Transhumanism

[Steezie]

Im wondering what people's view on the idea of Transhumanism is. Transhumanism, as the Wikipedia definition goes, is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human cognitive and physical abilities and ameliorate what it regards as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition, such as disease, aging, and death.

Transhumanism is not incompatible with religion. Some Transhumanists are religious, however most are secular.

 

[Shemjaza]

I consider myself a transhumanist.

I see it as a path to drag humanity into a new phase of evolution, to take direct control of our bodies and minds with the addition of biological/genetic changes and the direct incorporation of machines to our selves.

My ultimate ideal is that humanity will be allowed to transform ourselves into super intelligent, near immortal, space traveling entities. The Earth could hopefully return to a clean and healthy planet for us to watch over rather than exploit and destroy.

What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason!
how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how
express and admirable! in action how like an angel!
in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the
world! the paragon of animals!

 

[marblehead]

Sounds like fun.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

I have considered myself a transhumanist at times (in fact I'm teaching a course on transhumanism next semester). However, I have qualms about some transhumanist goals and methodologies. Transhumanist support for libertarian economic measures troubles me, and many transhumanists simply seem too fanatical to attract the kind of support that they will need for their more positive goals (like extending the human lifespan). There seems to be a lack of political pragmatism in the movement.
Also, though I personally am o.k. with it, I think transhumanism's view of spirituality is somewhat reactionary. Not to mention their view of post-modernism, environmentalism, and any other movement that might have moral qualms about creating human-animal chimeras (lol).

 

[LouTheWicked]

Hmmm, yeah that would be my kind of thing except for the eternal life part.

 

[Isis-Astoroth]

My comment to those on such branches of science is this: Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. No biological organism in nature will live forever, it will always end up dying, therefore I do not believe we should find ways to prevent death. Just because the physical may one day be able to cope with forever, doesn't mean to say the mind will.

Also, I heard somewhere that some were of the opinion that it a scientist's ethical duty to keep people alive as long as possible. But, just because people may live 20 more years because of something or other, doesn't mean to say they will have a good extra 20 years, they may spend it in agony, is that ethical?

I believe that not all aspects of the 'human condition' should be eradicated because once you start playing god, you're going to open up a whole new generation of issues, not just ethical, but moral, biological, psychological and so on.

 

[Shemjaza]

Hmmm, yeah that would be my kind of thing except for the eternal life part.

[FONT=&quot]That's why I said 'near immortal'. I don't think living forever is even possible, either accidents, unforseen danger or the slow cooling of the universe itself would all mean the end of any post human creature. I'm not interested in living longer because I'm afraid to die, I'm interested in seeing a whole lot more that the universe has to offer, weird wonderful things.[/FONT]

I believe that not all aspects of the 'human condition' should be eradicated because once you start playing god, you're going to open up a whole new generation of issues, not just ethical, but moral, biological, psychological and so on.

This sort of danger is one of the things transhumanists want to avoid.
Last year I got acute appendicitis, with out our modern medicine I would have died in agony or my friend who was born with a hare lip but due to surgery as a baby she's utterly gorgeous today. So I'm a big fan finding ways around our current limitations.

I understand that many people believe dying of old age to be natural and appropriate thing... but I doubt they would be as relaxed about cancer or heart disease. Just because it is currently a part of our bodies doesn't mean it's a moral obligation to endure it if we can avoid it.

[FONT=&quot]I'd also love to be smarter and I'd really love to see an alien star from up close.[/FONT]

 

[akaibara]

No biological organism in nature will live forever, it will always end up dying, therefore I do not believe we should find ways to prevent death.

I'd like to argue that single celled organism can and/or do live for ever. They don't die of old age, they just divide into 'new' cells. So even if one of the 'new' cells dies, the others are still alive. Kinda weird to think about.

 

[MoonlessNight]

The thing that worries me is that transhumanists aren't loyal to humanity, since they'd be perfectly willing to alter any part of what a human is to make a "better" being. And it isn't about themselves, because they will never live to see all of this happen. But it's something to do with the children I guess, because the mere existence of super-intelligent aliens isn't enough for transhumanists, though it would be if they somehow descended from humans. I guess I just trust movements which such vague goals when they defend them so fiercly. I mean, what are they really willing to give up, or to force other people to give up, to achieve these goals? And for what purpose, some vague notion of progress?

 

[Steezie]

Transhumanist support for libertarian economic measures troubles me

There are different kinds of Transhumanists.

According to Wikipedia-

• Democratic transhumanism, a political philosophy synthesizing liberal democracy, social democracy, direct democracy and transhumanism.
• Extropianism, an early school of transhumanism characterized by a set of principles advocating a proactive approach to human evolution.
• Hedonistic Imperative, a moral philosophy based upon a perceived obligation to use technology to eliminate suffering in all sentient life.
• Libertarian transhumanism, a political philosophy synthesizing libertarianism and transhumanism.
• Postgenderism, a social philosophy which seeks the elimination of gender in the human species through the application of advanced biotechnology and assisted reproductive technologies.
• Singularitarianism, a moral philosophy based upon the belief that a technological singularity is possible, and advocating deliberate action to effect it and ensure its safety.

 

[JustJack!]

Altering humanity truely does open up so many new doors that could lead to a future racked by plauges, medical failures, cyborgs, genocides, and the end of free will, and even humanity.

I don't think we're mature enough, as a species, to deal with those kinds of technologies.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Hey Steezie,
I know not all transhumanists are libertarians. I'm not even saying libertarianism is a bad thing. I just think that most transhumanists underestimate the possibility this new tech has for perpetuating class inequity (not to mention perpetuating First World\Third World differences).

 

[MoonlessNight]

Hey Steezie,
I know not all transhumanists are libertarians. I'm not even saying libertarianism is a bad thing. I just think that most transhumanists underestimate the possibility this new tech has for perpetuating class inequity (not to mention perpetuating First World\Third World differences).

Honestly I have to wonder if how many of them even care about furthering the divide between haves and haves not. I know some of them want to make everyone happy and "suffer-free" but others just want to make sure that some part of humanity becomes godlike. It doesn't have to be everyone, just as long as someone gets out there. Seriously, have you heard some of these people respond when asked to questions like "what do you think should be done with humans who don't want to be improved." Many of them treat "unperfected" humans like they are a lower species. So then have versus have not to them becomes a question like "isn't it unfair that dogs can't own cars?"

Of course, not all transhumanists are like that, but I enough are as to be absolutely terrifying.

 

[Shemjaza]

Hey Steezie,
I know not all transhumanists are libertarians. I'm not even saying libertarianism is a bad thing. I just think that most transhumanists underestimate the possibility this new tech has for perpetuating class inequity (not to mention perpetuating First World\Third World differences).

I empathise completely. A great many Transhumanists are much bigger on the tran then on the humanist.

I don't like the attitude many Transhumanists have of being willing and happy to leave the earth ruined and billions starving just so a few 'superior' beings can ascend to greatness.

I'm a huge fan of almost unlimited modification, but I do think helping the poor, sick and hungry is a first step for our civilization. (I guess I'm one of the few socialist Transhumanists).

Some Transhumanists seem to play lip service to serving mankind, but have an underlying desire to crush all those who've wronged them in their mighty metal claws.

 

[Steezie]

Altering humanity truely does open up so many new doors that could lead to a future racked by plauges, medical failures, cyborgs, genocides, and the end of free will, and even humanity.

I don't think we're mature enough, as a species, to deal with those kinds of technologies.

In all fairness, much of our society does that NOW.

 

[Isis-Astoroth]

I agree with using surgery to improve someone's life because of deformities at birth, or manipulating genetics to enable families to have children that don't carry their genetic diseases, and to find ways of preventing cancer and so on. But there are may meanings of 'improving humanity' and I don't generally take it to mean eradicating disease. I believe it also includes the so called designer children, were parents get to choose their children so they look more like their parents, or have certain physical characteristics. Personally, I think sometimes that it's humanity's selfish nature that drives some of this 'transhumanism.' How much should we really play around with who we are?

 

[Shemjaza]

I agree with using surgery to improve someone's life because of deformities at birth, or manipulating genetics to enable families to have children that don't carry their genetic diseases, and to find ways of preventing cancer and so on. But there are may meanings of 'improving humanity' and I don't generally take it to mean eradicating disease. I believe it also includes the so called designer children, were parents get to choose their children so they look more like their parents, or have certain physical characteristics.

The term "designer children" doesn't just have to mean vain attempts to make you offspring into pretty versions of yourself or to resemble celebrities.

It could mean giving them their best shot at being more intelligent, extra fit and healthy and lacking congenital disorders. This child would have a great many advantages (and probably cost its wealthy parents a pretty penny). But if you were given the chance wouldn't you love to guarantee your child these opportunities? I would hope that the technology that allowed people to have these advantages would either by advancing technology or by social change become available to all and everyone could be smart and healthy if they wanted.

Personally, I think sometimes that it's humanity's selfish nature that drives some of this 'transhumanism.' How much should we really play around with who we are?

Maybe you are right, maybe there is pride and self worship that helps motivate people to change themselves... but then again, isn't it possible that it could also come from a noble ambition to be better then you are? To strive toward greatness?

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

The term "designer children" doesn't just have to mean vain attempts to make you offspring into pretty versions of yourself or to resemble celebrities.

It could mean giving them their best shot at being more intelligent, extra fit and healthy and lacking congenital disorders. This child would have a great many advantages (and probably cost its wealthy parents a pretty penny). But if you were given the chance wouldn't you love to guarantee your child these opportunities? I would hope that the technology that allowed people to have these advantages would either by advancing technology or by social change become available to all and everyone could be smart and healthy if they wanted.

Maybe you are right, maybe there is pride and self worship that helps motivate people to change themselves... but then again, isn't it possible that it could also come from a noble ambition to be better then you are? To strive toward greatness?

I'd love guaranteeing my children those abilities. I don't think that is the problem. The problem is transhumanists want to genetically screen embryos to make sure we all have the 'right' kind of non-disabled children. As someone with Obessive Compulsive Disorder, I would have been destroyed before I even had a chance to truly exist. Whatever one's position on genetic screening\abortion, etc., I think this is a frightening prospect.

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human cognitive and physical abilities

Amazing

People who think actually managed to gather together

I wish them great luck, and lots of progress

Personally, I think, it is inevitable what they are doing, but its still good to know, that there are people actively working on it


Genetic divide, is inevitable, at least 95% of our planet, does not have the financial resources to integrate technology, and genetic enhancements,

For a society, based on trade of services, as soon as robots/ai catch up with those, who are at the lower classes of society, the divide will happen anyway

So, in the end, it seems a great benefit

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

As someone with Obessive Compulsive Disorder, I would have been destroyed before I even had a chance to truly exist.

No, no matter how far we advance, we will not loose our morality,

If in the future, we will have advanced so far, that we will be screening embryos, for their genes, it will only be so that we will help them, perhaps gene therapy, or implants to suppress disorders, but definetly not death,