KilroywasNOTHere
"BEEP!"
wanting to be better is ok, dispising the human form and human beings is not.
Well I mean I do despise human beings to an extent but not for the reason the left does.
wanting to be better is ok, dispising the human form and human beings is not.
Well I mean I do despise human beings to an extent but not for the reason the left does.
Do you dispise human actions or human nature.
The former is understandable the later some thing that needs to be grown out of.
Prosthetics to recover missing or lost functionality, is a very different concept than transhumanism.I will admit, as someone who was born wrong due to pregnancy complications (being born a crippled) SOME aspects of transhumanism is appealing. Mainly the idea of using technology to fix physical defects.
So we aren't talking about becoming a cyborg or an android with a human soul? We're talking about the borg-like macro orgasm crap you see in sci-fi?Prosthetics to recover missing or lost functionality, is a very different concept than transhumanism.
Transhumanism seeks to leave physical and biological humanity behind, to become something 'more,' something 'better.'
That.Woodcutter from OZ was still human.Prosthetics to recover missing or lost functionality, is a very different concept than transhumanism.
Transhumanism seeks to leave physical and biological humanity behind, to become something 'more,' something 'better.'
There's no uniform group on things like this.So we aren't talking about becoming a cyborg or an android with a human soul? We're talking about the borg-like macro orgasm crap you see in sci-fi?
What is the appeal of that? I never understood the "cybernetics steals your soul" trope (I think it's bunk for the most part and I think in reality it'd very from person to person) and I never understood why so many writers seem to want to treat it as a good thing.
Yeah, transhumanism covers too many different ideas, concepts and desires to make broad statements about it.There's no uniform group on things like this.
Some more thoughtful sci-fi, especially cyberpunk subgenre like Ghost in the Shell, explicitly use cybernetics to explore 'what does it mean to be human?' in a context where physical humanity is being taken away.
Some science fiction, like Eclipse Phase, is implausibly idealistic 'the future will just be better' stuff, largely created by radical libertarians who think between technology and a form of pseudo-anarchism a near-ideal society can be attained.
Some want to go the Adeptus Mechanicus route and 'reject the weakness of the flesh,' even though the human body is a more capable machine than anything humans have ever designed; this position is largely based on ignorance.
IRL, there are some people who literally think that between cybernetics and possibly a technological singularity, mankind can ascend to functionally become gods.
There's all kinds of takes, and even as a broad umbrella term, 'transhumanism' isn't a large enough movement that there are well-known particular schools of thought. I'm sure if you found a dedicated transhumanist forum, you could find some sub-categories there, but then, have you ever actually heard of a dedicated transhumanist forum?
Tragedy of the commons. If it's possible to use transhumanism to remake yourself into something functionally drastically superior to a baseline human, someone's gonna do it and then they'll have a massive Outside Context advantage over the rest of us. Therefore, the only winning move is to augment yourself or your progeny first so they're the ones with the indefatigable advantage of being superior. If given a choice between having hypothetical Bassoe Junior being smart enough to conquer their way to the position of the Great Khan (Noonien Singh), tyrannical emperor of the world or a tyrannized peon with someone else as Khan, I obviously choose the first option.What is the appeal of that?
It won't work that way, because cybernetic 'enhancement' isn't actually 'enhancement.'Tragedy of the commons. If it's possible to use transhumanism to remake yourself into something functionally drastically superior to a baseline human, someone's gonna do it and then they'll have a massive Outside Context advantage over the rest of us. Therefore, the only winning move is to augment yourself or your progeny first so they're the ones with the indefatigable advantage of being superior. If given a choice between having hypothetical Bassoe Junior being smart enough to conquer their way to the position of the Great Khan (Noonien Singh), tyrannical emperor of the world or a tyrannized peon with someone else as Khan, I obviously choose the first option.
Genetic engineering and gene therapy might become more common in the future, and I do love the idea of creating an entire new generation of genetically enhanced human beings without any kind of physical and mental deformities involved, plus eliminating the potential of hereditary diseases along the way. For example, if a selected regular human being has a family history where diabetes, asthma, and heart disease were common in his or her ancestry, modern science can potentially locate the recessive gene responsible for such a thing and eliminate it. This application can expand to include family histories of mental health problems and eliminate that future problem before it becomes a thingPersonally I would have no problem with genetic engineering to optimize the human bodies in moderate ways.
IE raise people to the upper bounds of intelligence, health and physical capacity.
Looks are in my opinion a bit too much of a slippery slope. Because frankly if plastic surgery and filters are any indication, we'd end up with a future where every woman will look like they were manufactured in the same factory.
But on the other hand your kind of caught in an arms race where if you choose not to engineer your son, he'll go to school where every boy is given the Dolph Lundgren package.
Though realistically we'll probably see embryo selection be a thing. Especially in demographics and groups that have no problem with abortion.
Genetic engineering and gene therapy might become more common in the future, and I do love the idea of creating an entire new generation of genetically enhanced human beings without any kind of physical and mental deformities involved, plus eliminating the potential of hereditary diseases along the way. For example, if a selected regular human being has a family history where diabetes, asthma, and heart disease were common in his or her ancestry, modern science can potentially locate the recessive gene responsible for such a thing and eliminate it. This application can expand to include family histories of mental health problems and eliminate that future problem before it becomes a thing
Oldbreeds - basically regular human beings that are not genetically enhanced, or we can call them Organic Humans
Newbreeds - the aforementioned genetically enhanced human beings with expanded brain capacity and enhanced physical strength. This kind of thing would definitely be necessary, since we're not sure if the human body in its condition would be capable for further space exploration, though additional exploration to Mars has been achieved by humans without the necessary genetic enhancement.
If we could take the technology that's been used to clone any animal or human being, and apply that to the creation of an entirely new kind of human being from egg fertilization plus gene editing and enhancing, we can potentially eliminate the need for surrogate mothers in favor of expanded artificial wombs that will serve this purpose.
Which is even more tragic, considering the massive potential for such a thing in the wrong hands. And we definitely can't trust the Eastern batch of leadership as well for the same reasons.yeah Im sorry but you cant trust the current crop of leadership with that kind of power expecially in the west.
Any new tool they are given will be used for evil ends, incredibly evil ends we really cant have nice toys until their gone and replaced with a much more limited ruling class.
The current ruling class is far duller than you think they are.Any new tool they are given will be used for evil ends,
Though I disagree on this I would say. They despise their own people, but not as blatantly as EU leaders have tended to do lately and their propaganda at least attempts to sugar-coat it and when they do something they don't say it is for the good of "Asia" but of "China".their leaders don't actively despise their own people.