8 ms·

The Tranhumanist Cult Test

39 points by thinkingemote 2y ago

wryoak 2y ago
I guess it was inevitable. Any philosophy oriented toward a better tomorrow eventually accrues passionate evangelists, and with enough groundswell verges on becoming a movement, often manifesting at least one cult or political party in the process.
- colechristensen 2y ago
  ^ If your movement primarily attracts zealots it's either not ready yet or it's done. At the beginning of a movement when nothing can really be done yet you mostly only attract zealots. At the end of a movement when you've achieved many of your goals, you only have zealots remaining.
  - MisterTea 2y ago
    > At the beginning of a movement when nothing can really be done yet you mostly only attract zealots. I would say they are not zealots but power hungry people who enjoy clout and power. They adopt the movements ideology like a uniform - something to wrap one self in to signal others - and become the zealot like an actor becomes a character. I am sure many dont even care about the ideology, as long as it gives them more than the other guy. Many of them feel that they are better than others so they should be in charge. I knew people like that, control freaks who want everything in their life to work the way they want it to by controlling the actions of those around them - bending others to build their world. No thanks.
    - colechristensen 2y ago
      I'd argue that many zealots aren't true believers of what they show outwardly, and that doesn't make them not zealots.
lenerdenator 2y ago
The more I hear about Transhumanism, the more I think that people in NorCal need some real problems to deal with. EDIT: The tech industry went from resolving everyday problems ("how do I make spreadsheets more quickly", "how do I send this information to a person on the other side of the country") to trying to play God with AI.
- kstrauser 2y ago
  For reasons I’ve never dug into, NorCal has a rich history of people banding together to do goofy things. Cults? Where better to start one? (It’s one of the reasons I love it here. That same energy manifests amazing art, hackerspaces, meetups, and other fun things.)
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    > goofy things When you have members of the movement referring to those who will be left behind as "median humans" (Altman) and making major changes to government that are to the detriment of society (Musk, to a lesser extent, Thiel and Andreessen), we're no longer "goofy". "Scary" is a better word. The Flying Spaghetti Monster? That's goofy.
    - kstrauser 2y ago
      "Goofy" isn't benign to me. It's a statement of quality of the idea, not of the end result of it. For example, Jim Jones's cult was from here and I would describe it as goofy.
- throwaway91257 2y ago
  many of the weird singularity/transhumanist people do have real problems. lot of childhood trauma. lot of OCD. i guess if you call autism a mental illness now someone will jump out from behind a bush and correct you, but lots of mental health problems downstream of living with autism. if you read about the most extreme groups, people are in and out of mental hospitals with psychotic symptoms. NorCal has been a feeding ground for cult leaders for 100+ years, but I actually think fewer real problems would be better. the people out there without real problems, just have GPT wrapper startups and go lie to people on podcasts, which is annoying, but better for them and everyone else.
michaelgburton 2y ago
Um. The Singularity isn't religious in its origin. It's literally a reference to a mathematical singularity. I'm not entirely opposed to the article's characterization, but this is a big one to get wrong. What the term has become in its pseudo-cult modern context is entirely divorced from what it came out of.
- AlexCoventry 2y ago
  I don't know; there was definitely an apocalyptic quality to the Singularity in Marooned In Real Time, and superintelligences in A Fire Upon the Deep were literally referred to as Gods (there's a brief reference to Applied Theology in there, IIRC.) So you could argue that there was at least an unconscious parallel to religion in the way Vernor Vinge saw the Singularity.
  - TeMPOraL 2y ago
    That's hardly an unconscious parallel. That's a direct, atheist take. The whole attempt at casting transhumanism as religion is silly. Transhumanist side says, "there's no supernatural God, but sufficiently advanced technology could approximate it" - and then people turn around and say, "you see, you say enough technology is like a god, therefore you're religious and believe in God (specifically in Christian God per mainstream religion, with all its mores)". <facepalm> Like X != X.
    - simiones 2y ago
      Religion and theism are orthogonal concepts. You can be an atheist and religious at the same time - many Buddhist sects are entirely atheistic, for example. Many cults are also atheistic. A good example of atheistic, even materialistic, religion was the official doctrine of the USSR, "marxist dialectical materialism". This had all of the hallmarks of a religion, complete with religious texts, priests, condemnation of non-believers, and so on - but caked in fully materialistic and dogmatically atheist concepts.
      - TeMPOraL 2y ago
ctkhn 2y ago
Some related material that digs into the Zizian branch of these people https://maxread.substack.com/p/the-zizians-and-the-rationalist-death https://maxread.substack.com/p/the-zizians-and-the-rationali...
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Were they even transhumanists? There is a big crossover between the rationalists and transhumanists, but I don't think that is a given.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- cguess 2y ago
  Wired did a long-form on it too https://www.wired.com/story/delirious-violent-impossible-true-story-zizians/ https://www.wired.com/story/delirious-violent-impossible-tru...
BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
This is only talking about a very specific and extreme type of transhumanist. Not acknowledging that makes the author sound to me like a crank with an axe to grind. (I'm choosing to ignore here the substantial an-LLM-wrote-this vibe I get.) If you wear glasses or had braces or use an insulin pump or take Ritalin, then, congratulations, you're a transhumanist. The rest is just a matter of degrees. As wizzwizz4 says in a sibling comment, the post is conflating TESCREAL and transhumanism.
- mattgreenrocks 2y ago
  Why does use of technology to improve one's life need an identity marker?
  - datadrivenangel 2y ago
    It's identifying with the belief that we can AND should improve our lives.
    - dcow 2y ago
      Yes, but this sounds too (deliberately) naïve to me—like you’re trying to convince a kid that hard drugs are all harmless because caffeine is a drug. The dichotomy is not that Humanists refute technology while transhumanists embrace it. The appropriate question to ask is, “what unique beliefs do transhumanists hold”. And the differentiating factor is generally a sentiment that the human condition must be overcome even at the cost of humanity. A transhumanist fundamentally rejects what it is to be human in line with a belief that humanity is inevitably deprecated. Humanist: technology augments humans. Transhumanist: technology replaces humans. I’ve tried really hard and can’t seem to find a way to rationalize a transhumanist worldview—at least until we understand life and consciousness intimately and thoroughly. But even then I’d have to reevaluate, not take as a given.
  - BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
    The belief that using technology to improve one's life is a good idea is an ideology regardless of whether you like giving it a label.
nico 2y ago
In case like me, you were also wondering what Transhumanists are supposed to believe in (what the article says is): > transhumanists have deepened their belief in a fated future in which the human species will achieve “augmented” evolution through fusing with machines, leading to the emergence of an artificial superintelligence that will far outstrip all human knowledge and achieve God-like powers (The Singularity). This digital deity will lead us to a new era, in which all human biological limitations will be transcended; bringing about end to sickness, suffering and even death, and leading us to colonise the cosmos
- SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
  Well, when you put it like that, it doesn't not sound like a cult at all.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Phrasing does a lot of things. If I rephrased the quoted passage as: > transhumanists have deepened their hope for future in which the human species will augment evolution by fusing with machines (as we already do with brain-computer interfaces, but better), and the potential that current AI — which is already helping us decode proteins, perform and write up scientific research — will continue to improve, helping us to expand our medical knowledge even faster and help us develop cures for things currently beyond us. As the AI we already have has allowed us read the complete connectome — neural structure — in small animals, there's even a possibility we may expand this to human brains (though we don't know how long this will take us to do!), and if we manage that, then it would allow us to back up and restore our minds as we already do with digital documents. Doesn't seem nuts, unless you believe humans have souls that can't be digitised. That said, I'm skeptical about any specific future: when the only flying machine you've heard of is an airship, it's easy to imagine a future filled with them — what's our airship? What's the thing everyone expects but which won't happen?
    - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
      It doesn't seem nuts, it just seems to miss the point, even ignoring souls. No matter how perfect the copy it'll still be a new instance, and the original meat brain instance of myself will one day fail and that consciousness will cease. A copy may fire up and it may be perfect could be a brand new "me", but the consciousness that is the running instance of me will be no more. There's no escape from that. I don't care about copies of myself running around, I'm not that egotistical to think the world needs more of me, but the eternal dark of death scares me, and duplication does nothing to assuage those fears.
jmclnx 2y ago
I now know what it is, that alone is a reason to read the article. But has other interesting info. >Transhumanism first emerged in Silicon Valley in the 1990s That alone give me pause over this movement :)
- mattgreenrocks 2y ago
  Silicon Valley: boldly re-creating religion while claiming it is something entirely new and innovative. Yep, we've seen this before.
- myrmidon 2y ago
  The article basically builds up a straw man definition, which makes the whole thing rather worthless. Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) gives a much better overview of what the movement is and its history; the "came about in the 1990s in silicon valley" is just wrong, to start with.
bsenftner 2y ago
Transhumanism has an extremely rich literary history. Just grab any hard sci fi book from Greg Bear, his entire 21 century future history has transhumanists as part of the unspoken environment of normal, where transhumanists are just normal everyday people, despite being half or more composed of machinery.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  What the transhumanist cultists don't realize is that Bear's novels, along with most of the transhumanist subgenre, are cautionary tales, not blueprints for a bright, shining future.
  - bsenftner 2y ago
    Same with so many things people fascinate on, in our short sighted culture.
wizzwizz4 2y ago
This is describing TESCREAL, not transhumanism.
- elicksaur 2y ago
  Nitpicking like this sounds like something a cult member would say to make a Motte-and-bailey argument. “Don’t worry, I’m not one of those silly TESCREALs, I’m just a transhumanist!” What does this distinction add to or take away from the thrust of the analysis?
  - IsTom 2y ago
    You can be transhumanist (want to improve humans with technology) without all the rest of what the article is refering to. It's just conflating way too much. I think that transhumanism (the way that you'd find on wikipedia) is a noble pursuit and what article describes is a bunch of hogwash that I'd never hear of outside of anglosphere.
  - tim333 2y ago
    I don't think it's a nitpick. Wikipedia has >Transhumanism is a philosophical and intellectual movement that advocates the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available new and future technologies that can greatly enhance longevity, cognition, and well-being Which isn't a cult, just tech to live better etc. Making out it's something else makes the argument a bit meaningless.
gwbas1c 2y ago
I remember meeting a few transhumanists when I lived in Silicon Valley. Whenever they would go into their schpeal, I'd respond with: "Well, if you go to church every Sunday and behave, you'll go to heaven." It would catch them off guard, and then I would point out that they have faith in transhumanism like Christians have faith in Jesus. There would be a quick "get it" facial expression, then we'd both laugh. The transhumanists who I encountered were opened-minded enough to realize the difference between faith and reason. I'd then point out that the Egyptians had similar beliefs, and say that if you freeze your body, or head, at death; most likely someone would use it for some strange science experiment in the future. That being said, if I was wealthy, I'd love to freeze my body. I'm sure it'll come in handy for someone at some point, just like Egyptian mummies did.
- gjsman-1000 2y ago
  Except Christianity would find transhumanism exceedingly bland, for being an unoriginal repeat of the Original Sin; the latest scheme of humanity to be a God. “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’? The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
  - throw_m239339 2y ago
    > Except Christianity would find transhumanism exceedingly bland, for being an unoriginal repeat of the Original Sin; the latest scheme of humanity to be a God. Well God is an engineer and he gave us technology & curiosity as his greatest gift. Being aware of our own mortality both as individuals & as a species is what drives us to to try and beat it. To be fair, blame the serpent (or Prometheus).
    - simiones 2y ago
blogabegonija 2y ago
[dead]
lutusp 2y ago
> The Tranhumanist Cult Test Wait ... isn't it "transhumanist"? This typo appears once more in the article, just enough to thwart efficient computer content searches.
- mrb 2y ago
  I can't take seriously any written document with a typo in the first words, and of the title nonetheless. Literally the first thing that came to my mind after I read the title was "tranhumanism" must be a new concept unrelated to transhumanism.
nh23423fefe 2y ago
ctrl f musk "16 times" ctrl w
readthenotes1 2y ago
Cult: any organization formed that leads to the leader having more sexual partners than societal norms allow. E.g., Ayn Rand, David Koresh Its not difficult...

39 points by thinkingemote 2y ago

I guess it was inevitable. Any philosophy oriented toward a better tomorrow eventually accrues passionate evangelists, and with enough groundswell verges on becoming a movement, often manifesting at least one cult or political party in the process.

colechristensen 2y ago
^ If your movement primarily attracts zealots it's either not ready yet or it's done. At the beginning of a movement when nothing can really be done yet you mostly only attract zealots. At the end of a movement when you've achieved many of your goals, you only have zealots remaining.
- MisterTea 2y ago
  > At the beginning of a movement when nothing can really be done yet you mostly only attract zealots. I would say they are not zealots but power hungry people who enjoy clout and power. They adopt the movements ideology like a uniform - something to wrap one self in to signal others - and become the zealot like an actor becomes a character. I am sure many dont even care about the ideology, as long as it gives them more than the other guy. Many of them feel that they are better than others so they should be in charge. I knew people like that, control freaks who want everything in their life to work the way they want it to by controlling the actions of those around them - bending others to build their world. No thanks.
  - colechristensen 2y ago
    I'd argue that many zealots aren't true believers of what they show outwardly, and that doesn't make them not zealots.

lenerdenator 2y ago

The more I hear about Transhumanism, the more I think that people in NorCal need some real problems to deal with. EDIT: The tech industry went from resolving everyday problems ("how do I make spreadsheets more quickly", "how do I send this information to a person on the other side of the country") to trying to play God with AI.

kstrauser 2y ago
For reasons I’ve never dug into, NorCal has a rich history of people banding together to do goofy things. Cults? Where better to start one? (It’s one of the reasons I love it here. That same energy manifests amazing art, hackerspaces, meetups, and other fun things.)
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  > goofy things When you have members of the movement referring to those who will be left behind as "median humans" (Altman) and making major changes to government that are to the detriment of society (Musk, to a lesser extent, Thiel and Andreessen), we're no longer "goofy". "Scary" is a better word. The Flying Spaghetti Monster? That's goofy.
  - kstrauser 2y ago
    "Goofy" isn't benign to me. It's a statement of quality of the idea, not of the end result of it. For example, Jim Jones's cult was from here and I would describe it as goofy.
throwaway91257 2y ago
many of the weird singularity/transhumanist people do have real problems. lot of childhood trauma. lot of OCD. i guess if you call autism a mental illness now someone will jump out from behind a bush and correct you, but lots of mental health problems downstream of living with autism. if you read about the most extreme groups, people are in and out of mental hospitals with psychotic symptoms. NorCal has been a feeding ground for cult leaders for 100+ years, but I actually think fewer real problems would be better. the people out there without real problems, just have GPT wrapper startups and go lie to people on podcasts, which is annoying, but better for them and everyone else.

michaelgburton 2y ago

Um. The Singularity isn't religious in its origin. It's literally a reference to a mathematical singularity. I'm not entirely opposed to the article's characterization, but this is a big one to get wrong. What the term has become in its pseudo-cult modern context is entirely divorced from what it came out of.

AlexCoventry 2y ago
I don't know; there was definitely an apocalyptic quality to the Singularity in Marooned In Real Time, and superintelligences in A Fire Upon the Deep were literally referred to as Gods (there's a brief reference to Applied Theology in there, IIRC.) So you could argue that there was at least an unconscious parallel to religion in the way Vernor Vinge saw the Singularity.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  That's hardly an unconscious parallel. That's a direct, atheist take. The whole attempt at casting transhumanism as religion is silly. Transhumanist side says, "there's no supernatural God, but sufficiently advanced technology could approximate it" - and then people turn around and say, "you see, you say enough technology is like a god, therefore you're religious and believe in God (specifically in Christian God per mainstream religion, with all its mores)". <facepalm> Like X != X.
  - simiones 2y ago
    Religion and theism are orthogonal concepts. You can be an atheist and religious at the same time - many Buddhist sects are entirely atheistic, for example. Many cults are also atheistic. A good example of atheistic, even materialistic, religion was the official doctrine of the USSR, "marxist dialectical materialism". This had all of the hallmarks of a religion, complete with religious texts, priests, condemnation of non-believers, and so on - but caked in fully materialistic and dogmatically atheist concepts.
    - TeMPOraL 2y ago

ctkhn 2y ago

Some related material that digs into the Zizian branch of these people https://maxread.substack.com/p/the-zizians-and-the-rationalist-death https://maxread.substack.com/p/the-zizians-and-the-rationali...

s1artibartfast 2y ago
Were they even transhumanists? There is a big crossover between the rationalists and transhumanists, but I don't think that is a given.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
cguess 2y ago
Wired did a long-form on it too https://www.wired.com/story/delirious-violent-impossible-true-story-zizians/ https://www.wired.com/story/delirious-violent-impossible-tru...

BugsJustFindMe 2y ago

This is only talking about a very specific and extreme type of transhumanist. Not acknowledging that makes the author sound to me like a crank with an axe to grind. (I'm choosing to ignore here the substantial an-LLM-wrote-this vibe I get.) If you wear glasses or had braces or use an insulin pump or take Ritalin, then, congratulations, you're a transhumanist. The rest is just a matter of degrees. As wizzwizz4 says in a sibling comment, the post is conflating TESCREAL and transhumanism.

mattgreenrocks 2y ago
Why does use of technology to improve one's life need an identity marker?
- datadrivenangel 2y ago
  It's identifying with the belief that we can AND should improve our lives.
  - dcow 2y ago
    Yes, but this sounds too (deliberately) naïve to me—like you’re trying to convince a kid that hard drugs are all harmless because caffeine is a drug. The dichotomy is not that Humanists refute technology while transhumanists embrace it. The appropriate question to ask is, “what unique beliefs do transhumanists hold”. And the differentiating factor is generally a sentiment that the human condition must be overcome even at the cost of humanity. A transhumanist fundamentally rejects what it is to be human in line with a belief that humanity is inevitably deprecated. Humanist: technology augments humans. Transhumanist: technology replaces humans. I’ve tried really hard and can’t seem to find a way to rationalize a transhumanist worldview—at least until we understand life and consciousness intimately and thoroughly. But even then I’d have to reevaluate, not take as a given.
- BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
  The belief that using technology to improve one's life is a good idea is an ideology regardless of whether you like giving it a label.

nico 2y ago

In case like me, you were also wondering what Transhumanists are supposed to believe in (what the article says is): > transhumanists have deepened their belief in a fated future in which the human species will achieve “augmented” evolution through fusing with machines, leading to the emergence of an artificial superintelligence that will far outstrip all human knowledge and achieve God-like powers (The Singularity). This digital deity will lead us to a new era, in which all human biological limitations will be transcended; bringing about end to sickness, suffering and even death, and leading us to colonise the cosmos

SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
Well, when you put it like that, it doesn't not sound like a cult at all.
- ben_w 2y ago
  Phrasing does a lot of things. If I rephrased the quoted passage as: > transhumanists have deepened their hope for future in which the human species will augment evolution by fusing with machines (as we already do with brain-computer interfaces, but better), and the potential that current AI — which is already helping us decode proteins, perform and write up scientific research — will continue to improve, helping us to expand our medical knowledge even faster and help us develop cures for things currently beyond us. As the AI we already have has allowed us read the complete connectome — neural structure — in small animals, there's even a possibility we may expand this to human brains (though we don't know how long this will take us to do!), and if we manage that, then it would allow us to back up and restore our minds as we already do with digital documents. Doesn't seem nuts, unless you believe humans have souls that can't be digitised. That said, I'm skeptical about any specific future: when the only flying machine you've heard of is an airship, it's easy to imagine a future filled with them — what's our airship? What's the thing everyone expects but which won't happen?
  - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
    It doesn't seem nuts, it just seems to miss the point, even ignoring souls. No matter how perfect the copy it'll still be a new instance, and the original meat brain instance of myself will one day fail and that consciousness will cease. A copy may fire up and it may be perfect could be a brand new "me", but the consciousness that is the running instance of me will be no more. There's no escape from that. I don't care about copies of myself running around, I'm not that egotistical to think the world needs more of me, but the eternal dark of death scares me, and duplication does nothing to assuage those fears.

jmclnx 2y ago

I now know what it is, that alone is a reason to read the article. But has other interesting info. >Transhumanism first emerged in Silicon Valley in the 1990s That alone give me pause over this movement :)

mattgreenrocks 2y ago
Silicon Valley: boldly re-creating religion while claiming it is something entirely new and innovative. Yep, we've seen this before.
myrmidon 2y ago
The article basically builds up a straw man definition, which makes the whole thing rather worthless. Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism) gives a much better overview of what the movement is and its history; the "came about in the 1990s in silicon valley" is just wrong, to start with.

bsenftner 2y ago

Transhumanism has an extremely rich literary history. Just grab any hard sci fi book from Greg Bear, his entire 21 century future history has transhumanists as part of the unspoken environment of normal, where transhumanists are just normal everyday people, despite being half or more composed of machinery.

cratermoon 2y ago
What the transhumanist cultists don't realize is that Bear's novels, along with most of the transhumanist subgenre, are cautionary tales, not blueprints for a bright, shining future.
- bsenftner 2y ago
  Same with so many things people fascinate on, in our short sighted culture.

wizzwizz4 2y ago

This is describing TESCREAL, not transhumanism.

elicksaur 2y ago
Nitpicking like this sounds like something a cult member would say to make a Motte-and-bailey argument. “Don’t worry, I’m not one of those silly TESCREALs, I’m just a transhumanist!” What does this distinction add to or take away from the thrust of the analysis?
- IsTom 2y ago
  You can be transhumanist (want to improve humans with technology) without all the rest of what the article is refering to. It's just conflating way too much. I think that transhumanism (the way that you'd find on wikipedia) is a noble pursuit and what article describes is a bunch of hogwash that I'd never hear of outside of anglosphere.
- tim333 2y ago
  I don't think it's a nitpick. Wikipedia has >Transhumanism is a philosophical and intellectual movement that advocates the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available new and future technologies that can greatly enhance longevity, cognition, and well-being Which isn't a cult, just tech to live better etc. Making out it's something else makes the argument a bit meaningless.

gwbas1c 2y ago

I remember meeting a few transhumanists when I lived in Silicon Valley. Whenever they would go into their schpeal, I'd respond with: "Well, if you go to church every Sunday and behave, you'll go to heaven." It would catch them off guard, and then I would point out that they have faith in transhumanism like Christians have faith in Jesus. There would be a quick "get it" facial expression, then we'd both laugh. The transhumanists who I encountered were opened-minded enough to realize the difference between faith and reason. I'd then point out that the Egyptians had similar beliefs, and say that if you freeze your body, or head, at death; most likely someone would use it for some strange science experiment in the future. That being said, if I was wealthy, I'd love to freeze my body. I'm sure it'll come in handy for someone at some point, just like Egyptian mummies did.

gjsman-1000 2y ago
Except Christianity would find transhumanism exceedingly bland, for being an unoriginal repeat of the Original Sin; the latest scheme of humanity to be a God. “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’? The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’” “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
- throw_m239339 2y ago
  > Except Christianity would find transhumanism exceedingly bland, for being an unoriginal repeat of the Original Sin; the latest scheme of humanity to be a God. Well God is an engineer and he gave us technology & curiosity as his greatest gift. Being aware of our own mortality both as individuals & as a species is what drives us to to try and beat it. To be fair, blame the serpent (or Prometheus).
  - simiones 2y ago

blogabegonija 2y ago

[dead]

lutusp 2y ago

> The Tranhumanist Cult Test Wait ... isn't it "transhumanist"? This typo appears once more in the article, just enough to thwart efficient computer content searches.

mrb 2y ago
I can't take seriously any written document with a typo in the first words, and of the title nonetheless. Literally the first thing that came to my mind after I read the title was "tranhumanism" must be a new concept unrelated to transhumanism.

nh23423fefe 2y ago

ctrl f musk "16 times" ctrl w

readthenotes1 2y ago

Cult: any organization formed that leads to the leader having more sexual partners than societal norms allow. E.g., Ayn Rand, David Koresh Its not difficult...