Talk:Transhumanism/Archive 2

message: Might this longish entry be better presented as a series of pages?
JasonS 03:34 Jan 13, 2003 (UTC)
::absolutely yes, its way too long as it is, and it is very biased. 
Dnagod 20:56, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Split long article

message: In the interest of ensuring transhuman is NPOV: Who decides what the definition of transhumanism is? 
:Every philosophy and discipline has a "father" who defines its principles. If these principles are widely accepted by his peers and the public at large over time, they become authoritative but not absolute. 
This element of humanism, is that from huxley or someone else? 
:Max More.
Does the man who invented the word, Julian Huxley decide the definition of Transhumanism, does one in modern times who publically states the definition decide or does the World Transhumanism Association decide? 
:See my previous answers. More's definition simply won out.
I would like clarity as to who ultimately determines what transhumanism means because the definition used by the WTA and other groups differs. More importantly, what gives one authority or the command to be able to define in an undisputed what transhumanism is, so that other POV's can be excluded?
:See my previous answers. 
For instance I have reviewed the entire transtopia.org, prometheism.net and cosmotheism.net site, and I can't seem to figure out how you could label it as disputed in the links section?
:They are labeled disputed because there is a dispute within the transhumanist community and on wikipedia about whether transtopianism, promotheism and cosmotheism are legitimate forms or offshots of transhumanism. The reason for this dispute is because these ideologies hold views that are imcompatible with the humanistic and scientific roots of transhumanism.
What is to say the world transhumanism association isnt disputed? 
:Even if it was, that's not the issue since the WTA and the Extropy Institute are not by themselves authorities on the definition of transhumanism as much as they are organizations representative of modern transhumanism.
I can see how one might label cosmotheism as white racial separatist, but prometheism.net and transtopia.org I would like more discussion as to why it is disputed as a transhumanism group. And why is Cosmotheism a disputed offshoot? Cosmotheism was developed in the 1960's and 1970's which came before extropy and WTA, so why is it an offshoot? I thought offshoot meant, that something existed and a branch or seed came off that plant. Can you please define offshoot and explain who decides what is or is not transhumanism?
:You are absolutely correct about cosmotheism not being an offshoot of transhumanism. I will remove any mention of it from the article. As for the issue of dispute, see my previous anwers.
More on this humanism element of Transhumanism, is that from huxley or someone else? Thanks.
:See my previous answers. You can also read the writings of Max More for more information. Loremaster 21:58, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: Why does the link to cosmotheism keep getting deleted? Just because that article had a banned user associated w it doesn't make it any less relevent. Sam [Spade] 20:56, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Spade, I don't mean to be offensive but stop playing dumb! The link keeps getting removed not because the article was associated to a banned user, who may or may not be a good acquaintance or even friend of yours. As I have said before, the issue is one of accuracy. Strictly speaking, cosmotheism is a form of classical pantheism that identifies God with the cosmos, that is, with the universe as a unified whole. Transhumanism is a form of modern humanism that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally improving the human condition through applied reason, especially by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. According to these basic definitions that we all accept, the two concepts are obviously NOT related and of no relevance to each other. Bottom line: I am the one who keeps removing the mention of "cosmotheism" from the Article and will keep doing so every single day if necessary. Loremaster 23:19, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Your attitude in this statement is generally is anti-wiki, and specifically you make a Faulty generalization, assuming that the classic definition of Cosmotheism is the one we are discussing, when in truth the relevant variety is William L. Pierce's Cosmotheism. Sam [Spade] 23:40, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have explained myself in your talk page so I won't bother repeating myself. However, while not related to secular transhumanism, I will grant you that William L. Pierce's cosmotheism is arguably related to Christian transhumanism and eugenics so I have moved your link to those pages. I hope this finally ends this dispute once and for all. Loremaster 18:17, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Cosmotheism has nothing to do w Christianity. Have you researched this? I have noticed a positive correlation between arrogance and ignorance in my life. Sam [Spade] 03:44, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said that cosmotheism has something to do with Christianity. However, the similarities between cosmotheism and Christian Transhumanism are obvious since both are millinarian religions. As I said many months ago, I have researched this topic and I have visited those dubious websites linked to below. This is why I am again removing any reference to Cosmotheism from the Transhumanism article for reasons I have already explained in the past and for the following one as well: Cosmotheism, transtopianism and prometheism hold views that are incompatible with transhumanism. Lastly, I am disappointed that you would resort to a personal attack, however underhanded it may be, after you lectured me about anti-wiki behavior... Loremaster 00:34, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Loremaster you are wrong, biased, unfair and have a personal agenda which goes against the very principles of wikipedia and neutrality. Let me break some reality to you. The man who invented the word transhuman - Julian Huxley, was an avid, open, public and published supporter of state sponsored coercive eugenics, selective breeding communities. So when people try to hijack his term and say it means something else, it is not only ignorance, arrogance and foolishness - its an outright LIE. If anything the WTA is NOT a transhuman organization because they are against eugenics. If Julian Huxley where alive today, he would wonder why these groups hijacked his terms and made it into something it is not. Transhumanism includes eugenics, to say otherwise is a LIE. This doesnt mean transhumanism is only eugenics, it is saying that eugenics is a subset or part of the transhuman philosophy, which is attaining higher states of physical and mental being. Eugenics might be a slow method, but none the less it is still valid. To say other wise is patently false and a lie. Stop trying to hijack transhumanism for your own agenda. NO one, absolutely no one has the final say on what transhumanism is or is not and all points of view regarding transhumanism. the WTA does not now or will ever have the final say on what transhumanism is and the web sites prometheism, cosmotheism and transtopia.org are relevant, valid and important web sites that belong perminently listed in transhumanism. In fact I dare say that transtopianism (transopia) is a much more highly evolved and thoughtout meme set than WTA, but that is just my personal opin. Prometheism, Cosmotheism and Transtopianism are all clearly transhuman philosophies and I would appreciate it if you kept your personal biases OUT of ruining wikipedias neutrality, fairness and POV support. Dnagod 17:59, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue of whether or not prometheism, cosmotheism and transtopianism are legitimate forms of transhumanism has already been debated ad nauseum and a consensual conclusion was reach to end this dispute a long time ago. Therefore, I will not repeat myself except to say that this article is about apolitcial and secular transhumanism. You are more than welcomed to create new articles for these fringe philosophies and groups. Loremaster 21:16, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Although cosmotheism was conceived of and created by Dr. William Pierce in the 1960's and early 1970's it was still created after the term "transhumanism" was created and therefore is valid to be linked to in the disputed links section. Even though cosmotheism would most likely not be disputed by the creator of the word transhumanism, as Julian Huxley was a Eugenicist. I fail to see how even with transhumanism redefined that cosmotheism would be disputed or even worthy of being deleted, it seems you might be playing a personal agenda here loremaster by deleting this link. Dariodario 13:39, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cosmotheism dispute revisited 

message: I'd like to incorporate a mention of the Human Cognome Project into this article, as it is relevent to human brain augmentation and AI research. Any suggestions? -- Dave User:Sydhart
:I've added it to the Transhumanism and technology section. Loremaster 21:38, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Cognome Project