A major component of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine’s Human Gene-Editing Initiative is an international summit to take place December 1-3 in Washington, D.C. Co-hosted with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the U.K.’s Royal Society,...
Nature magazine recently ran a “point-counterpoint” entitled “Does evolutionary theory need a rethink?”
“The spiritual things — the exotic phenomena people experience — in general violate the things we know to be correct on the basis of experiment, so they’re highly likely to be wrong,”
David Benatar is professor of philosophy best known for his advocacy of anti-natalism.
Richard Dawkins is wrong. He wants us to stop whining about our deaths; to stop fearing our ultimate demise, because we are lucky to be alive.
The brain is the engine of reason and the seat of the soul. It is the substrate in which our minds reside. The problem is that this substrate is prone to decay.
License to thrill? Zoltan Istvan thinks you should need a license to procreate.
Kevin has provided a typically engaging gloss on the difference between posthumanism and transhumanism over at the IEET site. I don’t fundamentally disagree with his account of transhumanism (though I think he needs to emphasize its fundamentally normative character) but the account of posthumanism he gives here has some shortcomings.
A well known and atheist-minded Transhumanist, Zoltan Istvan blames religion for an anti-cryonics law in Canada.
I always appreciate the opportunity to learn from your comments, the more so when I have ventured outside my expertise. I was particularly excited to receive extended comments from Gary Hurd with references that were new to me and a pointer to one of my favorite biological free-thinkers, Carl Woese. This is a brief response to Gary, with some expanded thoughts and clarifications.