Abstract: If God is morally perfect then He must perform the morally best actions, but creating humans is not the morally best action. If this line of reasoning can be maintained then the mere fact that humans exist contradicts the claim that God exists. This is the “anthropic argument.” The anthropic argument is related to, but distinct from, the traditional argument from evil. The anthropic argument forces us to consider the ‘creation question’: why did God not create other gods rather than humans? That is, if God is omniscient, omnipotent, and morally perfect then why didn’t He create a world populated exclusively by beings that are perfect in the same way that He is—ontological equivalents—rather than choosing to create humans with finite natures and all the suffering that this entails?
...
Complete entry
Posted by
artvladi on 06/08 at 05:27 AM
What if post-humans developed a time travel technology and tried to save the lives of the loved ones who died before the singularity? Obviously they would not want to interfere with the history, so they would be here silently only to make copies of the brains. If this was true, it is highly probable that those who they choose to revive would satisfy the same criteria mentioned in the scriptures. Would they want to revive murderers? Would they want to revive someone who killed himself? To make the future society system more stable, they would only choose someone who wants to live eternally and whose system of values is primarily oriented toward immortality and love as a force opposed to the death and destruction. Interestingly, the same philosophical concept of love to a parent being an objective realty force that saves a man from death is discussed in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Andes-Days-Mountain-Long/dp/1400097673
I like the transhumanist culture because their system of values evolves toward the concept of immortality, they are opposed to anything that can destroy it.
IEET Blog