Unidentified flying idiots
And I also know that Mac Tonnies over at Posthuman Blues links to my articles from time-to-time. Posthuman Blues often deals with transhumanist and other future issues, but Tonnies's legitimate content is offset by his misguided focus on UFOlogy. As a result, the transhumanist movement may have a harder time gaining public acceptance and support with this kind of negative association.
My first reaction upon reading this was an urge to defend myself. But "defend" what? The ability to suspend conclusions in the face of a legitimate unknown? The intellectual rewards of honest speculation?
I'll continue to read and enjoy Sentient Developments; it's a good blog that makes intelligent points. Unfortunately, this latest potshot isn't one of them.
9 comments:
Mac:
I'd never heard of this bozo before now, but if he and this post are examples of the "critical thinking" skills found amongst transhumanists, I think we're better off staying with just plain old humanism.
I know you won't say it, but I will - what a maroon. Any valid points he makes are completely negated by his tone, his lack of knowledge or understanding about the subject of UFOs / UAP, and by his personal swipe at you.
People can agree to disagree. But this guy is a Grade-A Idiot.
Paul
I've run up against the same essential obstacle before: transhumanist thinkers -- or would-be thinkers -- who are so justifiably disgusted with the whole "believer" milieu that they lash out at anyone or anything with potential "paranormal" significance.
I personally think it's less an intellectual defecit than a studious political bias. Transhumanism is a minority viewpoint, and its high priests are extraordinarily wary of being tainted with the "kook factor" -- and I sympathize. But when this schism breeds lame personal swipes, I roll my eyes.
Mac:
http://www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2006/10/transhumanism-vs-ufos.html
:-)
Paul
Wow. Dvorsky took some cranky pills this morning. The irony is that so much of his Transhumanist worldview is based on faith - we WILL become immortal, the galaxy IS home to thousands of advanced civilizations, AI's WILL uplift humanity to technological nirvana. etc. etc. etc.
Don't get me wrong, I love all those ideas, and I think they're fascinating. I love UFOlogy too, I find spiritualism fascinating. I entertain many ideas and belief systems because I find them INTRUIGING, not because my education was lacking. Dvorsky is quite welcome to accuse me of being a superstitious intellectual barbarian if he cares to try. I wish him luck.
Thing is, what's really the most dangerous thing in this world isn't people "picking and choosing" what they want to believe. It's people like Dvorsky who think they have a right to dictate what belief systems are and are not valid.
And really, why are people like him so deeply bothered by what other people believe? It's not just that he disagrees or disapproves - he's genuinely UPSET that people are interested in things he considers unsuitable. He even suggests that belief in UFOs and the paranormal are "dangerous". Dangerous to whom? Are his own beliefs so brittle?
Man, what a rant. You'd think that you could manage to go through your life without calling out so many people. Heck, I think he even got upset with people linking to his blog! Maybe he should just publish a private journal...
But, and maybe I'm picking the wrong point here, who is he to tell me that I'm scientifically illiterate because of what I choose to investigate and read? I think my career and degrees speak otherwise...Just because he can't imagine a phenomenon is no reason to insinuate that everyone who studys UFO's is an x-files fanatic.
He strikes me as a real religious, cult type in that rant. "Believe me and what I say...but nothing else!"
Mac,
YOU are my trusted source for things transhuman and unidentified.
ok -- I like Wikipedia too.
Always smile in the face of adversity.
later,
Darc
Hard-core transhumanists have a tendency to get so enmeshed in certain prospects and ideas that they become nastily territorial. I've seen it happen before. It's insipid -- and sad: "I'm a transhumanist -- you're not!" We humans so love our labels.
This is why I've deliberately avoided seeking membership in any >human organizations despite my philosophical affinity.
a transhumanist who doesn't entertain the possibility of UFO's and higher intelligence elsewhere in the galaxy doesn't truly understand transhumanism, in my opinion.
a transhumanist who doesn't entertain the possibility of UFO's and higher intelligence elsewhere in the galaxy doesn't truly understand transhumanism, in my opinion.
Well, George the All-Knowing *does* entertain thoughts on ETI (good ones, too), but he sticks to Dyson spheres, the Fermi "paradox" and related subjects. Which is, of course, playing it safe.
Post a Comment