IEET > Rights > HealthLongevity > Vision > Directors > Giulio Prisco > FreeThought > Futurism > Technoprogressivism > Innovation
The End Is Not The End

During our conversation we cover a wide variety of topics such as: how Giulio got interested in transhumanism and the singularity; the inspirational role of science fiction in general and Arthur C. Clarke in particular; the many definitions of the technological singularity; transhumanism and why he is a singularitiarian who doesn’t believe in the singularity; happiness as the ultimate motivation; religion, spirituality, unreligion and science; the Order of Cosmic Engineers; The Turing Church; hope and resurrecting the dead.

My favorite quote that I will take away from this interview with Giulio Prisco is:

“The end is not the end. Future science and technology may be able to resurrect us.”

If this is so and if the public could be widely informed of such, they might v. well accept transhumanism: because of the several hundred people I mentioned transhumanism to since 1989, approx. 95- 99 percent replied or alluded they would not want to be 'immortalists' (for lack of a better designation, it was the title of a book written 45 yrs. ago) without loved ones accompanying them.
Problem is, how do we get to the public? Hire blimps with giant messages on them reading "Resurrect Your Loved Ones Someday"?
"Science must never be religious." I suggest that science most certainly is a religion, a true religion, and its foundational assumptions are embodied in mathematical logic. That's real science.

But we suffer from "legacy science" which assumes the primacy of observation by our electromagnetically mediated senses, among may other epistemological irrationalities. This is why science appears to be perpetually changing in its "doctrine" which is just confusion. The logic is not wrong, but the methods are invariably approximate and incomplete, even if apparently accurate at some particular time.

The "legacy religions" (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, you name it) are, of course, either based entirely on myth and superstition, or, if they happen to have captured a worthwhile idea, have long gone out of their way to obscure and suppress it for their followers with lots of myth and superstition because real spiritual truth is liberating and the doctrines of legacy religions are enslaving. It is no wonder that most modern thinkers find little of value, if anything, in this morass of nonsense.

I suggest that the dismissal of legacy religion is entirely appropriate, providing it is replaced by a serious rationality that is not automatically dismissive of the non-electromagnetic domains of human experience.

I also suggest that the dismissal of certain fundamental concepts of vitological (spiritual) thought by "nominal atheists" is irrational, since there is ample evidence, easily accessed and reproduced, for phenomenal relationships that are not subject to simple collective electromagnetic observation.

What are some superstitions of legacy science? Here are a few my nominations:
Occam's Razor
Linearity of Causation
Two-valued logic
Continuity of space-time
Need I go on? Of course, to seriously bash these ideas takes a lot of discussion to understand what we are actually talking about in each case, which is why I called them "nominations". Your mileage may vary.
@Intomorrow re "how do we get to the public?"

Yes, this is the main issue. I think we can do better than blimps with giant messages on them reading "Resurrect Your Loved Ones Someday" (though, now that I think of that...)

The idea that our descendants may develop future "magic" technologies to build/become Gods and resurrect the dead from the past is so powerful that, once you fully grasp it, it makes instant peace between the scientific and spiritual parts of your personality and fills you with optimism, hope for the future and positive visions. See and my provious articles here, most related.

As you say, If this is so and if the public could be widely informed of such, they might v. well accept transhumanism. I will not say that "this is so," because it is a hope and not a certainty. It is, however, a scientifically plausible hope, and a project: _we_ will have to do this. Dan thinks others in the universe may already be resurrecting the dead all over the cosmos, which may well be the case, but I think we should also do our part and join the community of Gods when we are ready.

I am writing a book "Tales of the Turing Church." I have a lot of material already written, but I want to condense it in a small book of a couple of hundreds pages, the sort of book that you can read cover to cover in the commute train.

But I don't have what it takes to bootstrap a spiritual movement. If somebody wants to help, please get in touch.

@Dan re legacy science and legacy religion.

Yes, the staying power of old things is always the biggest barrier to the emergence of new things. I suggest that _both_ legacy science and legacy religion have captured worthwhile ideas and will continue to. So, perhaps legacy science and religion should undergo an evolution, or if you prefer a revolution, and embrace Cosmism.
YOUR COMMENT Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: How to Accomplish High Goals

Previous entry: Top 10 Reasons We Should Fear The Singularity