Would teaching that Asimov made those predictions be too religious in your view?No, that is a fact that can be confirmed.
Ok. So why isn't the fact that serious philosophers like David Chalmers find uploading plausible not something that can be taught in public schools?
I think that Asimov was in a position to know something about space travel so therefore I am in favor of educating people about whatever he said (unless he said something completely crazy).
The standard of what constitutes a religion for purposes of First Amendment issues is complicated and subject to dispute, but no legal scholar thinks that "I think he was correct" is a reason to include a religious statement in school. The correctness of a religion cannot be correct. (Incidentally, according to the Asimov essay we should have had a colony on Mars about 20 years ago and should be preparing our mission to Pluto.)
Strong AI would get me laughed out of court by itself (probably). Uploading however could be made into a decent case.
Really? I'm curious as to how you would present such a case.
Even stronger then someone that did not believe in the specifics of transhumanism would be someone that did believe in transhumanism attempting to gain the status of a religion. That would in my opinion get through the courts without any difficulties.
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you expand?
we should have had a colony on Mars about 20 years ago and should be preparing our mission to Pluto.
That was the plan, Apollo was supposed to be a sustained and expanding program with nuclear rockets following shortly after. Instead we got the space shuttle and billions spent on programs that go nowhere with any cheap or good technology getting discarded or sold as implementing it would cause unemployment in certain key congressional districts.
...serious philosophers like David Chalmers find uploading plausible not something that can be taught in publi