Transhumanism

[Talonis]

How so? A mechanical arm would be similar to working out, so is excersizing also bad? Is that rejecting my humanity?

When one exercises, do you reject you arm? All you do is use your biological processes in order to reinforce what you have.

And thinking is a biological process. Why not simply remove your arm, and, via thinking, make a better one? This is also using a biological process to reinforce what you have, is it not?

[Ostroeuropa]

Increasing supply to meet demand is precisely what we are proposing.

Making the supply infinite is what you're proposing.

The demand is infinite.
And where the demand is not infinite, the supply can be adjusted accordingly by the individual.

[Olivaero]

I'll leave the rest of your post to TP to respond to you but for this particular point I have a hypothetical for you, Imagine a society where without fail once every month, you didn't know which day, but without fail you get hit on the head with a very large stick. this happens to every single person within the society and they all find it very painful. Imagine in such a society their were philosophers who waxed lyrical about how the whacking upon the head once a month taught every one valuable lessons in life and lent perspective. This is exactly the current attitude to death. And what we think about the head whacking society right now would be how a post death society would see us. It is nothing more than a horrible limit placed upon us by our biology.

That's a terrible analogy.

It is only lack that drives us to appreciate what we have. While we are content to fulfill our needs so that we do not experience lack for many things precisely because there is also lack of other things we find valuable, if there is no shortage of life, no lack, then what value is placed on it? In terms of supply and demand, if supply is infinite, what matters demand when deciding value?

We don't operate in terms of supply and demand with regards to life though do we? I have never really experienced not being alive so i cannot place a "value" on it for all the practical experience I have life may well be infinite I already do what makes me happy, I would continue to do what makes me happy even if I new I could do it forever... especially if I knew I could do it for ever actually because there would be no pressure on me to do something more "worthy" or to leave my mark on the world some day... Infinite life would only improve my existence... I cant even imagine how it would devalue any ones...

[AETEN II]

Making the supply infinite is what you're proposing.

The demand is infinite.
And where the demand is not infinite, the supply can be adjusted accordingly by the individual.

Not to mention that even if immortal, there still remains the chance of your possible destruction. While harder for you to be destroyed due to being either a cyborg or full-blown robot with a human AI, there would still be 'deaths' as idiots slipped up and were destroyed.

[Ostroeuropa]

What about this changes by eliminating the lack? (Or severely scaling it back.)

Because then those people understand that life is not limited. There is no lack for them to understand.

Can we assume we're talking about termination of cognitive functions here, and throw the soul in as included for the purpose of our discussion as "Life".
If so, i'd argue that plenty of christians perfectly "understand" the atheists view of the afterlife. They just view it as undesirable. And yet from their view, everyone does in fact have a soul.
The "Facts" (to them, since we're talking about perceptions) don't matter. They can still perfectly understand and appreciate what the "lack" of a soul would entail.

They are able to appreciate what lacking a soul would be, despite their perceptions being that everyone does in fact already "live" forever.
They seem to be proof positive your argument is fundamentally incorrect

[Olivaero]

Mm in our early stages of development, but I doubt anyone is suggesting augmenting new borns here...

When you are hit, that does not affect the way you think? When you starve, when you are exhausted, that does not affect your thoughts?

Boot camp must be useless then.

Yes those things plug into our baser instincts... I file them under "things we can do without".

[Transhuman Proteus]

How so? A mechanical arm would be similar to working out, so is excersizing also bad? Is that rejecting my humanity?

When one exercises, do you reject you arm? All you do is use your biological processes in order to reinforce what you have.

Yes, you are rejecting the arm you have and doing what you can to change it into something better as it is the only choice you have. Exercise, being an imperfect process with temporary results unless you constantly practice it and which will eventually fail to deliver results.

Which they would, because humans are weak. Technological augmentation or full-blown assimilation would improve you beyond what evolution could offer.

Humanity has expanded to every continent on Earth (as well as space) and can thrive in conditions that would kill any other remotely comparable species on this planet. I'd say we're pretty damn tough.

No, our tools and technology make us tough. And we are tough mentally (potentially). Most of those conditions will kill us. Space will kill us, the ocean will kill us, the sun will kill us. Augmentation has the potential to make our bodies a lot tougher, and far less likely to sicken or fall victim to accidental death.

[Britannic Realms]

I cant even imagine how it would devalue any ones...

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

[Ostroeuropa]

I cant even imagine how it would devalue any ones...

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

That's entirely untrue.
A life has purpose so long as it decides it does.
When a life decides it has no purpose, it can decide to terminate itself.

[Vetalia]

No, our tools and technology make us tough. And we are tough mentally (potentially). Most of those conditions will kill us. Space will kill us, the ocean will kill us, the sun will kill us. Augmentation has the potential to make our bodies a lot tougher, and far less likely to sicken or fall victim to accidental death.

I absolutely agree with the use of technology to make us healthier and safer, but enhancing our abilities is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

Generally, one would build a religion around water. Their thirst drives them to appreciate water. It's not the other way around.

And once water becomes plentiful, people largely stop worshiping it. And little of value is lost because of that.

No better or worse?

Tell me, if it came down to the matter of the survival of humankind or the survival of 'magical elves from four dimensions over', and you had to pick which species survived, which would it be?

Totally depends on the situation at hand. Why do I have to choose one? Is there a war? If so, who started it? Who conducted themselves more honorably? If we are competing for the same vital resource, who has better claim to it and why? How many individuals are in each species? What are they generally up to?

I certainly wouldn't side with humans just because I'm human.

[AETEN II]

No, our tools and technology make us tough. And we are tough mentally (potentially). Most of those conditions will kill us. Space will kill us, the ocean will kill us, the sun will kill us. Augmentation has the potential to make our bodies a lot tougher, and far less likely to sicken or fall victim to accidental death.

I absolutely agree with the use of technology to make us healthier and safer, but enhancing our abilities is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

Except there's no evidence of that. History shows that it only increases our strength as a species, and our survivability.

[Ostroeuropa]

Generally, one would build a religion around water. Their thirst drives them to appreciate water. It's not the other way around.

And once water becomes plentiful, people largely stop worshiping it. And little of value is lost because of that.

No better or worse?

Tell me, if it came down to the matter of the survival of humankind or the survival of 'magical elves from four dimensions over', and you had to pick which species survived, which would it be?

Totally depends on the situation at hand. Why do I have to choose one? Is there a war? If so, who started it? Who conducted themselves more honorably? If we are competing for the same vital resource, who has better claim to it and why? How many individuals are in each species? What are they generally up to?

I certainly wouldn't side with humans just because I'm human.

This is precisely my view. At absolute best, if denied all other information and told
"You must choose or else."
i'd pick humans, because at that point, the only thing I can go on is self-interest.

[Talonis]

No, our tools and technology make us tough. And we are tough mentally (potentially). Most of those conditions will kill us. Space will kill us, the ocean will kill us, the sun will kill us. Augmentation has the potential to make our bodies a lot tougher, and far less likely to sicken or fall victim to accidental death.

I absolutely agree with the use of technology to make us healthier and safer, but enhancing our abilities is simply a disaster waiting to happen.

How so? Being intelligent is a detriment? Strength? So do we need to close down schools? Demolish Gyms? Destroy farms?

[Olivaero]

I cant even imagine how it would devalue any ones...

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

Okay I'll leave aside for one second that you couldn't possibly know this because your not immortal, It would not make life worseless. Why? Because we value things we need to live, full stop. And we need Life, to live funnily enough. Yes you do have a lot of time on your hands once you have defeated death, doesn't this just give you more time to find things to do? Why do you assume people would just fall idle?

[Conserative Morality]

Indeed, but no reason to treat it like a sacred artifact we need to build little shrines to. If we one day escape the solar system I'd be bemused at people wasting resources and life making pilgrimages back here. Much like I know my families tree and where I come from, but I don't feel a special attachment to the particular plot of land that housed my great, great, great, great, great grand pappy.

Now I'm something of an environmentalist, but that would apply to any planet or ecosystem. I'd like earth preserved, like any potentially habitable planet.

I place great value on history and sentimentality.

So - "they way things are are the only way things can be"? I'm still not seeing why a potentially very long lived philosopher wont be able to philosophize. The philosophy might well be different, but still philosophy.

And there's the problem. Not that philosophy wouldn't exist, but that philosophy would lack that which has driven so much of philosophy up 'til now: a sense of the human condition.

So does a shorter life have more meaning or poignancy? How much shorter?

No. A shorter life has less meaning as it holds less potential for experience of life.

It does, since body alone is not solely responsible for how we think or perceive things, it is an interplay between our hardware, and the software built by our experiences.

Our hardware creates limits through which the software can work. I worry less about the software we can get now and more about what changing the hardware will allow our software to change to.

I've failed to see any real argument from you as to the real relevance of that as to the potential value or quality of thought. Oh yes, why it troubles you, but not really why it is a problem or reflects poorly on people who'd pursue it.

To think as a human being is all that is worthwhile. You speak continually as though there is a greater purpose; there is not. It's like asking me "Well, why do you think like you? Wouldn't you want to think like Thomas Jefferson?"

To which I respond "No, I am who I am. I would not want to be any other, as my being is intrinsic to who I am. I have no desire to lack who I am, no deep-seated hatred of myself so great that I want to reject who I am."

And then you stare at me, puzzled, as you have what I lack and lack what I have.

Do you have anything quantifiable to back that up?

*cough*

The rejection of approximations and the insistence on absolutes are the manifestation of a nihilism that loathes freedom, tolerance, and equity.

[Transhuman Proteus]

I cant even imagine how it would devalue any ones...

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

So - "if you never died you'd get bored". Not wanting to be bored isn't a motivation to do things? Do you picture very long lived people just lying on their lounge for centuries doing absolutely nothing?

And the universe if finite in terms of life, the planet is finite as is the star we are orbiting. Where is this infinite time coming from?

[Britannic Realms]

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

That's entirely untrue.
A life has purpose so long as it decides it does.
When a life decides it has no purpose, it can decide to terminate itself.

That completely defeats the point of becoming immortal in the first place. You might as well not be immortal and set yourself a purpose rather then just killing yourself when 'a life decides it has no purpose'.

[Vetalia]

We have, but still are relatively weak. Augmentation or assimilation would make us goddamned unstoppable.

Possibly, but is being unstoppable a desirable aim?

Also, a fair amount of those achievements (especially space), were done with technology.

Technology is inseparable from humanity in the context of our survival as a species.

[Conserative Morality]

And thinking is a biological process. Why not simply remove your arm, and, via thinking, make a better one? This is also using a biological process to reinforce what you have, is it not?

Not anymore than the atomic bomb is a biological process.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's entirely untrue.
A life has purpose so long as it decides it does.
When a life decides it has no purpose, it can decide to terminate itself.

That completely defeats the point of becoming immortal in the first place. You might as well not be immortal and set yourself a purpose rather then just killing yourself when 'a life decides it has no purpose'.

The point is, you get to do everything you want to do, given enough time.
To read ALL the books etc.
Then you can decide "Ok, now i'm done." rather than being rudely interrupted by the man in the black cloak.

[Talonis]

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

Okay I'll leave aside for one second that you couldn't possibly know this because your not immortal, It would not make life worseless. Why? Because we value things we need to live, full stop. And we need Life, to live funnily enough. Yes you do have a lot of time on your hands once you have defeated death, doesn't this just give you more time to find things to do? Why do you assume people would just fall idle?

Precisely.
Whence more-
"Society creates problems, and business solves them"
- Ben Franklin
There will ALWAYS be problems we can solve. If not, we'll just make them up.

[Britannic Realms]

It would make life worthless, which is quite a devaluation. If there is death, then it gives the drive to do something before you die. It gives your life a purpose. That drive, that purpose is gone if you are immortal because you have an infinite time to do it. Life wouldn't have a purpose.

Okay I'll leave aside for one second that you couldn't possibly know this because your not immortal, It would not make life worseless. Why? Because we value things we need to live, full stop. And we need Life, to live funnily enough. Yes you do have a lot of time on your hands once you have defeated death, doesn't this just give you more time to find things to do? Why do you assume people would just fall idle?

There is only a finite amount of things one can do. However big that number is, it is not infinity.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

Possibly, but is being unstoppable a desirable aim?

Um...yes?

If I can be smarter than I am now, that's good.

If I can be stronger than I am now, that's good.

If I can have the option to live longer than my current life expectancy, that's good.

If I can have lasers in my fingertips...well, I don't really miss them, but who knows? They might come in handy one day. So good.

These are the values of transhumanism.

[Talonis]

And thinking is a biological process. Why not simply remove your arm, and, via thinking, make a better one? This is also using a biological process to reinforce what you have, is it not?

Not anymore than the atomic bomb is a biological process.

Ahh, I see. And so again, do we therefore have to simply erase civilization?
Also, the Atom Bomb was a life-saving device, and a requisite. See the thread about it.