Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Radio Free Ashley

There has been tremendous interest in the media about Ashley and the decision by her parents to keep her small. Here is a radio interview I did today on The Eagle, KSSZ from Columbia, MO. The host is Derek Gilbert.

3 Comments:

At January 11, 2007 , Blogger Simon Young said...

from Simon Young
Founder
www.worldtranshumanistsociety.com

I welcome Wesley’s earlier link to the so-called ‘Institute of Ethics and Emerging Technologies’ website, and urge everyone to have a closer look, specifically, at the following statement by one of it's Board of Directors, George Dvorsky:

"If the concern has something to do with the girl’s dignity being violated, then I have to protest by arguing that the girl lacks the cognitive capacity to experience any sense of indignity."

Am I missing something? Is it just me? Or is that not just about the coldest, vilest, most ignorant and irresponsible statement you’ve ever read? Imagine, for instance, if the author was writing about black or Jewish people, instead of the mentally disabled.

This group, the IEET, is an offshoot of the World Transhumanist Association created by its Secretary James Hughes as a platform for his beliefs. These include planting ‘morality chips’ in our brains to ensure good behavior, and genetically engineering the brains of apes, dolphins, and elephants so they can speak.

I founded an opposing group, the World Transhumanist Society, specifically to counter the lunatic extremism of the WTA and IEET. We stand simply for the belief in using medical science to prevent/cure disease/disability and allow individuals to improve their minds and bodies if they choose. We oppose experimenting on ‘spare’ embryos created in the attempt to have a baby, and propose that no one has the right to medically prevent a child from growing physically into a woman if her life is not at stake, irrespective of her ‘cognitive capacities.’

Although Wesley and I will never agree on whether we should seek to improve ourselves through medical technology or accept ourselves as we are, I feel strongly that it’s important to recognise that there’s a big difference between transhumanists such as myself/the WTS who simply believe in using medical technology to help us be the best we can be as human beings, and the WTA/IEET project, which is based on a fantasy world of half men half beasts, talking elephants, winged humans and robot rights – in fact, almost anything except for human beings, which they seem to loathe (hence their favorite term ‘human racism’ – they're against prejudice in favor of humans).

Or is it themselves they secretly loathe?

 
At January 11, 2007 , Blogger Lydia McGrew said...

As noted in the comments to an earlier thread, many of Dvorsky's comments were highly objectionable, not to mention outrageous. Notable about this particular nasty one you quote is the idea that human dignity is not intrinsic to the individual but is present only if the human is capable of a subjective "sense" of indignity.

 
At January 11, 2007 , Blogger Wesley J. Smith said...

Hi, Simon. You are always welcome here.

Dvorasky never "disappoints," does he?

I am not against using technology to make human life better. I wear glasses, for example. Laser surgery, which I am not interested in, might make it so I don't need glasses.

What I oppose is striving to change who we are as a species at a biological level. We haven't the wisdom or ability, and mistakes will be made.

But we agree, I think the Dvorsky transhumanist school is misanthropic.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home