Well judging from my search log entries recently it looks as if they must have recently re-aired the Visions of the Future episode (in the UK, possibly elsewhere) in which I had an approximately two-minute interview bit.
If you found this site as a result of seeing that programme, please read my post If You Saw Me On The BBC....
The short version is that while I don't regret taking part in the "Visions of the Future" project (it was a learning experience in many respects, that's for sure), I no longer identify as a transhumanist.
Mind you, this does not mean I am uninterested in longevity, robots, human modification, etc. I still find all those topics bloody fascinating. It just means I don't relate to the "transhumanist subculture" anymore and haven't for some time.
I really didn't fully know what I was getting into when I was associating with all that stuff and I've a feeling I'm going to be paying for it (in terms of having to write posts like this every so often, for one thing) for many years to come. Which is my own fault, but still.
In other words, if you want to discuss anything with me (which is fine, comments and emails are always welcome provided you're not a spammer or troll or other ne'er-do-well), please realize that people are not static in time, and please don't insist on treating me like I'm still living in 2007 and couldn't possibly have refined my views or changed my mind about anything in the past three or four years.
Thank you,
- Anne Corwin
16 August, 2010
13 comments:
Hi Anne,
Just read the post that you attached about the BBC interview. I was just saying that it was a fascinating topic. Did not mean to offend you at all. I am sure you get tired of people referring to the 2 min clip all the time. Of course views and beliefs can change throughout time. Will still check out your blogs.
Brendan
I think it was EY who said that the internet means that after a while, it's like going through life with your baby photos stapled to your forehead.
Brendan: You didn't offend me, you probably just picked up on some of my "revisitation weariness" when it comes to certain things.
outlawpoet: heh, yes, that analogy seems apt. The thing is, it's a lot more about people's attitudes than the Internet itself per se, as it's quite easy to check and see if a given interview/quote is current or not!
I can understand your situation, Anne. Ray Kurzweil has popularized my coinage of the word "singularitarian," even though I've become skeptical about the whole singularity business.
Interesting. I was just thinking I should *start* calling myself a transhumanist - a label I'm very wary of despite for example signing up for cryonics - because I found definitions that make sense to me. In particular, I'm attracted to the idea that it's not a set of beliefs as such, but a moral stance - it's not the assertion that we *can* move beyond what is standardly human, but that if it is possible, doing so - by extending life, by improving intelligence, and suchlike - is *morally laudable*. And that definition, perhaps best expressed in Yudkowsky's "Transhumanism as Simplified Humanism", is something I can get on board with.
ciphergoth: Argh, your comment pretty much typifies the kind of discussion-starter that makes me want to stay well away from identifying as a "transhumanist".
You wrote:
it's not the assertion that we *can* move beyond what is standardly human, but that if it is possible, doing so - by extending life, by improving intelligence, and suchlike - is *morally laudable*.
...in which I can perceive the distinction you're trying to make, but it still doesn't make sense to me. I just don't see what demands the existence of a whole self-congratulatory subculture about essentially saying "good things are good, bad things are bad, and humans should do interesting things rather than remain stagnant forever". That's just a statement of the obvious and I cannot fathom why or how any particular "group" would see themselves as justified in taking credit for such notions. The way I see it, humanity owes a lot more to, say, truly creative science fiction authors for inspiring interesting projects in real life than to any futurological sub-culture. Particularly a sub-culture in which half the time its "members" are arguing about what to call themselves and worrying about "PR".
What stirs my soul is the observation that Anne is 'enlightened' deduced from her understanding of her true nature of being. Once you realise and identify yourself as the universe - questions of form such as what is a transhumanist become as trivial as what shall I have for dinner. We are in an evolutional paradigm shift, we are the universe waking up. However understand that we are already an immortal energy conscious, we expand in space and time. On the nature of 'ego' how would you know you are 'alive' if you hadn't already been dead? Love yourself in a universal sense - we are one and we are amazing! Do yourself justice and help others to wake up.
the body known as Sam: Huh? I don't understand your comment but just for the record, my inability to respond properly to it does not imply endorsement or agreement with whatever it is you are trying to say.
I don't normally have such a talent for saying exactly the wrong thing - sorry about that! I agree that these notions are obvious and it's hard to imagine that anyone would think otherwise, but the thing is, people really do. Talk to people about life extension or intelligence enhancement, and people don't just doubt whether it's possible - they really do argue that it if it was, it wouldn't be a good idea! So when I call myself a transhumanist, I'm not trying to take credit for anything, I'm not saying I think all the other people who call themselves transhumanists are wonderful, and I don't think who is owed what is anything to do with it - I'm just making it clear that I believe something that a lot of people, perhaps even the majority of people don't believe, which is that death is bad.
ciphergoth: oh good grief. You are still saying the "wrong" thing, if you honestly believe thinking death is bad makes you (or anyone who identifies as "transhumanist") special and different. Not liking death is totally mainstream and unremarkable unless you happen to be exceedingly depressed. You have to look at what people DO, not what they say, and if you bother doing this at all, you will likely notice that the vast majority of people seek medical attention for life-threatening illnesses or injuries.
Hence, I maintain that one of the most pernicious aspects of "transhumanism" is the way (many, but not all) people identifying with that subculture seem to subscribe to this mythology that the whole reason death (or at least death in its present form, i.e., humans tending to die before age 120 if they aren't picked off by bad luck earlier) still exists is because not enough people are "opposed" to it. This is a very convenient myth for people who want to Change The World but don't want to work hard. To the extent that average human longevity actually does increase, it's going to have a lot to do with hard work and concrete research and precious little to do with yelling about how much you hate death, etc.
(And please, for the love of kittens and unicorns, do not respond to this by saying something like "...but hope and imagination such as that demonstrated by transhumanists are the only things that are going to motivate the hard work to be done!" Um no. H+ types do not own and cannot lay claim to hope and imagination, and when it comes to actually accomplishing things in the real world, scientific rigor and the capacity to give and receive useful criticism are every bit as important as impassioned yelling about how Bad Stuff Is Bad And Good Stuff is Good.)
In other words, I want to make it very clear that I enthusiastically support research into mitigating age-associated disease (and, by extension, the fatal aspects thereof). But this does not and should not bring to mind mythical notions of "immortality" or any form of existence where one does not have to confront and deal with finitude on a cognitive and/or emotional level. No matter how long any one of us ends up living, I think it's harmful to ever get to the point where you simply consider death so "unacceptable" that your perception of reality becomes skewed. IMO that mindset is far more likely to HINDER useful, real-world research than help it. In other words, denying death altogether is liable to hasten it, not make it go away!
Last night, I came home to find a piece of paper on the kitchen table with nothing but the words "Anne Corwin, Transhumanist" written on it. (This was taking place in Brisbane, Australia.) My flatmate, who is more into feng shui than futurism, had nonetheless watched Kaku's show and took note of your existence. Fortunately, having read this blog, I was able to explain the situation. :-)
Mitchell: Wow. Envisioning my name written on a scrap of paper in Australia is actually pretty surreal. But thanks for explaining things to your flatmate. I find it terribly ironic (if that's the right word to use here) that "futurism" so often insists on being stuck in the past!
Post a Comment