What is the best way to convert everyone to your own personal -ism?

[Hauldren Collider]

Also, HC, there basically aren't any SF writers I've encountered who whose fiction or politics mimics my crazy philosophy, because the idea that morality is unknowable without first consuming the universe is not really a popular (or sane) view.

No, I know I've definitely run across your exact viewpoint (or something pretty similar) from several hard sci fi authors. It's very cliche. I just can't quite nail it down right now.

[Lorizael]

No, I know I've definitely run across your exact viewpoint (or something pretty similar) from several hard sci fi authors. It's very cliche. I just can't quite nail it down right now.

The closest thing SF gets to my crazy idea (that I know of) is the Omega Point concept. The important distinction I see between those sorts of ideas and my crazy philosophy is that the Omega Point idea is usually seen as inevitable and/or good. I emphatically do not believe either of those things to be true.

[Alexander's Horse]

The best way is to firstly claim to have secret or unique insight, this is known by many words, gnosis is a good one. The next step is gather a small band of followers with the characteristics of a privileged group with access to the core knowledge. Many people find elites attractive. Next you propagate your ideas but tell the elite not to share all the ideas. This holding back is almost certain to leak out - but you have to be part of the inner circle to know what is true about the rumors. People love rumors. Next you need a compelling story or legend. This is usually based on the leader's life but incorporates the leader's inner circle, thus binding them closer and allowing the next step - replication. This is usually achieved by the inner circle fanning out and founding new groups. Once replication had been achieved, the "ism" has its own momentum.

Religions, political movements, sports, pretty much all follow this model.

[Egbert]

Get drunk and stoned and so you don't care if anyone converts to own "ism'.

[Elok]

I don't buy this, to be honest. Transhumanism at its core is just two ideas: (1) that we can change humans with technology and (2) that we should do so. The first is an incontrovertible fact. Artificial hearts, prosthetics, nootropics--all of these things are plainly real. That we should change humans is certainly a matter one could debate, but I'm not sure what about it constitutes a religious idea.

Admittedly you have way more experience with it than I have, but everything TH I've encountered has strong apocalyptic and redemptive undertones; someone once called the Singularity "the Rapture for nerds." We both believe that humanity is flawed and in need of a radical transformation, which will usher in a new age our minds can barely fathom. We just happen to disagree about means.

[Elok]

P.S. The Wiki article on Omega Point links to the article on Asimov's "The Last Question," which invokes the concept. Also, for some reason, to Time Cube.

[Lorizael]

Admittedly you have way more experience with it than I have, but everything TH I've encountered has strong apocalyptic and redemptive undertones; someone once called the Singularity "the Rapture for nerds." We both believe that humanity is flawed and in need of a radical transformation, which will usher in a new age our minds can barely fathom. We just happen to disagree about means.

Singularitarianism (yes, that's a real term) is a branch on the futurist tree, as is transhumanism. There are a lot of people who believe both, but belief in one does not require belief in the other. So, again, an important difference between my beliefs and those you find in the Singularity movement is that Singularitiarians usually believe the Singularity is inevitable and/or good. I do not believe this. Further, the Singularity is not the same thing as the wanting to consume the universe thing. The Singularity, from a "technical" standpoint, is just the point at which humans are no longer capable of fathoming what will happen next. That's why they use the word "singularity." Clearly, consuming the universe is on the other side of that, but it is not necessarily immediately on the other side or the point of getting to the other side. And finally, there is a branch of Singularitarians out there who believe the Singularity is something to be careful of, if not downright afraid of. Google "friendly AI" if you want to learn more.

P.S. The Wiki article on Omega Point links to the article on Asimov's "The Last Question," which invokes the concept. Also, for some reason, to Time Cube.

Indeed, Asimov did write a short story about an AI essentially becoming a god. But it's not really a proselytizing short story, more of a thought experiment short story. If there's a take home message from Asimov's fiction, it's that thought experiments are fun.

As far as the Time Cube stuff goes, you certainly know I've never claimed not to be crazy.

[Aeson]

Anything linked to Time Cube can't be all bad ...

[Hauldren Collider]

Time Cube is awesome. The most wonderful part of that site is when you finally get down to the end of his War and Peace-lengthed diatribe there's a link that says "Next Page". It says that at some point he said "OK, I've written enough. Now's a good place for a page break." And that point was after about 70 paper pages worth of scrolling.

[Elok]

Lori, what I take away from that is: you're also like a religion in that you're divided by incomprehensible schisms.

Kill all non-believers worked for centuries, not sure why what is so special about 21st century for that method to suddenly stop working.

Actually, not really. From what I've read, religious persecution only really "works" if you've got a couple of decades to really stick with it. Five years of brutality, interrupted by the inevitable external crisis forcing you to send troops elsewhere, is deeply counterproductive, since a whole generation of Jews/Paulicians/whatever grow up hearing how you're the devil and need to die at all costs. Often they just emigrate and offer their services to your neighboring enemy.

It worked real well for Charlemagne, but mostly because he had no other option but to stick at it. His whole empire was basically a machine for turning crop production into big horses with metal-plated guys on top. No real economy or cultured life to speak of. Just a solution constantly in search of a problem, which turned into a problem itself if Charlemagne was too slow to find fresh outlets for their endless aggressive energy. One damn province or another was always revolting when the local lords stopped getting fresh plunder and grew bored. He couldn't go overseas--no navy--and the Muslims were both too strong and sheltered behind a mountain range. South Italy was the Pope's, politically untouchable. Nothing for it but to smash the hell out of the Saxons and Avars. Took something like twenty-five years of brutality apiece before they stopped resisting. Good thing Charlemagne was never at risk of running out of soldiers. Also, he was really good at it, and seemed to enjoy it. Scary son of a *****.

The Albigensian Crusade and the Reconquista were similarly successful because in both cases the aggressor had the time, resources and will to be cruel for as long as it took. More wishy-washy attempts inevitably backfired. The Muslims achieved their spectacular successes so quickly in part because of incompetent persecution by the Byzantines and Visigoths; wherever they went, they found Jews and heretics with pre-made ironclad loyalty, all eager to assist in the civil service.

[Lorizael]

Lori, what I take away from that is: you're also like a religion in that you're divided by incomprehensible schisms.

I'd argue that the kind of behavior you see from most adherents of futurist/transhuman/singularitarian philosophies looks like the same kind of behavior you see from adherents of religions, but that's mostly because humans in general like to believe things and follow things. But I would also argue that most futurists are not religious, because their beliefs have nothing to do with the supernatural. Personally, I feel I have a lot more in common with skeptical/pro-science type people than I do with transhuman people.

[Alexander's Horse]

I'd like to start an ism when I retire

[Elok]

I'd argue that the kind of behavior you see from most adherents of futurist/transhuman/singularitarian philosophies looks like the same kind of behavior you see from adherents of religions, but that's mostly because humans in general like to believe things and follow things. But I would also argue that most futurists are not religious, because their beliefs have nothing to do with the supernatural. Personally, I feel I have a lot more in common with skeptical/pro-science type people than I do with transhuman people.

The line between philosophy and religion is of course fuzzy, but even so I'm not convinced that the presence or absence of supernatural is the defining factor. Theravada Buddhism and Confucianism certainly warrant consideration as religious beliefs, to cite the usual examples. I would add classical Stoicism to the list. For all functional purposes, they're religions; whether or not what they believe would be categorized by a modern WEIRDo as "supernatural" is extraneous. (Marxism is a bit different, because of its explicitly worldly and political nature, but you could argue for it being, or being like, a religion for some purposes)

Every time I read something by a transhumanist-type (admittedly, that's a small sample size), I get the feeling the author would be aggressively digging through The Sayings of the Desert Fathers if he'd grown up in a more religion-friendly house or society. It feels like they're responding to the same basic impulses--dissatisfaction with the world, desire for radical change, faith in the unfathomable, austere contempt for "ordinary life"--but channeling them through a very different set of assumptions. It's kind of like the way the difference between sci-fi and fantasy is arbitrary; they look at the same kind of ideas, they're written by the same kind of people, and at the end of the day it hardly matters whether the bad guy is invincible because of a high-tech force field or a magic spell of protection.

[Elok]

Of course, I can't speak for your personal beliefs.

[ZEE]

Elok is a nerd.