[agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies
Another indication that we need to take the public relations issue very seriously indeed: as time passes, this problem of the public attitude (and especially the religious attitude) to NBIC technologies will only become more extreme: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7767192.stm Richard Loosemore --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies
2008/12/8 Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Another indication that we need to take the public relations issue very > seriously indeed: as time passes, this problem of the public attitude (and > especially the religious attitude) to NBIC technologies will only become > more extreme: People who are highly religious tend to be very "past positive" according the Zimbardo classification of people according to their temporal orientation. For them the ideal formula for living has already been described by their favourite guru/prophet/leader, so anything significantly different from this formula (or their interpretation of it) is to be avoided or resisted. This doesn't just apply to nanotechnology, but any technology with the capacity to bring about social or environmental change. I agree that in time we will see more polarization around a variety of technology related issues. --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies
2008/12/8 Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > People who are highly religious tend to be very "past positive" > according the Zimbardo classification of people according to their > temporal orientation. [...] > I agree that in time we will see more polarization around a variety of > technology related issues. You're probably right. Part of the problem is that these people [correctly] believe that science and technology are destroying their worldview. And as the gaps in scientific knowledge decrease, there's less roo for the "God of the gaps" to occupy. Having said that, I'm not aware that nanotechnology or AI are specifically prohibited by any of the major religions. And if one society forgoes science, they'll just get outcompeted by their neighbours. -- Philip Hunt, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies
Everyone, The problem here is that WE don't have anything to point to as OUR religion, so that everyone else has the power of stupidity in general and the 1st amendment in particular, yet we don't have any such power. I believe that it is possible to fill in this gap, but I don't wish to discuss incomplete solutions on public forums. However, if you have any ideas just how OUR religion should be structured, then please feel free to send them to me, preferably off-line. It would be a real shame to do a bad job of this, so I'm keeping my detailed thoughts to myself pending a "live birth". Note Buddhism's belief structure that does NOT include a Deity. Note Islam's various provisions for unbelievers to get a free pass, and sometimes even break a rule here and there, so long as they pretend to believe. Any thoughts? Steve Richfield On 12/8/08, Philip Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2008/12/8 Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > People who are highly religious tend to be very "past positive" > > according the Zimbardo classification of people according to their > > temporal orientation. [...] > > I agree that in time we will see more polarization around a variety of > > technology related issues. > > You're probably right. Part of the problem is that these people > [correctly] believe that science and technology are destroying their > worldview. And as the gaps in scientific knowledge decrease, there's > less roo for the "God of the gaps" to occupy. > > Having said that, I'm not aware that nanotechnology or AI are > specifically prohibited by any of the major religions. And if one > society forgoes science, they'll just get outcompeted by their > neighbours. > > -- > Philip Hunt, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > > --- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies
>> The problem here is that WE don't have anything to point to as OUR religion Why not go with Unitarian Universalism? It's non-creedal (i.e. you don't have to believe in God -or- you can believe in any God ) and has a long history and already established community. Form the Unitarian Universalist Association website at http://www.uua.org Our Principles Principios en Espanol There are seven principles which Unitarian Universalist congregations affirm and promote: a.. The inherent worth and dignity of every person; b.. Justice, equity and compassion in human relations; c.. Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations; d.. A free and responsible search for truth and meaning; e.. The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large; f.. The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all; g.. Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part. Unitarian Universalism (UU) draws from many sources: a.. Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life; b.. Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love; c.. Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life; d.. Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves; e.. Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit. f.. Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature. These principles and sources of faith are the backbone of our religious community. - Original Message - From: Steve Richfield To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 8:14 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Religious attitudes to NBIC technologies Everyone, The problem here is that WE don't have anything to point to as OUR religion, so that everyone else has the power of stupidity in general and the 1st amendment in particular, yet we don't have any such power. I believe that it is possible to fill in this gap, but I don't wish to discuss incomplete solutions on public forums. However, if you have any ideas just how OUR religion should be structured, then please feel free to send them to me, preferably off-line. It would be a real shame to do a bad job of this, so I'm keeping my detailed thoughts to myself pending a "live birth". Note Buddhism's belief structure that does NOT include a Deity. Note Islam's various provisions for unbelievers to get a free pass, and sometimes even break a rule here and there, so long as they pretend to believe. Any thoughts? Steve Richfield On 12/8/08, Philip Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2008/12/8 Bob Mottram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > People who are highly religious tend to be very "past positive" > according the Zimbardo classification of people according to their > temporal orientation. [...] > I agree that in time we will see more polarization around a variety of > technology related issues. You're probably right. Part of the problem is that these people [correctly] believe that science and technology are destroying their worldview. And as the gaps in scientific knowledge decrease, there's less roo for the "God of the gaps" to occupy. Having said that, I'm not aware that nanotechnology or AI are specifically prohibited by any of the major religions. And if one society forgoes science, they'll just get outcompeted by their neighbours. -- Philip Hunt, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription --- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
