Will you side with the Transhumanists?

[Olivaero]

There is no political ideology behind what transhumanism will actually look like. Science does not determine political ideologies in the same way it does not determine morals, heck I wouldn't even call what the vast majority of transhumanists follow an ideology. It's simply the progression of technology the same way a telephone progressed into a mobile phone which then progressed into a smart phone. What will happen next to the smart phone is pretty easy to extrapolate. and googles project glass is a relatively spot on target. https://plus.google.com/+projectglass/posts why then stop their? It is simply the logical progression that at some point in the future we are not going to be content with out of body means of communication when the technology for putting such devices on the optical nerve will exist and that will be the "start" of what you seem to hate so much for no good reason.

From certain points of view we've been doing transhumanist things for years. How long have we had pace makers? Or hearing aids? Or artificial joints? Right now we have robotic prosthetics that can be controlled by the wearer's mind. I inherited my father's short-sightedness until dastardly technology zapped my eyes to perfect functionality. Like almost everyone of my generation I was vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella. Thanks to science I am immune to those diseases when nature on its own would leave me vulnerable to them and that is awesome.

I am in full agreement with you. I think it's ridiculous that some people draw an arbitrary barrier around not only their's but other people bodies as well and say "this far but no further!" It just reeks of scientific ignorance and irrationality. I'm very glad to alive during the time that these ideas are coming to full fruition!

[Uiiop]

No. It. Does. Not. Transhumanism does not value a single thing apart from the scientific method.

I value independence, Independence from biology.
I value continual progress, and our biology is hindering us.
I value ethics and letting human minds wink out of existence because biology fails is un-ethical to me.

Transhumanism is a tool nothing more or less.

How does transhumanism value the scientific method? The scientific method is completely unrelated to this.
And, no, transhumanism is not just a tool. People control tools. Transhumanism controls people.

How does it control people? we don't have to upgrade the brain and we can put anti-virus software if we do. Also you haven't explained how biological transhumanism can control people. I can see how but i want to see if you can keep your argument there.

[Phocidaea]

From certain points of view we've been doing transhumanist things for years. How long have we had pace makers? Or hearing aids? Or artificial joints? Right now we have robotic prosthetics that can be controlled by the wearer's mind. I inherited my father's short-sightedness until dastardly technology zapped my eyes to perfect functionality. Like almost everyone of my generation I was vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella. Thanks to science I am immune to those diseases when nature on its own would leave me vulnerable to them and that is awesome.

I am in full agreement with you. I think it's ridiculous that some people draw an arbitrary barrier around not only their's but other people bodies as well and say "this far but no further!" It just reeks of scientific ignorance and irrationality. I'm very glad to alive during the time that these ideas are coming to full fruition!

Where do I draw the line? I say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Disease is a problem. Broken limbs are a problem. Thinking is not a problem. Dying of old age is not a problem.

[Ifreann]

No. It. Does. Not. Transhumanism does not value a single thing apart from the scientific method.

I value independence, Independence from biology.
I value continual progress, and our biology is hindering us.
I value ethics and letting human minds wink out of existence because biology fails is un-ethical to me.

Transhumanism is a tool nothing more or less.

How does transhumanism value the scientific method? The scientific method is completely unrelated to this.

That one's true. If, for some silly reason, we could get superhuman bodies and minds through, I dunno, pacts with demons then I suppose transhumanists would be all for it. But realistically it'll happen with science.

And, no, transhumanism is not just a tool. People control tools. Transhumanism controls people.

Yeah, except that it doesn't really.

[Divair]

Thinking is not a problem.

Which is relevant how?

Dying of old age is not a problem.

Uh, yeah it is.

[Phocidaea]

How does transhumanism value the scientific method? The scientific method is completely unrelated to this.
And, no, transhumanism is not just a tool. People control tools. Transhumanism controls people.

How does it control people? we don't have to upgrade the brain and we can put anti-virus software if we do. Also you haven't explained how biological transhumanism can control people. I can see how but i want to see if you can keep your argument there.

Biological transhumanism can be used to physically modify people to be good at a certain role, or intentionally disable them to make them inferior, or intentionally make them super-powerful to serve as some kind of elite.

Put down the Kurzweil and read Brave New World, mmkay? All transhumanist arguments are based on theories and imagination, but when someone tries to argue against you with plausible examples from fiction, you begin crying fallacy.

[Little Miss Rarity]

Humans are so disgusting...

Maybe a bit of genetic, hormonal and cybernetic modifications could improve this bunch of animalistic, stupid and evil apes called mankind!

[Divair]

theories and imagination

plausible examples from fiction

Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony here.

[Ostroeuropa]

How does it control people? we don't have to upgrade the brain and we can put anti-virus software if we do. Also you haven't explained how biological transhumanism can control people. I can see how but i want to see if you can keep your argument there.

Biological transhumanism can be used to physically modify people to be good at a certain role, or intentionally disable them to make them inferior, or intentionally make them super-powerful to serve as some kind of elite.

Put down the Kurzweil and read Brave New World, mmkay? All transhumanist arguments are based on theories and imagination, but when someone tries to argue against you with plausible examples from fiction, you begin crying fallacy.

You can't argue that transhumanism would allow us to specifically make humans shitter. You mean biological ENGINEERING could. Only some bio-engineering is transhumanist.

[Uiiop]

How does it control people? we don't have to upgrade the brain and we can put anti-virus software if we do. Also you haven't explained how biological transhumanism can control people. I can see how but i want to see if you can keep your argument there.

Biological transhumanism can be used to physically modify people to be good at a certain role, or intentionally disable them to make them inferior, or intentionally make them super-powerful to serve as some kind of elite.

Put down the Kurzweil and read Brave New World, mmkay? All transhumanist arguments are based on theories and imagination, but when someone tries to argue against you with plausible examples from fiction, you begin crying fallacy.

I used Brave new world as a worst case scenario. You're making the assumption that people can't prevent your problems with transhumanism without abandoning it. All we need to do is figure out if these issues are inevitable and occurring in transhumanism and if not how to prevent it.

[Phocidaea]

Thinking is not a problem.

Which is relevant how?

Dying of old age is not a problem.

Uh, yeah it is.

How has our civilization failed due to someone not living forever?

If everyone lives forever, then you run into all sorts of logistical problems. Populations are meant to continually replenish themselves. When you get rid of death, you also have to stop reproduction, and that creates another logistical issue.

If people live forever, they have no incentive to do anything, since they can just do it later. Assuming people would make productive use of immortality means you assume everyone is hardworking and willing to contribute.

And people don't want to live forever. Even with current lifespans you hear people talking about how boring their lives become over long spans of time. The longer someone does something, the more bored they are. People bitch about having to work thirty years. What makes you think people would be fine doing the same thing for eternity?

[Ifreann]

I am in full agreement with you. I think it's ridiculous that some people draw an arbitrary barrier around not only their's but other people bodies as well and say "this far but no further!" It just reeks of scientific ignorance and irrationality. I'm very glad to alive during the time that these ideas are coming to full fruition!

Where do I draw the line? I say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Disease is a problem. Broken limbs are a problem. Thinking is not a problem. Dying of old age is not a problem.

What the fuck? Dying for any reason is a problem.

[Divair]

How has our civilization failed due to someone not living forever?

Do you not see the issue behind this?

"Has our civilization failed due to tetanus? Or polio? Or hepatitis?"

If everyone lives forever, then you run into all sorts of logistical problems. Populations are meant to continually replenish themselves. When you get rid of death, you also have to stop reproduction, and that creates another logistical issue.

Only if we don't colonize space.

If people live forever, they have no incentive to do anything, since they can just do it later. Assuming people would make productive use of immortality means you assume everyone is hardworking and willing to contribute.

I don't know a single person who would sit around doing nothing if they were going to live forever.

And people don't want to live forever. Even with current lifespans you hear people talking about how boring their lives become over long spans of time. The longer someone does something, the more bored they are. People bitch about having to work thirty years. What makes you think people would be fine doing the same thing for eternity?

I'd be fine with eternity. If you don't want to live forever, then you don't have to. No one is going to force you to become immortal.

[Phocidaea]

theories and imagination

plausible examples from fiction

Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony here.

When I say "theories", I don't mean "scientific theories" or even "hypotheses". That's the wrong word. What I mean is "things that could happen but we have no proof of". Which is basically the same as fiction.

My point is that transhumanism is entirely fictional, but since you are so keen on bringing in fictional benefits, I have every right to bring in fictional disadvantages.

[Olivaero]

No. It. Does. Not. Transhumanism does not value a single thing apart from the scientific method.

I value independence, Independence from biology.
I value continual progress, and our biology is hindering us.
I value ethics and letting human minds wink out of existence because biology fails is un-ethical to me.

Transhumanism is a tool nothing more or less.

How does transhumanism value the scientific method? The scientific method is completely unrelated to this.
And, no, transhumanism is not just a tool. People control tools. Transhumanism controls people.

The Scientific method is the method which leads to the development of devices which enable transhumanism.

As to your second point let me pose a question to you, What is a person? As a Rational human being I conclude that I am no more than the thought patterns induced by the chemical reactions in the brain. My goal as a transhumanist is to be able to expand my capabilities by augmenting my physical body in order to achieve the fullest potential. So I conclude that Transhumanism is not controlling me It is my thought patterns that are controlling the tools it has given me, so it is me (the person) controlling the technology implanted in my body. And thus transhumanism does not control me.

[Uiiop]

Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony here.

When I say "theories", I don't mean "scientific theories" or even "hypotheses". That's the wrong word. What I mean is "things that could happen but we have no proof of". Which is basically the same as fiction.

My point is that transhumanism is entirely fictional, but since you are so keen on bringing in fictional benefits, I have every right to bring in fictional disadvantages.

And i'm saying that we shouldn't abandon transhumanism just because of that and we should discuss and figure out if we can avoid them.

[Phocidaea]

How has our civilization failed due to someone not living forever?

Do you not see the issue behind this?

"Has our civilization failed due to tetanus? Or polio? Or hepatitis?"

If everyone lives forever, then you run into all sorts of logistical problems. Populations are meant to continually replenish themselves. When you get rid of death, you also have to stop reproduction, and that creates another logistical issue.

Only if we don't colonize space.

But how do we colonize space? Colonizing space is completely different from transhumanism, and even more logistically challenging. Transhumanism is plausible. Space colonization beyond very rudimentary levels requires increasing levels of disregard for physics.

If people live forever, they have no incentive to do anything, since they can just do it later. Assuming people would make productive use of immortality means you assume everyone is hardworking and willing to contribute.

I don't know a single person who would sit around doing nothing if they were going to live forever.

Then your friends must be paragons of ethics and generosity, because the majority of people would just spend a million years watching porn and eating junk if you gave them the chance.

And people don't want to live forever. Even with current lifespans you hear people talking about how boring their lives become over long spans of time. The longer someone does something, the more bored they are. People bitch about having to work thirty years. What makes you think people would be fine doing the same thing for eternity?

I'd be fine with eternity. If you don't want to live forever, then you don't have to. No one is going to force you to become immortal.[/quote]

But what about peer pressure? If I want to die, what do people say? And what about everyone else? Everyone will get tired of living eventually. As life gets longer, so do suicide rates. We already have people shooting themselves at 50 because they don't want to waste 30 years doing nothing.

[Mefpan]

Forward with transhumanism. It seems like the best and most easily available way of advancing further as a species - and by no means should we stop advancing because some are afraid of the consequences. If mankind as a whole had been doing that from the beginning onwards, we would not have even harnessed fire yet.

Of course there are arguments against it. Do I care? No.

[Phocidaea]

When I say "theories", I don't mean "scientific theories" or even "hypotheses". That's the wrong word. What I mean is "things that could happen but we have no proof of". Which is basically the same as fiction.

My point is that transhumanism is entirely fictional, but since you are so keen on bringing in fictional benefits, I have every right to bring in fictional disadvantages.

And i'm saying that we shouldn't abandon transhumanism just because of that and we should discuss and figure out if we can avoid them.

There will always be disadvantages to it. Above all the danger of transhumanism is that it tries to make everyone perfect when some people realize there is no such thing.

[Ifreann]

How does it control people? we don't have to upgrade the brain and we can put anti-virus software if we do. Also you haven't explained how biological transhumanism can control people. I can see how but i want to see if you can keep your argument there.

Biological transhumanism can be used to physically modify people to be good at a certain role, or intentionally disable them to make them inferior, or intentionally make them super-powerful to serve as some kind of elite.

Yes, I suppose it can. Also, big sticks can be used to cave in people's skulls. So what?

Put down the Kurzweil and read Brave New World, mmkay? All transhumanist arguments are based on theories and imagination, but when someone tries to argue against you with plausible examples from fiction, you begin crying fallacy.

I'm not arguing from fiction. I'm not positing a utopia. I just want to use science to make us all harder to kill, and better at doing stuff. We'll solve the logistical or political consequences as we come to them, as we always have.

[Nidaria]

And i'm saying that we shouldn't abandon transhumanism just because of that and we should discuss and figure out if we can avoid them.

There will always be disadvantages to it. Above all the danger of transhumanism is that it tries to make everyone perfect when some people realize there is no such thing.

Indeed, no matter how far technology advances, humankind will always be imperfect.

[Uiiop]

And i'm saying that we shouldn't abandon transhumanism just because of that and we should discuss and figure out if we can avoid them.

There will always be disadvantages to it. Above all the danger of transhumanism is that it tries to make everyone perfect when some people realize there is no such thing.

better/=/perfect i don't see that being a danger expect for terrorist groups... I mean all of us aren't going to turn into Social Darwinists for transhumanism.

[Olivaero]

I am in full agreement with you. I think it's ridiculous that some people draw an arbitrary barrier around not only their's but other people bodies as well and say "this far but no further!" It just reeks of scientific ignorance and irrationality. I'm very glad to alive during the time that these ideas are coming to full fruition!

Where do I draw the line? I say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Disease is a problem. Broken limbs are a problem. Thinking is not a problem. Dying of old age is not a problem.

and that right there is where you have shown your arbitrariness you are the one that is determining what is broke, and what isn't. I argue simply to show you your own bias. If you don't think dying of old age is a problem why do you think dying of disease is a problem? How have you arrived at the conclusion that 80 ish is the perfect age for the human race? have you ever spoken to some one who was 200? no? didn't think so. The "but we'd get bored!!!!" argument is one made out of ignorance, and you must never argue out of ignorance for it leads you to produce ignorant conclusions.

[Ifreann]

Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony here.

When I say "theories", I don't mean "scientific theories" or even "hypotheses". That's the wrong word. What I mean is "things that could happen but we have no proof of". Which is basically the same as fiction.

My point is that transhumanism is entirely fictional, but since you are so keen on bringing in fictional benefits, I have every right to bring in fictional disadvantages.

I refer you to my earlier post on the various transhumanist things we already do.

[Phocidaea]

Where do I draw the line? I say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Disease is a problem. Broken limbs are a problem. Thinking is not a problem. Dying of old age is not a problem.

and that right there is where you have shown your arbitrariness you are the one that is determining what is broke, and what isn't. I argue simply to show you your own bias. If you don't think dying of old age is a problem why do you think dying of disease is a problem? How have you arrived at the conclusion that 80 ish is the perfect age for the human race? have you ever spoken to some one who was 200? no? didn't think so. The "but we'd get bored!!!!" argument is one made out of ignorance, and you must never argue out of ignorance for it leads you to produce ignorant conclusions.

What is ignorant about saying immortality produces boredom? We can see that 80 years already produces boredom. All it takes is some extrapolation.

And no, 80-ish is not the perfect age. But it's as far as we can go and still be "human".