• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Ray Kurzweil has me confused


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 advancedatheist

  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 17 September 2005 - 09:55 PM


The Sept. 2005 issue of Life Extension magazine has an article about Ray Kurzweil and his project to live forever, titled "On Building Bridges to Immortality." You can find it on the Web (requires Adobe) here and here.

Now, in a box about Kurzweil's "Core Principles" (you have to scroll down to find it), Kurzweil recommends,

Follow a detoxification program to avoid environmental toxins and heavy metals.This means eating organic foods, drinking filtered water, and avoiding overexposure to electromagnetic pollution by minimizing the use of computer monitors, hair dryers, electric shavers, and other highpowered electric devices.


This reminded me of my observation about the paradox (or hypocrisy?) of libertarians who buy organic produce for themselves to reduce their pesticide exposure, even though their explicit belief system requires them to defend if not promote unrestricted pesticide use in general. (I don't have to make this up. See here and here and here and here}. Kurzweil's plan sounds like it could have come from a New-Agey neo-Luddite advocate of alternative medicine, like you'd hear on a left-wing Pacifica radio station.

Given Kurzweil's framing of his life-extension plan as a way to take advantage of foreseeable "progress," I have to ask how he can think that future additions to our material culture won't pose risks to his personal health that he'd find unacceptable. If Kurzweil fears industrial pollution, electrical appliances and pesticides, he has already repudiated a great deal of the 20th Century's technological legacy.

For example, how does he know that the full-immersion Matrix he wants to plug into won't do something to interfere with his prospects for longevity? I have the strong suspicion that both his Fantastic Voyage book and the forthcoming one about the Singularity incorporate some seriously flawed thinking about science and survival issues.

#2 justinb

  • Guest
  • 726 posts
  • 0
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 17 September 2005 - 10:39 PM

If we are apart of the matrix how can electromagnetic radiation effect our non-organic bodies?

#3 wraith

  • Guest
  • 182 posts
  • 0

Posted 17 September 2005 - 10:54 PM

Well, Mark, you seem to have an eye for irony (I think that's what this represents).

Perhaps one could say that our use of techology is like a child learning to draw. First attempts are crude and don't turn out exactly as intended. Newer technology might be better and safer. I don't like pesticides much as they are now, but I can see a future where safe, targeted and effective insect control technologies could be used without harming anything but the intended pest species. Well, let's hope, anyway...

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 emerson

  • Guest
  • 332 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Lansing, MI, USA

Posted 18 September 2005 - 12:46 PM

This reminded me of my observation about the paradox (or hypocrisy?) of libertarians who buy organic produce for themselves to reduce their pesticide exposure, even though their explicit belief system requires them to defend if not promote unrestricted pesticide use in general.


How is that ironic? My belief system requires me to defend free speech of all forms, but it doesn't mean I'm going to participate in hate speech even if I defend their right to do so. They believe companies should be able to churn out what some feel might be slightly dangerous food, doesn't mean they can't vote with their wallet for those who don't.

#5 wraith

  • Guest
  • 182 posts
  • 0

Posted 18 September 2005 - 02:37 PM

A pure liberatian wants no government imposed environmental regulations whatsoever. The act of buying organic produce indicates that the libertaian recognizes the health dangers of pesticide exposure. They recognize the danger, but want no protection for the public at large (or even themselves, since exposure is not limited to the foods we eat). This isn't a case of irnoy, as I understand the definition - a paradox maybe? I'm not sure what you'd call it (Sort of like the observations in Alanis Morrisette's Ironic). But I see the point Mark is making, and I agree with him that pure libertarianism is untenable.

The Ray Kurzweil thing *is* a true case of irony, and I think Mark's topic heading for this thread might be a case of Socratic irony.

#6 icyT

  • Guest
  • 326 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Canada
  • NO

Posted 18 September 2005 - 10:46 PM

Give up the computer, yeah right. He'd like that. They'll come out with safer computers eventually then I'll buy one.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users