Future X

by rsbakker

Definition of the Day I – Human: A biological system connecting the dinner plate to the shitter. 

Definition of the Day II – Writer: A biological system convinced that it does more than simply connect the dinner plate to the shitter. See, Flatulance.

Quite the dialogue we’ve had going the past several days. For my part, I’ve pared back my commitment to Argument (1) from the previous post. I really don’t think anyone has seriously challenged Argument (2) regarding identity, which, I think anyway, is the core of the dilemma facing us.

Since all our rationales turn on our neurophysiology as it exists, I just don’t see how anyone can argue that it would be ‘better’ to leave our neurophysiology behind. If what we call ‘morality’ is a product of our neurophysiology, then abandoning that neurophysiology entails abandoning that morality. How can it be ‘better’ to leave BETTER behind?

This just underscores the real problem faced by the technological enthusiast: they really don’t know what they’re arguing for… Why should anyone embrace some Future X, especially when all we know for certain is that we will cease to exist? Because there’s a good chance the incomprehensible aliens that follow us will be ‘more intelligent’ (whatever that means, post UNNF (universal natural neurophysiological frame))?

Why should anyone give a damn about them?

Anyway, here are the links to a couple of more or less apropo pieces I wrote for Tor.com a couple years back. (Thanks Bhaal!)

A Fact More Indigestible than Evolution I

A Fact More Indigestible than Evolution II