You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

knb comments on Charles Stross: Three arguments against the singularity - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: ciphergoth 22 June 2011 09:52AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (54)
Tags: stross singularity

Comments (54)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: knb 22 June 2011 11:06:41PM 1 point [-]

Gay marriage is actually a good example of the secular side winning, since gay marriage is spreading to more states and countries, and everyone thinks it will continue spreading in the future. That is in spite of the fact that their scriptures are totally opposed to homosexuality, whereas I don't believe brain uploading is mentioned.

Comment author: Dreaded_Anomaly 23 June 2011 04:11:58AM 2 points [-]

It's a good example that the secular side wins eventually, but it's not a good example of religious people not having problems with something. Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible, either.

Comment author: wedrifid 23 June 2011 04:19:37AM 3 points [-]

Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible, either.

Although God did allegedly slay someone for the act of spilling semen on the ground during sex rather than impregnating the mate. May be best to err on the side of caution!

Comment author: knb 23 June 2011 04:24:12AM 0 points [-]

The secular side only has to win "eventually" in order for it to argue against Stross' point. In any case, even in the case of abortion, which triggers powerful disgust reflexes, there isn't anything like a holy war against abortion, let alone a holy war with a good chance of succeeding everywhere in the world.

Comment author: Dreaded_Anomaly 23 June 2011 04:29:39AM -1 points [-]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence

I do agree that the "holy war to end holy wars" phrase was hyperbolic, but it's also hyperbolic to expect no objection from religious people. When Stross first addresses the issue, he says:

However, if it becomes plausible in the near future we can expect extensive theological arguments over it. If you thought the abortion debate was heated, wait until you have people trying to become immortal via the wire. Uploading implicitly refutes the doctrine of the existence of an immortal soul, and therefore presents a raw rebuttal to those religious doctrines that believe in a life after death. People who believe in an afterlife will go to the mattresses to maintain a belief system that tells them their dead loved ones are in heaven rather than rotting in the ground.

That's not an extreme conclusion. It's only in the "in summary" section at the end that the rhetoric really picks up.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit