Subscribe: Max More's Strategic Philosophy
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
energy  hot stove  human  interested reading  life  long  max  paul  risk  stove won  stove  transhuman  understand  warming  won sit 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Max More's Strategic Philosophy

Max More's Strategic Philosophy

Updated: 2018-02-05T11:38:31.683-06:00





Thanks for taking this on, Max.


Thanks for taking this on, Max.

SwissWiss, I don't understand why you state th...


SwissWiss, I don't understand why you state that we do nothing to bring about our birth or death. Birth is caused directly by actions (and inactions) on the part of parents. Death is made sooner or later by presence or absence of medical treatment and safety.

If you are talking about individuals having no direct control of their own birth, that strikes me as irrelevant to an argument about whether humanity as a whole can develop technologies to delay death. It's not primarily a self-centered matter of extending one's own life, but of delaying the statistical incidence of death by enhancing medical technology.

Wow! We (husband Paul Wakfer, friend David Jackeme...


Wow! We (husband Paul Wakfer, friend David Jackemeyer and I) were just talking about you. I looked up what you were doing these days since you had terminated the Extropy Institute. I checked your blog; surprise is an understatement at what I saw for today's entry and then read to the two of them.

Since I and Paul have been signed with Alcor since Dec 2005 - after our individual experiences with CryoCare in the 90s - we are pleased to see you take on the job as CEO. We are not pleased with Alcor's use of funds these past years and had been seriously debating (almost decided) not to pay our dues this year, increased now and to be again next year. But we will likely now go ahead and pay again to see how things work out next year with this major change of leadership.

So welcome aboard, Max. We hope that you will succeed at making Alcor an at least more financially sound and cost-effective organization at promoting cryonics and processing cryopreservations. Paul says:
"Don't take orders from the board which tends to want to micro-manage everything. However, from my memory you are a person who can resist this. If there is anything I can do to help, let me know."
Note that we are in Casa Grande AZ (just 50 miles from Alcor) from November to April inclusive and the other 6 months at Paul's legal residence in Ontario Canada.

On gene-spliced crops - I do not know enough about...


On gene-spliced crops - I do not know enough about the nutritional value or dangers of these crops to comment intelligently; my concern is related to property rights. As patent law is currently interpreted, I can be held liable for violating the rights of the owner of the patent for a crop, even if I never planted the patented crop and had no desire to incorporate its genes into my own line. Farmers who have saved their own seed for decades are now unable to do so without the risk of lawsuits, because pollen from neighboring fields has contaminated all the crops within the distance the wind can blow the pollen.

On Type I errors vs Type II - I've observed th...


On Type I errors vs Type II - I've observed that managers in large organizations, both public and privately held, tend more to make Type II errors, mainly for the reason you stated, that the consequences of a Type I error are more likely to be noticed by other people. Entrepreneurs working on their own or as part of small organizations are far more willing to take risks that could result in obvious failure. As long as an economy is dominated by large organizations, there will be fewer innovations, with the possible exception of military research.

Thanks for taking the effort to understand. The &q...


Thanks for taking the effort to understand. The "incoherent" idea that Jef complains about reveals how easy it is to overlook the obvious--namely, we do nothing to bring about our birth. And regardless of developments in life extension technology, we do nothing to leave life (although we have a lot of control over how critical bodily functions are terminated). Thus, the mystery of human existence is an empirical data point that rationalists tend not to address. The irrationality of rationalism is a theme explored by G.K. Chesterton--a Catholic friend of H.G. Wells and George Bernard Shaw, a rationalist and sceptic respectively. Chesterton is well worth reading--and rereading--for those who wish to understand.

I've led myself to believe the GOP would be ou...


I've led myself to believe the GOP would be our best chance to get to where we want go,, but the reaction to the Tea Partys Fiscal View's seem to be shrill within the Elite Party Structure of the Gop. Seemingly another Facet of the Reactionary Lefts opposite reaction sans the Saul Alinsky character assaination,, with the exception of Karl Rove. Even Charles Krauthammer seems to be pulling in that direction (Reactionary) Thoughtless ?
When can we expect Center Right Libertarians to run for office ?
After three big Votes for change,,
No Change. Who should we hitch our wagon to in 2012 ?

true! but humans tend to see only by their chemica...


true! but humans tend to see only by their chemical hormonal influences. It takes an enlightened veiw to see that we are not the center of the universe and there are systems that are influential in our lives that are guided by energy rather than that which guides us, chemistry. Talk to a spider. If it answers you then you will begin to understand. Its your energy it responds to. plants, clouds, everything that has energy responds to energy. you exist in a universe that lives. it is your presumptions that stop you from ever communicating with us.

A cat that sits on a hot stove won't ever sit ...


A cat that sits on a hot stove won't ever sit on a hot stove again; but it won't ever sit on a cold stove again either.

Risk assessment is very difficult, and endangered by emotions, so naturally people are generally bad at it. I would think the tendency to take risk is as genetic and environmental than it is rational and reality based when weighing risk vs. benefit.

I have been thinking of us as systems and as such ...


I have been thinking of us as systems and as such this means we are energy in different forms with connections to many other systems where energy is exchanged in many forms. You have pointed out that there are certain rules that guide this transfer of energy. How these energies are focused and distorted affects all exchanges. Creating algorithms which map visually these connections would be very valuable in creating honest understanding of situations like risk assessment.

It is an interesting topic. I once made a video a...


It is an interesting topic. I once made a video about it.

Just stumbled across this and thought it interesti...


Just stumbled across this and thought it interesting. On the note of immortality and not wishing it for the human race I point to the elves in Lord of the Rings. Like the Doctor, they are doomed to be immortal. There is a lot of pain and suffering in living so long. The Doctor and the elves both have seen and been part of much bloodshed, have seen races created and destroyed, have seen many ages pass, etc. Though the Doctor shows a lot of mercy and protects humans through his actions, he is perhaps showing the most mercy and giving the most protection to the human race through his inaction.




Nice Post~!!!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....


Nice Post~!!!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hi. I`m linking this article to my tumblelog which...


Hi. I`m linking this article to my tumblelog which is a career study for my Personal Orientation Project class. It`s on bioethics.

Just curious do you know of Photoreading?

So a curious, continuous spectrum of transhuman ty...


So a curious, continuous spectrum of transhuman types evolves. A population varying through the seven transmogrifications of your constitutional amendments - some more transhuman than others.

Who selects those who will be transmogrified - i.e. who is God?

When can a human be considered to have become a transhuman? At what stage through the transmogrification sequence does the transhuman status kick in?

What will be the role, or status of non-transhumans, particularly humans, in this new society?

Undoubtedly it would be folly to dismiss any of the changes as being impossible - but your scheme would create a bizarrely heterogeneous population during the evolution of these changes.


Max King

anon: Yes, I'd be interested in reading it, if...


anon: Yes, I'd be interested in reading it, if it addresses the topic. I didn't get the sense that it did from this description:

There is a very wonderful and difficult to obtain ...


There is a very wonderful and difficult to obtain essay by the late great Isaac Asimov, "Farewell to Youth",that addresses the supposed problem of boredom during an extended life. I have this, if you are interested in reading it.

I'm impressed. This is the first forum I'v...


I'm impressed. This is the first forum I've seen that includes people from different sides of the issue, and yet has rational dialog.

I've done a bit of research, and the most relevant thing I've seen is the ice-core data, which shows we are in relatively cool period historically. It also shows that an ice age is long overdue. Even before the industrial age, this was already the longest inter-glacial period on record.

The IPCC models are the least persuasive thing I've seen. The models begin with the assumption that warming is a problem and that Co2 is the cause. The models do not include an adequate treatment of clouds, which makes them rather irrelevant. After all, water vapor is by far the most important greenhouse gas, and reflection from clouds can trump all greenhouse gases.


Jim: What bothers me about your comment is that it...


Jim: What bothers me about your comment is that it seems to contribute to the persistent and insistent polarization on this issue. You make it sound like there are only two positions. (It's as if you didn't read my post that you're commenting on...)

The "skeptics" are not a single position. There are extreme skeptics who reject the idea that there has been any warming over the past century or so. I completely agree that this position seems completely unsustainable. There are those who question exactly how much warming there has been. This seems somewhat plausible around the edges, but too much time (in my view) is being wasted on minor points here when the trend and magnitude seem pretty well established. There are those who argue that we have no reason to believe that any of the warming anthropogenic. Then there are those who question the extent to which the warming is human-related. This seems perfectly reasonable to me at this point. The models simply are not reliable enough to demonstrate with any confidence the degree to which warming is anthropogenic in origin. Then there is a distinct discussion about the reliability of long-term projections. This is one that especially interests me. I think the "standard view" is weakest here -- and the views of alarmists like Gore are especially doubtful. The final issue, distinct from some of the others, is that of what actions to take. It's crucial to distinguish between these.