I think somebody's given him "slick" ...Dale wrote:<BR/><BR/>> I think somebody's given him "slick" spinmeistery advice. . .<BR/>> [P]ossibly it was a few suave singularitarians (notice how they're<BR/>> taking over the WTA Board right now. . .) who have learned<BR/>> the hard way to keep the crazy talk confined to initiates<BR/>> in the inner circle. . .<BR/><BR/>I notice one of them says (on<BR/>http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/more/vote2008/ ):<BR/><BR/>"I love transhumanists - one of the most rational and caring groups<BR/>of people living on this fragile blue planet. . ."<BR/><BR/>Pardon me while I dab a tear from my eye.jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-56762933328625901062008-01-09T23:20:00.000-08:002008-01-09T23:20:00.000-08:00Yet another content-free non-response from Giulio ...Yet another content-free non-response from Giulio Prisco, ladies and gentlemen.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-7102693540435836012008-01-09T23:02:00.000-08:002008-01-09T23:02:00.000-08:00Re: "I think somebody's given him "slick" spinmeis...Re: "I think somebody's given him "slick" spinmeistery advice to essentially say "I know you are but what am I" in response to any strong criticisms of his transhumanism or techno-immortalism he is unequal to... I am quite sure Giulio cannot specify the premises that presumably undergird his "demonstration" nor show why my propositions illustrate whatever it is he thinks he has demonstrated. He shouldn't write checks his ass can't cash."<BR/><BR/>L.O.L.Giulio Priscohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13811681020661409028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-60831254489868614782008-01-09T14:45:00.000-08:002008-01-09T14:45:00.000-08:00Oh, let's cut him a break here for his malapropism...<I>Oh, let's cut him a break here for his malapropism. He must've meant something like "my point exactly" or "you took the words right out of my mouth."</I><BR/><BR/>I'm disinclined to give him a break, since I don't think your generous translations make any sense either.<BR/><BR/>I think somebody's given him "slick" spinmeistery advice to essentially say "I know you are but what am I" in response to any strong criticisms of his transhumanism or techno-immortalism he is unequal to. <BR/><BR/>I daresay it was one of the Thighmaster Futurists of extropianism who love to claim to be down with the greens and anarhicsts these days since the dot bomb exposed their fraud, or perhaps it was one of the many urbane libertopian retro-futurists who are waiting it out among the Dynamists and Tech Central Stoopid readership while Bush bleeds all over their beloved market fundy piecharts, occasionally quietly recommending the impressionable kids read Von Mises in the hopes of living long enough for another golden age of free market paradise like the three decade Reagan-through-Bush II nightmare we're starting to dig ourselves out from now, but overall just laying low hoping to be mistaken for civil libertarians rather than the crypto-fascists they really are, or possibly it was a few suave singularitarians (notice how they're taking over the WTA Board right now -- hard to believe given the hardnoised realism of WTA's stewardship by big-tent moderateness, HA hah) who have learned the hard way to keep the crazy talk confined to initiates in the inner circle and to talk existential risks and r&d synergies like the grownups at the Rand Corporation when they're angling for billionair cash... <BR/><BR/>(For those who didn't get that last paragraph -- it's inside baseball for techno-utopian robot cult watchers, there's nothing there worth worrying about if this stuff doesn't already fascinate you.) <BR/><BR/>Anyhoozle, whoever gave him the advice to mirror criticisms rather than respond to them, it is evident<BR/>over and over in his moves lately, not just in this recent example you are generously letting slide.<BR/><BR/>[1] in his recent sad uprising in the cyberspatial strip mall of second life he is "proudly" taking up the mantle of "Robot God" (rather than responding to the substance of the critique of superlativity), <BR/><BR/>[2] in his initial response to this post he hyperbolically and sarcastically fluttered (I think he might have imagined this move was parodic, indicating the usual incomprehension of the point) about how he wouldn't ride the high-speed rail because it wasn't transcendental enough (rather than responding to the actual substance of the minor point in the post to which he was reacting; namely, that serious technodevelopmental policy discourse is different from robot cultism -- an altogether different point from a claim that robot cultism skews every single belief a robot cultist asserts, I daresay, for example, a robot cultist is quite as capable of wiping his ass effectively as a non robot cultist is), <BR/><BR/>[3] in the subsequent exchanges he non-responded -- yet again -- to my argument that the fact the some of one's beliefs are non-crazy doesn't justify the conclusion that they all are with the claim that this "provided not only a very good explanation of my point, but also a proof of its validity" when it palpably provided none of these things,<BR/><BR/>[4] and <I>then</I> he quoted me and then stamped out his little "Q.E.D." at the end.<BR/><BR/>Words like proof, validity, demonstration mean something to me (I teach rhetoric, you know). I'll be damned if I'm not going to call bullshit when somebody wants to cite the very formal conventions they are playing fast and loose with. My own argumentation is hardly confined to strict logic, but I don't claim otherwise when engaging otherwise. Sorry, it's a pet peeve.<BR/><BR/>I am quite sure Giulio cannot specify the premises that presumably undergird his "demonstration" nor show why my propositions illustrate whatever it is he thinks he has demonstrated. He shouldn't write checks his ass can't cash.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and if, by chance, he means only to suggest that my potty mouth demonstrates how unserious I am: <BR/><BR/>a) fuck that shit <BR/><BR/>and <BR/><BR/>b) get your smelling salts, Miss Pittypat, any futures worth having are likely to be naughty.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-57665740890549117922008-01-09T13:16:00.000-08:002008-01-09T13:16:00.000-08:00Giulio Prisco quoted Dale:> Re: "I reserve my resp...Giulio Prisco quoted Dale:<BR/><BR/>> Re: "I reserve my respect for the respectable. . .<BR/>> Don't expect me to pimp your weird [ideas]."<BR/>><BR/>> Q.E.D.<BR/><BR/>And Dale replied:<BR/><BR/>> What is it exactly you think you have "demonstrated"?<BR/><BR/>Oh, let's cut him a break here for his malapropism.<BR/>He must've meant something like "my point exactly" or<BR/>"you took the words right out of my mouth."<BR/><BR/>In other words, "back atcha".<BR/><BR/><BR/>"[Jules] Pfeiffer captured this too in his play _Grown Ups_.<BR/>Ignoring what she means, Jake pounces on Louise for getting<BR/>expressions slightly wrong: 'She lies like a glove' for<BR/>'lies like a rug'; 'snitched' to mean 'stole,' which he<BR/>thinks should be 'snatched'; 'put your ten cents in'<BR/>instead of 'two cents'; 'flip to attention,' which he says<BR/>'is simply not English.' The net result is that Louise<BR/>feels that Jake thinks (she suspects correctly) that<BR/>she's not smart enough for him. It may be true that he<BR/>thinks so; many people regard the use of what they consider<BR/>correct English usage as a sign of intelligence -- an attitude<BR/>with no basis in fact. What is a fact is that slightly<BR/>altering common expressions is as common as the expressions<BR/>themselves and presents no barrier to comprehension."<BR/><BR/>-- Deborah Tannen, _That's Not What I Meant! How Conversational<BR/>Style Makes or Breaks Relationships_,<BR/>Chapter 9, "The Intimate Critic", p. 152<BR/><BR/>Note to Jake: "Snap to attention" is certainly good English.<BR/><BR/>Oh well, it's a doggy-dog world! ;->jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-50271277738802365102008-01-09T13:02:00.000-08:002008-01-09T13:02:00.000-08:00Dale wrote:> You might also benefit from reading P...Dale wrote:<BR/><BR/>> You might also benefit from reading Purdy's "God of the Digirati". . .<BR/><BR/>Hadn't seen this one. The author says,<BR/><BR/>"Temperament is a theme too little appreciated in reflecting about<BR/>culture and politics."<BR/><BR/>Or even philosophy. More than a century ago, William James noted:<BR/><BR/>"The history of philosophy is to a great extent<BR/>that of a certain clash of human temperaments.<BR/>Undignified as such a treatment may seem to some<BR/>of my colleagues, I shall have to take account<BR/>of this clash and explain a good many of the<BR/>divergencies of philosophers by it. Of whatever<BR/>temperament a professional philosopher is, he<BR/>tries, when philosophizing, to sink the fact<BR/>of his temperament. Temperament is no conventionally<BR/>recognized reason, so he urges impersonal<BR/>reasons only for his conclusions. Yet his temperament<BR/>really gives him a stronger bias than any of his<BR/>more strictly objective premises. It loads the<BR/>evidence for him one way or the other, making for<BR/>a more sentimental or a more hard-hearted view<BR/>of the universe, just as this fact or that<BR/>principle would. He trusts his temperament. Wanting<BR/>a universe that suits it, he believes in any<BR/>representation of the universe that does suit it.<BR/>He feels men of opposite temper to be out of key<BR/>with the world's character, and in his heart<BR/>considers them incompetent and 'not in it,' in<BR/>the philosophic business, even though they may<BR/>far excel him in dialectical ability."<BR/><BR/>-- William James, _Pragmatism_ (1907)<BR/>Lecture 1, "The Present Dilemma in Philosophy"<BR/>http://www.4literature.net/William_James/Pragmatism/2.htmljimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-59901785253321912482008-01-09T10:41:00.000-08:002008-01-09T10:41:00.000-08:00Jackie: For my take on the transhumanists, extropi...Jackie: For my take on the transhumanists, extropians, Singularitarians, Techno-Immortalists, dynamists, and other techno-utopians you might like to explore the essays collected at the link <A HREF="http://amormundi.blogspot.com/2007/10/superlative-summary.html" REL="nofollow">The Superlative Summary</A>. If you don't know about these folks it isn't exactly something you're missing -- they symptomize in an extreme way certain tendencies exhibited by many technology enthusiasts more mainstream than they are. You might also benefit from reading Purdy's <A HREF="http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_god_of_the_digerati" REL="nofollow">God of the Digirati</A>, Newitz's <A HREF="http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/19850/" REL="nofollow">Extropian Trash</A>, Barbrook and Cameron's <A HREF="http://www.alamut.com/subj/ideologies/pessimism/califIdeo_I.html" REL="nofollow">Californian Ideology</A>, Borsook's <A HREF="http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2000/11/cyberselfish2.html" REL="nofollow">Cyberselfish</A>, Lanier's <A HREF="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.12/lanier.html" REL="nofollow">One Half a Manifesto</A>, Hayles <A HREF="http://www.english.ucla.edu/faculty/hayles/wiener.htm" REL="nofollow">Wiener and Cybernetic Anxiety</A>. I'm assuming you've already read Donna Haraway. If not, read everything you can by her online as well.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-57572837117177727722008-01-09T10:28:00.000-08:002008-01-09T10:28:00.000-08:00Peco: I do think that cults are harmful, but that ...Peco: I do think that cults are harmful, but that doesn't mean I think that they should always be regarded as criminal or actionable. <BR/><BR/>Where/when they engage in fraud, de facto kidnapping, duressed reprogramming, and so on, I consider them criminal organizations. <BR/><BR/>But where/when they exploit vulnerable people's needs for belonging and reassurance or where/when they undermine people's capacity for critical thinking through the inculcation of True Belief, or where/when they engage in public discourse that introduces confusions into deliberation and skews priorities I try to expose them and warn people against what they are up to. <BR/><BR/>Not all harms are equal, nor do all harms demand the same response. But it is wrong to say that not all cults are harmful just because not all cults are criminal. It is possibly logically valid as arguments go, but not sensible.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-42489790682988951122008-01-09T10:14:00.000-08:002008-01-09T10:14:00.000-08:00"Q.E.D."What is it exactly you think you have "dem..."Q.E.D."<BR/><BR/>What is it exactly you think you have "demonstrated"? Words have meanings, you know. If you want to indulge in the trappings of logic, have a care. What conclusion do you think you have come to by way of what premises? These oracular pronouncements lately may be marginally less embarrassing for you in the long run than legible propositions given the idiotic things you tend to say when actually explaining yourself at length, but I doubt this new strategy of issuing vacuities is going to get you any closer to your desired outcomes than did your older strategy of issuing imbecility. Although, who knows, resonant insinuations go a long way if one wants to be a guru at the head of a cult, just ask Eliezer.Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-51717011726079634272008-01-09T09:43:00.000-08:002008-01-09T09:43:00.000-08:00Re: "I reserve my respect for the respectable. Tra...Re: "I reserve my respect for the respectable. Transhumanism, Singularitarianism, and Technological Immortalism don't qualify. Don't expect me to pimp your weird Robot Cult."<BR/><BR/>Q.E.D.Giulio Priscohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13811681020661409028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-90785449211117317012008-01-09T09:29:00.000-08:002008-01-09T09:29:00.000-08:00As long as they don't actually do those things, th...As long as they don't actually do those things, their cultishness is harmless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-3934883850469274572008-01-09T08:58:00.000-08:002008-01-09T08:58:00.000-08:00Jackie wrote:> I must ask you to explain what ">Hi...Jackie wrote:<BR/><BR/>> I must ask you to explain what ">Hism" is!<BR/><BR/>">Hism" is shorthand for "transhumanism".<BR/><BR/>As far as what **that** is, well, you could take a look<BR/>at the Wikipedia entry:<BR/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanismjimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-19507512185907146202008-01-09T08:55:00.000-08:002008-01-09T08:55:00.000-08:00Peco wrote:> Have Robot Cultists actually harassed...Peco wrote:<BR/><BR/>> Have Robot Cultists actually harassed. . . opponents?<BR/><BR/>They've shown some signs of the kind of litigiousness characteristic<BR/>of cults toward their public critics.<BR/><BR/>Dale has some experience of that.jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-62151217214246820022008-01-09T07:10:00.000-08:002008-01-09T07:10:00.000-08:00jfehlinger:Have Robot Cultists actually harassed/m...jfehlinger:<BR/><BR/>Have Robot Cultists <I>actually</I> harassed/murdered opponents? If they haven't I don't think their cultishness is harmful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com