Transhumanism

[Ostroeuropa]

What do you mean by organic matter exactly.

Will my program self-correct? Will it adapt? Will it change? My mind is purely physical, based on the unique connection patterns of neurons in my brain. As we learn those neurons make new connections and develop new understandings and interpretations. Will this eternal substance function exactly like my brain?

Hopefully so.
Or it wouldn't be a transfer, it'd be a duplicate. And a poor one at that.

[Transhuman Proteus]

Do you imagine how we think now is the best we could possibly ever think? If not why do you think the way "changed human beings think" would necessarily be worse?

How we think now is the best we could possibly think.

Because?

What about human thought of today is perfect?

[Seperates]

Well, I'm assuming these people aren't trying out a fake arm for a day.

Although, if they were, I would probably be just as horrified.

Self-improvement is important. Provided that self-improvement doesn't harm other individuals, i'd even consider it a moral imperative.

I'd consider it a moral neutral. It happens, for better or for worse.

[Conserative Morality]

That's largely for the individual to decide. There are some norms.

What would you say self-improvement is for you?

[Seperates]

Will my program self-correct? Will it adapt? Will it change? My mind is purely physical, based on the unique connection patterns of neurons in my brain. As we learn those neurons make new connections and develop new understandings and interpretations. Will this eternal substance function exactly like my brain?

Hopefully so.
Or it wouldn't be a transfer, it'd be a duplicate. And a poor one at that.

A poor duplicate is worthless.
And I am not of value as an unchanging program.

[AETEN II]

1) We'll be able to colonize space by then. Nobody will give a shit about Earth besides strip mining if for metal and researching the technology to make a faster than light drive (NASA is already researching one). We won't need Earth.

Earth is forever our home. We don't need the Colosseum of Rome, the Tower of London, Hagia Sofia, but these things remind us of our past, who our ancestors and predecessors were, and who we are.

2) You could either force her hand, or simply wipe your memory of her upon death. Really, it's up to you.

What the actual fuck.

3) Lol life is meaningless? While being able to endlessly revel in the glory of mandkind as immortalized great thinkers were able to dedicate entire centuries to their work, rapidly expanding our culture and increasing our technological power? Sounds more like heaven.

Sounds more like hell. You think philosophy is born from a life with no end and no purpose?

Earth is not our home. It is our birthplace that will be destroyed eventually by cosmic events beyond out control. Better to leave it and spread ourselves across as much space as possible to avoid extinction. With immortality, our greatest would have infinite time to work and contribute to mankind.
And yes, with an augmented mind you could likely spare yourself the grief, if-so-wished. Although you could probably convince a loved one to augment themselves as well. Turning up such a gift defies logic.

And there will always be purpose- to contribute to the survival and condition of the species. Not advancing ourselves as far as we possibly can is pathetic and asking for extinction.

[Britannic Realms]

Well sorry if it sounded that way. Everyone is, of course, entitled to their own opinion.



But don't you think life would get a little boring after a while? Oh and, whether or not it is mutilation, and whether or not it helps your body, is quite subjective.

Well, I'm terribly sorry if you would be so unsportsman-like towards those poor other organisms who wouldn't have immortality. Having a poor dog by mortal, whilst I'm immortal? I'm afraid that's just not fair. Our bodies our not weak, we can lift a fair few pounds, and the stuff that we can't moved is moved by machinery. Again, whether or not our body is advanced is subjective, it is advanced compared to the body of a snake or something.

So, you expect immortality to grace us within a century, eh? And what will this mean, a severe lack of food and water. The biggest overpopulation problem ever scene. Have you seen that Torchwood special where nobody died, and they ended up burning people alive? That, coupled with even more births, would just completely over-crowed the planet. And I'm terribly sorry if this doesn't quite fit your bill, but I would rather die, and have my children live in a world where such awful overcrowding would never occur.

Species exist solely to survive and conquer. This is the ultimate truth, the Greater Good. We owe nothing to other life-forms besides humans, we take care of our own, and only our own, as unless aiding a species supports our survival, it is a waste of resources better dedicated elsewhere.

Also, for one, Torchwood is a retarded, poorly written show with its only attraction being violence. Not only was that scenario poorly thought out (if people are both invincible and immortal, then they would not need food). For one, it wouldn't be free. You would have to pay for assimilation. Secondly, that problem is solved with abortion and careful regulation of the human population. You could even use some of the augmentations to track pregnancies if overpopulation became a real issue. Besides, augmentation and full assimilation would make extraterrestrial colonials on the Moon feasible and cheaper.

And life would not become 'boring'. The concept is unfounded, as very few immortal species exist, and they lack sentience. And don't bring up the bullshit 'time distortion'. That occurs because of the slow degradation of the brain, which would not be an issue.

Also, humans are weak. Our own DNA kills us eventually. You can be killed with a simple strike to the back of the head. You can be killed by falling two stories. You can die from infection. We're far from perfection, and augmentation is the best route to this.

That's awfully mean to those poor animals. Your points may have been true about the barbaric societies of the past but we have standards in today's world.

So what you're saying here is that transhumanism requires some form of eugenics, or something that could easily be warped to be eugenics. Oh great. Paying for this 'assimilation', this sounds like the foundations of some kind of neo-feudalistic society in which these cyborgs would rule over the poor people who wouldn't be able to be blessed with such augmentations. As a matter of fact, assimilation is an awfully sinister word to use, it sounds as if this augmentation would rip away your humanity and put you into some kind of hive mind.

Life would become boring. There is only a finite amount of things one can do.

I'd sooner die from falling from a two-storey building than be transformed into one of these cybernetic monstrosities that you appear to be showing.

Oh, and what if a government gains control over these implants. Surely they would involve computers? Therefore, they can be hacked and then you've gone and completely buggered the whole thing up if that kind of thing happens.

[Conserative Morality]

Because?

What about human thought of today is perfect?

People think how people think. I see no point in thinking like anything other than a human being.

What's the point of being human save being human? I don't aspire to anything different, because there is no higher goal than humanity; humanity, as is, is what I am, what I believe in, what I support. All of our flaws, our problems, physical and otherwise, they make us what we are. I wouldn't trade being human for anything.

[Finjaldn]

Now I may be crazy here, but i'd say that detaching ourselves from our human forms is a bad idea. You know the phrase 'That's what makes you human'? Well once Transhumanism comes about, that is no longer going to apply to us. Detaching ourselves even more from humanity then we already are is the fucking worst idea anyone has ever come up with, because once you take that first step, you're no longer human. I mean I support giving bionic body parts to people who have lost limbs/eyes/organs, but giving it to some ungrateful idiot (Ungrateful in the sense that he isn't happy with the fact that he has been born without a disfigured body/some form of mental retardation/etc.) who willingly agrees get own limbs cut off is not acceptable in anyway whatsoever, and that fact that such an idea even exists scares the living shit out of me.

TL;DR: Fuck. No.

[Seperates]

Earth is forever our home. We don't need the Colosseum of Rome, the Tower of London, Hagia Sofia, but these things remind us of our past, who our ancestors and predecessors were, and who we are.

What the actual fuck.

Sounds more like hell. You think philosophy is born from a life with no end and no purpose?

Earth is not our home. It is our birthplace that will be destroyed eventually by cosmic events beyond out control. Better to leave it and spread ourselves across as much space as possible to avoid extinction. With immortality, our greatest would have infinite time to work and contribute to mankind.
And yes, with an augmented mind you could likely spare yourself the grief, if-so-wished. Although you could probably convince a loved one to augment themselves as well. Turning up such a gift defies logic.

And there will always be purpose- to contribute to the survival and condition of the species. Not advancing ourselves as far as we possibly can is pathetic and asking for extinction.

So long as it is equal opportunity and not based on those who have the most money.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's largely for the individual to decide. There are some norms.

What would you say self-improvement is for you?

Expansion of knowledge, empathy and understanding in personal relationships, to not only recognize what is an ethical way to act but to adhere to it once recognized. The expansion of knowledge is largely subserviant to this secondary impulse, the desire to do no wrong etc.
Basically, self-improvement is an ethics class.

[Olivaero]

Because?

What about human thought of today is perfect?

People think how people think. I see no point in thinking like anything other than a human being.

What's the point of being human save being human? I don't aspire to anything different, because there is no higher goal than humanity; humanity, as is, is what I am, what I believe in, what I support. All of our flaws, our problems, physical and otherwise, they make us what we are. I wouldn't trade being human for anything.

Why do you not see any point in gaining additional perspectives?

EDIT'D for clarity

[Conserative Morality]

Earth is not our home. It is our birthplace that will be destroyed eventually by cosmic events beyond out control. Better to leave it and spread ourselves across as much space as possible to avoid extinction.

Even as one's home since one was a child is burning to the ground, one does not shrug and say "Oh, what matters it? Just a relic of the past.". Memories have meaning, and pull besides.

With immortality, our greatest would have infinite time to work and contribute to mankind.

Death provides both individual and societal impetus. Without either, we lose the progress you so crave.

And yes, with an augmented mind you could likely spare yourself the grief, if-so-wished.

And that doesn't strike you as hopelessly infantile?

Although you could probably convince a loved one to augment themselves as well. Turning up such a gift defies logic.

What good is rationality without the values that irrationality imparts?

Rationality is only a tool. It bears no values of its own.

And there will always be purpose- to contribute to the survival and condition of the species. Not advancing ourselves as far as we possibly can is pathetic and asking for extinction.

At what point do we stop being homo sapiens and start being homo machina?

[Esternial]

Obviously, I had to take the fourth option.

[Olivaero]

Now I may be crazy here, but i'd say that detaching ourselves from our human forms is a bad idea. You know the phrase 'That's what makes you human'? Well once Transhumanism comes about, that is no longer going to apply to us. Detaching ourselves even more from humanity then we already are is the fucking worst idea anyone has ever come up with, because once you take that first step, you're no longer human. I mean I support giving bionic body parts to people who have lost limbs/eyes/organs, but giving it to some ungrateful idiot (Ungrateful in the sense that he isn't happy with the fact that he has been born without a disfigured body/some form of mental retardation/etc.) who willingly agrees get own limbs cut off is not acceptable in anyway whatsoever, and that fact that such an idea even exists scares the living shit out of me.

TL;DR: Fuck. No.

If the only thing that makes you human is disease and death and all your limitations you mustn't have a very cheery life...

[Vetalia]

I'm opposed to it in its entirety; extending human lifespans isn't transhumanism, as we would still be humans even if we live indefinitely.

Transhumanism would bring about the worst excesses of elitism in human society and amplify it. Having a transhuman aristocracy lording over everyone else by virtue of their ability to afford these enhancements is infinitely worse than even the most stratified feudal societies of centuries past...the difference then was the common people could overcome the elites by virtue of the fact that they were all human and subject to the same limitations but with an aristocracy comprised of individuals vastly more capable than any common person the chance of overthrowing a corrupted regime is virtually zero.

[AETEN II]

Species exist solely to survive and conquer. This is the ultimate truth, the Greater Good. We owe nothing to other life-forms besides humans, we take care of our own, and only our own, as unless aiding a species supports our survival, it is a waste of resources better dedicated elsewhere.

Also, for one, Torchwood is a retarded, poorly written show with its only attraction being violence. Not only was that scenario poorly thought out (if people are both invincible and immortal, then they would not need food). For one, it wouldn't be free. You would have to pay for assimilation. Secondly, that problem is solved with abortion and careful regulation of the human population. You could even use some of the augmentations to track pregnancies if overpopulation became a real issue. Besides, augmentation and full assimilation would make extraterrestrial colonials on the Moon feasible and cheaper.

And life would not become 'boring'. The concept is unfounded, as very few immortal species exist, and they lack sentience. And don't bring up the bullshit 'time distortion'. That occurs because of the slow degradation of the brain, which would not be an issue.

Also, humans are weak. Our own DNA kills us eventually. You can be killed with a simple strike to the back of the head. You can be killed by falling two stories. You can die from infection. We're far from perfection, and augmentation is the best route to this.

That's awfully mean to those poor animals. Your points may have been true about the barbaric societies of the past but we have standards in today's world.

So what you're saying here is that transhumanism requires some form of eugenics, or something that could easily be warped to be eugenics. Oh great. Paying for this 'assimilation', this sounds like the foundations of some kind of neo-feudalistic society in which these cyborgs would rule over the poor people who wouldn't be able to be blessed with such augmentations. As a matter of fact, assimilation is an awfully sinister word to use, it sounds as if this augmentation would rip away your humanity and put you into some kind of hive mind.

Life would become boring. There is only a finite amount of things one can do.

I'd sooner die from falling from a two-storey building than be transformed into one of these cybernetic monstrosities that you appear to be showing.

Oh, and what if a government gains control over these implants. Surely they would involve computers? Therefore, they can be hacked and then you've gone and completely buggered the whole thing up if that kind of thing happens.

Actually, that's a stupendous idea. A hive mind would be perfect, and eliminate the threat of hacking. Not to mention that it would permanently bind humanity together in a peaceful, utopian society as not only would it be impossible to wreak malice upon others, it would certainly increase morale of the species. It would also the be the ultimate form of the social animal- form what we evolved and what we are.

And no, we don't owe anything to other species. They're lucky if we're kind enough to store their DNA and resurrect them on whim. We don't need them at that point. We don't owe anything to them. A species only owes itself its own survival, nothing else. Dogs and Cats exist for the sole original reason of serving humanity- now acting as companions.

[Ostroeuropa]

As another question, assume aliens exist.
Assume they somewhat resemble humans in thoughts and mannerisms in a spectrumish kind of way.

Most Humans --- Some Humans+Some Aliens --- Most Aliens

Now assume humans are unquestionably, undeniably, in the wrong by doing something against this species. Could be mass genocide for instance.
What informs the side you take in this issue. Your membership of the human species, or your humanity

Now you are to assume that the humans have done some kind of stupid bomb thing.
They are unquestionably the aggressors, and it will wipe out the other race if it's allowed to continue.
You have an oppurtunity to rig the bomb to instead kill all of the humans (the aggressors.)

What do you do.

[Conserative Morality]

Expansion of knowledge, empathy and understanding in personal relationships, to not only recognize what is an ethical way to act but to adhere to it once recognized. The expansion of knowledge is largely subserviant to this secondary impulse, the desire to do no wrong etc.
Basically, self-improvement is an ethics class.

How to act in an ethical way?

What if empathy were to get in the way of acting correctly?

And what decides what is the ethical way to act? Don't you already decide that? If you think there is a better way, why don't you change it as a human being, now?

[Seperates]

What would you say self-improvement is for you?

Expansion of knowledge, empathy and understanding in personal relationships, to not only recognize what is an ethical way to act but to adhere to it once recognized. The expansion of knowledge is largely subserviant to this secondary impulse, the desire to do no wrong etc.
Basically, self-improvement is an ethics class.

I'd say it's based on success and failure.

[Conserative Morality]

As another question, assume aliens exist.
Assume they somewhat resemble humans in thoughts and mannerisms in a spectrumish kind of way.

Most Humans --- Some Humans+Some Aliens --- Most Aliens

Now assume humans are unquestionably, undeniably, in the wrong by doing something against this species. Could be mass genocide for instance.
What informs the side you take in this issue. Your membership of the human species, or your humanity

You assume I find a difference between the two.

[Esternial]

Anyway, in regard to the topic:

I'm all for transhumanism. With any luck, I'll be doing research for it later on in my life. My interest lies with nanoparticles, among other things.

[Ostroeuropa]

As another question, assume aliens exist.
Assume they somewhat resemble humans in thoughts and mannerisms in a spectrumish kind of way.

Most Humans --- Some Humans+Some Aliens --- Most Aliens

Now assume humans are unquestionably, undeniably, in the wrong by doing something against this species. Could be mass genocide for instance.
What informs the side you take in this issue. Your membership of the human species, or your humanity

You assume I find a difference between the two.

Then, and forgive my phrasing here, but what exactly is it that separates you from a racist if we think on those terms?
Regardless of the actions of the humans, you'd back them. Regardless of the actions of the aliens even.
Regardless of similarity etc.
You know your race, and you're sticking by it, all other ones be damned.

[Finjaldn]

Now I may be crazy here, but i'd say that detaching ourselves from our human forms is a bad idea. You know the phrase 'That's what makes you human'? Well once Transhumanism comes about, that is no longer going to apply to us. Detaching ourselves even more from humanity then we already are is the fucking worst idea anyone has ever come up with, because once you take that first step, you're no longer human. I mean I support giving bionic body parts to people who have lost limbs/eyes/organs, but giving it to some ungrateful idiot (Ungrateful in the sense that he isn't happy with the fact that he has been born without a disfigured body/some form of mental retardation/etc.) who willingly agrees get own limbs cut off is not acceptable in anyway whatsoever, and that fact that such an idea even exists scares the living shit out of me.

TL;DR: Fuck. No.

If the only thing that makes you human is disease and death and all your limitations you mustn't have a very cheery life...

Not what I meant and you know it isn't. Basically, I believe in what Conservative Morality said. Our downfalls are what make us human.

[Olivaero]

If the only thing that makes you human is disease and death and all your limitations you mustn't have a very cheery life...

Not what I meant and you know it isn't. Basically, I believe in what Conservative Morality said. Our downfalls are what make us human.

Why aren't our success's what makes us human? Why must it always be our downfalls?