Quotes from Leon Kass Monday, Dec 11 2006
transhumanism 3:09 pm
“We, on the other hand, with our dissection of cadavers, organ transplantation, cosmetic surgery, body shops, laboratory fertilization, surrogate wombs, gender-change surgery, “wanted” children, “rights over our bodies,” sexual liberation, and other practices and beliefs that insist on our independence and autonomy, live more and more wholly for the here and now, subjugating everything we can to the exercise of our wills, with little respect for the nature and meaning of bodily life.”
“The supreme virtue of the virtuous woman was modesty, a form of sexual self-control, manifested not only in chastity but in decorous dress and manner, speech and deed, and in reticence in the display of her well-banked affections.”
“Thanks to technology, a woman could declare herself free from the teleological meaning of her sexuality — as free as a man appears to be from his. Her menstrual cycle, since puberty a regular reminder of her natural maternal destiny, is now anovulatory and directed instead by her will and her medications, serving goals only of pleasure and convenience, enjoyable without apparent risk to personal health and safety.”
“A nation dedicated to safeguarding individual rights to liberty and the privately defined pursuit of happiness is, willy-nilly, preparing the way for the “liberation” of women; in the absence of powerful non-liberal cultural forces, such as traditional biblical religion, that defend sex-linked social roles, androgyny in education and employment is the most likely outcome.”
“In the absence of such countervailing customs, as Bacon clearly understood, the successful pursuit of longer life and better health leads – as we have seen in recent decades – to a culture of protracted youthfulness, hedonism, and sexual license.”
“My approach is deliberately simple, but I hope not thereby simple-minded.”
“Parents of college-bound young people, especially those with strong religious and family values, could direct their children to religiously affiliated colleges that attract like-minded people.”
“Even if it is true that the great majority of Americans still profess a belief in God, he is for few of us a God before whom one trembles in fear of judgment. With adultery almost as American as apple pie, few people appreciate the awe-ful shame of The Scarlet Letter. The sexual abominations of Leviticus – incest, homosexuality, and bestiality – are going the way of all flesh, the second with religious blessings, no less.”
“Could the beauty of flowers depend on the fact that they will soon wither? . . . How deeply could one deathless ‘human’ being love another?”
“Biotechnologies may undermine the likelihood that I will find my path to a full and rich life.”
“Fancy medical technology wasn’t going to benefit a lot of people. It would lead to a trade in human spare parts.”
“My job is to provide the president with the richest possible consideration, so that he knows what is at stake in whatever decision he makes.”
“What about the changing mores of marriage, divorce, single parent families and sexual behavior? Do we applaud these changes? Do we want to contribute further to this confusion of thought, identity and practice?”
“Our society is dangerously close to losing its grip on the meaning of some fundamental aspects of human existence.”
“Withering is nature’s preparation for death, for the one who dies and for the ones who look upon him.”
“I don’t regard myself as a good enough Jew by a long shot, either in terms of learning or practice.”
“One could look over the past century and ask oneself, has the increased longevity been good, bad or indifferent?”
“The human soul yearns for, longs for, aspires to some condition, some state, some goal toward which our earthly activities are directed but which cannot be attained during earthly life.”
“Our only responsibility is to live our own life and take care of our own children.”
“Sexuality itself means mortality – equally for both man and woman.”
“The interest in religious questions and religious studies among the younger generation is palpable.”
“We are enmeshed in a lineage that came from somewhere and is going to make way for the next generation.”
“I don’t like being forced to reduce my thoughts to sound bites.”
And possibly the most famous:
“Worst of all from this point of view are those more uncivilized forms of eating, like licking an ice cream cone — a catlike activity that has been made acceptable in informal America but that still offends those who know eating in public is offensive…This doglike feeding, if one must engage in it, ought to be kept from public view, where, even if WE feel no shame, others are compelled to witness our shameful behavior.”
Leon Kass – what an ass. Read my response to this nutjob from 2003.




Leon Kass has incredible biases based on religion and sex.
How much is he going against “rule of law”
Equality of individuals before the government irregardless of religion and gender.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law
If government services are unequal based on gender and religion that would seem to be a violation of rule of law.
Of course the current administration seems to take a loose attitude towards what laws or treaties they will or will uphold.
Leon Kass and Bush are forcing people to look outside the USA to get certain medical research and treatments.
“Leon Kass – what an ass” thank god… I started reading thinking that you agreed with this Luddite, but when I saw that I breathed a sigh of relief.
I am so naive at times. I thought that you were quoting some obscure nutjob. It turns out i’m an idiot and he is on an advisory committee to President Bush.
I am still just awestruck at how much the more that I find out about bush the more I despise him.
Leon Kass—what an ass…INDEED! And this nut-job is supposedly a venerable *ethicist*??!!! Puh-leazz. Give me an mfing break…
Leon: Do yourself (and everyone else) a favor: Drop acid and/or eat some magic mushrooms, then read Alan Harrington’s *The Immortalist*, F.M. Esfandiary’s works (especially *Upwingers*), Robert Ettinger’s works (especially *Man into Superman*), Damien Broderick’s *The Spike*, K. Eric Drexler’s *Engines of Creation*, and Ray Kurzweil’s *The Singularity Is Near*—that way, maybe you can self-extricate you head from whatever bodily orifice you’ve (rather obviously) have it [your head] shoved-up.
And Live Long & Prosper, Leon: You’re not irredeemable, just incredibly backward and ignorant!
Ciao for now…
Bad grammar and diction, then, at the last; typin’ furiously…a thousand pardons…
I’m glad to see you did not leave out the ice-cream quote; that’s my personal favorite!
It gets me every time.
So does he not debate people with contrary opinions, or just not listen to them?
I suppose Kass is a testament to the ability of religious tendencies to persist in the face of reason and the power of evasion.
Comment to CNN about how far you would go for health?
reposted from advancednano.blogspot.com This week (Dec 11-14, 2006) CNN’s show Anderson Cooper 360 asks
Upon yet again re-reading these quotes, I have to admit to being f’ing ASTOUNDED that this guy can walk and chew gum at the same time. These quotes evince neo-cortical constipation (so to speak) on an eye-popping scale!!
Leon: Again, PLEASE: Eat some ‘shrooms and read the best of the transhumanist lit. You’re already neo-cortically near-comatose—WAKE-UP!!!
A Leon Kass Retrospective
A reminder from Michael Anissimov that some people are not just opposed to healthy life extension, but also quite willing to steer government power to block research and the development of working anti-aging therapies. So much for live and let live. …
Wow. I knew Leon K ass was “bad news” but this set of quotes is remarkable. He has a talent for packing more raving nonsense into a paragraph than many garden-variety mediocrities manage in entire books. I almost have to believe this guy has a real death wish- he so clearly hates every aspect of modern, cosmopolitan, techno-progressive society- and if he follows observable trends as closely as he must to advise the Short-Bus-Rider-in-Chief, he must know, or at least subconsciously intuit, the “awe-ful” truth of the matter: Simply put, no matter how many people claim to believe in the Colorless Green Unknowable Flabblespook, no matter how many impressionable youth are successfully seduced, coerced, or dragooned into
“religiously-affiliated” brain-death factories to have their minds systematically drained of every drop of spiritual fuel, no matter how many traditionalist pundits waste perfectly good bandwidth on spewing Kass-esque hyena dung into the ether ad nauseum, no matter how many pompously strutting alpha-apes the Power Elite pimp onto the world stage to mystify us, inflict fear and pain upon us, and eat out our substance, the world Kass values so misguidedly is trembling…more and more…and if he lives another 15-20 years, Kass will live to see
the whole edifice of “tradition” come thundering down around his ears like an Olympian avalanche.
What “trads” just don’t get, even if they understand technology in the abstract(they most often don’t) is the dynamic interplay between different technologies and their users. Kids(of all ages) are not just passively absorbing information; they bounce it around, slice & dice it, assemble it in new patterns, share and spread it, and, of course, test-drive as many cool new tools for doing these things as they can get their hands on. With biology beginning to digitize in a big way, will these kids be inclined to treat their bodies, their minds, their very selves, as “off-limits” to such hacking because some old fool stinks up his Depends at the mere thought? Hell, no! We should by all means do as much as possible to promote life extension/enhancement now, and oppose troglodytes like Kass at every turn, since this can potentially alleviate considerable suffering. But we should not fall into undue pessimism; a “constituency” for radically extended life is -literally- growing up all around us. Deep down I think Kass & his ilk know it. And “scared shitless” probably understates their visceral reaction.
Deathists, prudes? Bad news.
Keep in mind, that billion or more people are even dumber! Much dumber.
Their combined power may be more significant, however. Even more.
touche …
Brian Keavey, my Buffalo bud, what’s up? U snowed-in yet? Haven’t seen you posting here in many moons, brudda.
Yeah, poor Leon: He desparately *hopes* he’s mainstream, but instead he’s mere mudpuddle.
Leon, you might just as well go ahead and cryonically-deanimate right now; we’ll reanimate you in about 25 yrs (+/- 10), when we’ve got everything like we want it…OOOPS!…I forgot, you don’t “believe in” cryonics. So I suppose you’re planning to stick around, boring us with your inane crap, until you croak…hmmm…oh, well…
Ironically the Intelligent Design movement has helped to spread the idea of viewing the human body as a technological product. Bioconservatives who promote Intelligent Design and oppose Transhumanism, work at cross-purposes.
Hah, good point Mark! For some reason I never thought of it that way.
I concur: Excellent point, Mark. But, of course, it is WE, along with our artificially (or, you prefer, synthetically) intelligent “offspring”, who shall be the ultimate designers. And while I have a great respect for Tipler, I much prefer James Gardner’s work, which doesn’t depend on an Ultimate Big Crunch, but, instead, expanding on conjectures put forth by, among quite a few others, Lee Smolin (especially), Andrei Linde and Max Tegmark, conjectures that we, all of us, both individually & collectively, are destined to be the designers and engineers of new universes, new cosmoi. And, for dyed-in-the-genes transhumanists, this is, of course, virtually axiomatic!!
We has met the “Intelligent Designers” and They is Us!!
See Gardner’s superb latest book, **The Intelligent Universe: AI, ET, and the Emerging Mind of the Cosmos**
I’ve never heard of James Gardner, what is his take on the whole resurrection idea of Tipler? Is it possible without a big crunch?
Gully Foyle: James Gardner is the *Biocosm* guy, and a respected chaos/complexity theorist and systems analyst. Check out his stuff at amazon.com and on any good search engine…As best I can tell, Gardner (along with, e.g., Kurzweil) not only doesn’t think a Big Crunch is especially likely (which is consonant with current observattions/evidence), but that one is not necessary in order for Mind, not only to eventually take-over this particular cosmos, but to spawn at least one (perhaps near-infinite) baby cosmoi as well. Indeed, extrapolating on an idea of Lee Smolin’s, Gardner posits that we humants (and any other intelligent life in this cosmos) are integral parts of a meta-cosmic reproductive-cycle, one that is infinite in time both into the past, and into the future. See his books, *Biocosm* (see http://www.biocosm.org/, and http://www.amazon.com/Biocosm-Scientific-Evolution-Intelligent-Architect/dp/1930722222). And, as best I can discern, Gardner doesn’t see the need to posit a resurrection (though the kind of tech he thinks we’ll eventually have [broadly similar to that posited by Kurzweil] is consistent with that capability), as he anticipates many persons be(com)ing immortal (this is more implicit than explicit). Basically, he posits Mind taking over physical substrate(s) and condensing them to form gateways through which new cosmoi can be born (this is a considerably simplified rendition of his stuff…)
As for Tipler, btw, never one to let evidence necessarily rule-out his Omega Point position, he has recently argued that massive baryon utilization/consumption (better living thru femtotech) in the far future will lead to an cosmic-expansion reversal, collapse, and eventually culminating in an Omega Point Big Crunch. I happen to prefer Gardner’s cosmology…
Gardner’s latest book, **The Intelligent Universe: AI, ET, and the Emerging Mind of the Cosmos** isn’t out yet, but can be advance-ordered thru Amazon…
Garder is cool, I was fortunate to meet him at John Smart’s conference at Stanford. He may be wrong, though. I still worship Tipler. I think that humanity will create a local Big Crunch even if there isn’t a universal one.
Thanks for the reply, I’ll have to take a look at his book(s). It doesn’t surprise me that he would not address the resurrection idea; I think it was that idea in particular that lead to the hostility toward Tipler’s cosmology. My familiarity of the idea of creating baby universes is limited to an article I read about Andre Linde. From that article it seemed that there was little chance of sending much, if any, information into the new universe, much less sending people. If this is so, then we in this universe are left with whatever fate we may have, be it a big crunch or big whimper. Maybe Linde is wrong and a great deal of information could be encoding in the new universe. An idea I’ve had before is that you could encode yourself in one of the physical constants of the baby universe. Billions of years later the inhabitants would calculate the value and discover the program, then they could run the program on a computer and you would live again in a new universe.
On the argument that the idea of universes with laws of nature as DNA proves the strong antropic principle (SAP), I am skeptical. It might be likely that this universe *was* spawned-off by intelligences in another universe, but that does not prove SAP. If the analogy to life on Earth is complete, then there must be many worlds created that lack intelligence. The first life bearing universe(s) had to come from somewhere. The only way that life bearing ones end up being more prevalent and prolific is if the mechanisms of reproduction work better with intelligence. The first treatment of baby universes I heard involved them dripping-off naturally from the singularities of black holes. Many universes could form from other, simpler ones that consist of nothing but dumb black holes. What makes the ones with intelligence better at spawning? I guess I’ll have to read the book to find out. Another thing to consider is that the hyperspace that all the universe creating will be playing out on is not like the Earth. On Earth, once life evolved there was an appreciable trend upwards of the ratio of matter used in living versus non-living forms. If the solar system gets turned into a Matrioshka brain the conversion will be complete. The way I understand it, the hyperspace stage of universe creating plays out on does not involve consuming scarce resources. If it did, our universe might be consumed by a new one as soon as it is created. Indeed, Linde has pointed out that it is evolution without competition. So if you took a sample of all available universes what would the percentage of life bearing ones be to non-life bearing ones? If there is no competition I see no reason to assume that many would have life and no reason to believe that there would be any trend towards ones that do.
One point I do agree on is that the future evolution of this space-time will be governed by intelligences. If it is all possible for them to do so, with whatever means they may have at their disposal, I would of course like for them to resurrect me and everyone else! I’m not sure if that would be possible through the brute-force computational method of creating every possible person in billions of simulations without breaking the Bekenstein bound. I.E., there might not be enough computational resources. One thing I like about Tipler’s idea is that in a closed universe that if the Bekenstein bound is not broken, then entropy would decrease globally as the universe collapsed thus violating the laws of thermodynamics. That is probably the most persuasive argument Tipler makes, providing, of course, that we live in a closed universe which is doubtful now. Maybe that is why the universe is expanding; if the Bekenstein bound and the second law of thermodynamics are both inviolate, then space *must* expand to avoid breaking either.
Oh, and I prefer some sort of extrapolation method of resurrection as opposed to brute-force methods; I find it more elegant.
Very enjoyable(-to-read) comment, Gully!! Thanks much! Here’s a list of books you might find interesting/helpful, plus there is one more that I don’t have the complete citation for, and will have to publish it in a later comment. But check these out for now:
1. *Decoding the Universe: How the New Science of Information Is Explaining Everything in the Cosmos, from Our Brains to Black Holes* (Hardcover) by Charles Seife
2. *Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes On the Cosmos* by Seth Lloyd
3. *The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design* by Leonard Susskind
4. *Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe’s Hidden Dimensions* by Lisa Randall
5. *The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality* (Paperback) by Brian Greene
6. *The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next* by Lee Smolin
And, again, be on the look-out for one more title/author citation coming in a few days…
I also highly recommend checking-out the work of Jack Sarfatti and Saul-Paul Sirag…
Ciao for now…
Tipler’s Omega Point Theory has been criticized on the basis of his own belief that there is plenty of evidence for the Omega Point Theory in today’s universe. Some do not see that much evidence, and as a consequence reject the theory as a whole. Others disagree on some or some other specific mechanism proposed by Tipler. This is, in my opinion, missing the point entirely: perhaps Leonardo’s aircraft sketches would not have been able to fly (the knowledge needed to design a flying machine was just not available at his time), but this does not lessen the value of Leonardo’s insight that a device conceptually similar to his own sketches would, someday, fly. Similarly, we may just not know enough physics and mathematics to evaluate the plausibility of a specific Omega Point mechanism, but this does not lessen the value of Tipler’s insight: someday science may develop the capability to resurrect the dead.
I agree that addressing resurrection is one of the things that drove most scientists against Tipler, probably for fear of being riduculed by other scientists and labeled as heretics against scientific rationalism.
I am waiting with impatience for the most recent book of James Gardner, due to be released in February. MCP, can you say more about Gardner’s take on resurrection?
Hey, Gully Foyle: Hopefully you’ll read this, even though it about 3 weeks later than I’d intended: The other book—2 books, actually— I want to recommend to you and other colleagues here:
1. Alex Vilenkin, *Many Worlds In One: The Search for Other Universes* (Hill & Wang, ’06) and
2. Peter Woit, *Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory And the Search for Unity in Physical Law* (Basic Books, ’06)
And Giulio Prisco: I’m not sure whether Gardner really has a “take” on resurrection theory. From what I can gather—and his views are broadly similar to John Smart’s over at SingularityWatch.com, aka AccelerationWatch.com)—I would imagine he thinks that we (or near-future subsequent generations) will be able to more-or-less immortalize themselves using robotic/cybernetic tech to encode their personalities, etc. onto more condensed and permanent substrates…
And as for resurrecting the already-deceased, I don’t think he really considers that very extensively. But I think Mike Perry’s *Forever For All* nonetheless dovetails with, or at least consistently comports with, Gardner’s stuff. I hope this answers your question…
Ciao…
[...] religious fantasies that this is something only God can do. Everyone favorite bioethicist, Leon Kass, is quoted in the article, saying, “I find it very hard to believe that, starting from [...]
I used to hate Leon Kass, or as much as one can hate someone they don’t know — and then I met him. He was my professor for a bioethics class, and it was there I learned how tragically and intentionally he is misunderstood. Don’t get me wrong — I’m a full-blown transhumanist and proud of it. But the man is so full of thought and wisdom and humility, that I cannot help but be also humbled, and ashamed of my former virulent dislike of the man.
Perhaps more interestingly, I’m almost certain he’s an atheist (maybe not publicly, but he hinted as much during office hours one day). The man seems to be aware of the more decent aspects of religion, and seeks to serve as a foil to the New Atheists only because he thinks it should be done by somebody.
Leon Kass, I have learned, is far more complex and compelling a character than I ever gave him credit for. I may still disagree with him on many counts, but I have come to appreciate the worth of his thought processes. It helps if you read his works with his voice in mind: the voice of a man who has seen much, thought about much, watched the little things come and go, who wishes to be smarter, who wishes to be wiser, who is constantly willing to revise and rethink his views, and who constantly wishes to learn the truth of things, even if that proves everything he knows wrong.
He is a stunningly noble man, a very intelligent person, and singularly kind. I can no longer insult the man now that I know him, nor can I help but offer the tale of my own change of heart when I see posts like this.
I think you describe in more detail
great, fresh post but interesting still