I quite sure that nowhere in my remarks did I say that I oppose
immortality. I was largely speaking about the effect of the "idea" of
mortality upon human society. It is not so much the actual dying itself
that I feel is the issue but rather recognizing that it is inevitable. Life
begets death, it always has and always will. If you ate anything today you
brought death into your body to continue your own life. Regarding you own
position, it's clear that you do not tolerate anyone who doesn't accept it,
reducing it to us against them. Is this lack of dialogue fundamental to
transhumanism? In reviewing the Transhuman Principles 1.0a from your
reference refer you #3, Memetic Propagation, it states:
Support the proliferation of transhumanist principles and goals,
consciously setting an example that others may follow or
promoting the principles of transhumanism directly. Spread awareness of
the dangers of technophobia, coercion, anti-humanism and other destructive
ideologies.
Your reply suggest an even greater contridiction regarding principle #5,
which refers to Diversity, it states:
Promote human efforts to grow and adapt to an ever-changing universe.
Tolerate people of all schools of thought that do not seek to limit the
extent or variety of your achievement. Discourage any attempts to impose
will or ideas through coercion.
Perhaps you were in a bad mood when you read my post, or perhaps too tired
to fully engage my comments. In any event you have certainly not put out
the welcome mat for anyone to join your discussion list that is not in
agreement with you. I remain forever mortal.
-- Bill Godby wgodby@tir.com