The transhumanist view of human fungibility is reminiscent of Heideggers critique of technology—of the process of enframing—where we come to see everything as resources—and that ends finally with humans themselves becoming part of the standing reserve
I learned the Christian perspective on life throughout my early life until I was not much younger than you are now and it's very deep within me. I went to Bible college for a year. I understand the Christian perspective on the immutable soul and why it means they will never be pro-choice and why they will struggle with IVF. A lot of us on the transhumanist side had a similar background and benefit from the perspective.
What I don't understand is why anyone would hold on to the idea of the immutable soul and such an uncompromisingly platonic view of the world amongst the trad right when they are not really all that Christian. There is a lot that is appealing in Christianity to me over the progressive zeitgeist: genuine pro-natalism, pro-family, pro-growth, the balance of individual rights and responsibilities and a hatred toward degeneracy. But holding on to a fundamentalist view of the soul as an individual, nonfungible platonic entity--that really is a bit alien to me. I'd be curious if you have insight into its continued appeal.
Does it have more appeal beyond the Christian right than I thought? Or is the trad right more Christian than I thought?
To my knowledge it seems to have purchase among conservatives of most majority religions, i.e. Hindus in India, Orthodox in Russia, or historical Jews and Pagans. Certainly the promise of an individual life path (providence / destiny) helps people not to succumb to tragedy or monotony.
The specific expression of the platonic soul - concern for embryos and genetic modifications - might be more Christian and more American, but the general concern is much more widespread.
The transhumanist view of human fungibility is reminiscent of Heideggers critique of technology—of the process of enframing—where we come to see everything as resources—and that ends finally with humans themselves becoming part of the standing reserve
I learned the Christian perspective on life throughout my early life until I was not much younger than you are now and it's very deep within me. I went to Bible college for a year. I understand the Christian perspective on the immutable soul and why it means they will never be pro-choice and why they will struggle with IVF. A lot of us on the transhumanist side had a similar background and benefit from the perspective.
What I don't understand is why anyone would hold on to the idea of the immutable soul and such an uncompromisingly platonic view of the world amongst the trad right when they are not really all that Christian. There is a lot that is appealing in Christianity to me over the progressive zeitgeist: genuine pro-natalism, pro-family, pro-growth, the balance of individual rights and responsibilities and a hatred toward degeneracy. But holding on to a fundamentalist view of the soul as an individual, nonfungible platonic entity--that really is a bit alien to me. I'd be curious if you have insight into its continued appeal.
Does it have more appeal beyond the Christian right than I thought? Or is the trad right more Christian than I thought?
To my knowledge it seems to have purchase among conservatives of most majority religions, i.e. Hindus in India, Orthodox in Russia, or historical Jews and Pagans. Certainly the promise of an individual life path (providence / destiny) helps people not to succumb to tragedy or monotony.
The specific expression of the platonic soul - concern for embryos and genetic modifications - might be more Christian and more American, but the general concern is much more widespread.