Transhumanism and your opinion on it

[Maelstrom]

Hmm, so many posts I somehow didn't notice before...

"I strongly believe that the struggle to find a meaning for your life is itself the meaning of your life: if there are no struggles because you are perfect, then what's the point in being alive? I mean ok, you remove all of your flaws via technological means, and you become immortal: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO THEN? Has anyone ever thought about this?"

That assumes perfection is possible. Perfection is an illogical construct at its core. Attempt to define perfection in words and you will understand this. One could devote an eternity to seeking perfection... Technology pushes the boundaries of our limitations back, it doesn't eliminate them altogether.

"Angel wings and machine guns."

I imagine the angel wings being analogous to people and tattoos. There will be people who go to all sorts of extremes to fit their own extreme aesthetics. Machine guns and the like will still be rigidly controlled and not allowed to be given to people willy nilly. Sense didn't go flying out the window along with prior limitations. The ability to do it didn't make it necessary to do it.

"Why live forever/longer/do amazing stuff when we're all going to die anyways?"

What if by doing changes/enhancements, we could help extend the life of the world? What would we have to consume if say we were able to make ourselves at least partly photoautotrophic? IE, use the sun's energy to power reactions that build up molecules we can break down for energy use later, the way plants do. We would need to eat less or not at all. We would have less need of expansive farm and ranch lands. We would product less waste, and indeed, consume some wastes for the chemicals we would need for autotrophy. Imagine if fission/fusion (I forget which) was found to be possible and we could adapt those energies to fuel ourselves? [ for example, in the netflix anime, Knights of Sidonia, people living on limited supplies on a ship with limited space modified themselves so they could photosynthesize]

"What's the fun of robotic arms?"

Indeed, where is the fun? I referenced Cyborg of Teen Titans for a reason. There are downsides to mechanization. He has great strength, but it isn't biologically based, so he can't get any stronger by working out. If his power sources failed, he'd be stuck in a hard situation. Idk that many people would exchange their arms for fun. But now you can do different work. Get jobs done that would have taken powerful, yet clumsy machines (think of any construction site machine/vehicle) to do before? Maybe perform that miracle operation with a steadiness and precision that couldn't have been achieved before? This isn't just about fun, this is serious. You have to decide if the ups outweigh the downs.

"Can I not play water polo anymore due to all the metal parts? Are all humans required to get these? And if that becomes mandatory, what's the point of individualism in our species if we just program everything?" "Basically, I believe that such augmentation is perfectly fine so long as one does not cross the line in the sand between a living being into the state of that of a drone."

- things can be sealed or made waterproof

- with new abilities, comes new boundaries and limitations: they'd probably have to make the pool bigger, change the goals, maybe change the ball design and composition, etc.

-why would they be required? maybe if they wanted a job that required arms or whatever enhanced a specific way. But everybody required to have it done as soon as they are born or reach a certain age? That's irrational and unreasonable.

-Even with programming, things get improved and customized all the time. I doubt everyone here is using the exact same tablet/pc/smartphone/os as everybody else here. There is individuality in modulation and customization. Again, compare this to tattoos. Individuality is which enhancements you get and what you do with your enhancements.

-you only lose individuality when you lose all of your choices. That's extremely unlikely to happen.

-highly advanced neural integrations will probably be one of the last things to happen. I don't think a lot of people would relish the thought of making one's self vulnerable to something like hacking by having this kind of modification. That's a huge risk to take and how many people will be willing to take it?

"I agree with you to an extent, but let's not compare genocide and the purposeful underdevelopment of a continent to societal change."

"Imagine Mecha-HItler from Wolfenstein 3D. But in real life. And even more nuts."

I wasn't. Let's not assume that advances in technology will start a societal change where genocide is suddenly okay. But technological advancement surely leads to societal change. Look at cell phones and computers, etc.

The underdevelopment is still an apt analogy when you realize that some areas didn't change because there was no impetus to, no reason to change. But as it invariably does, changes made elsewhere comes back to affect them. Even if there are plenty of people out there that want 'pure and simple', the changes started and shaped by the others outside of them will come and begin to shape and change their lives. And they will be the worse off for it because those changes will have been put into motion without their input or consent. When the industrial revolution hit its stride, the balance of the world changed around this technology.

The technology that has the ability to create a mecha-hitler has the technology to make someone or something to stop a mechahitler. And will do its best to prevent one in the first place. Why is the first thing that pops into people's heads is a cartoon caricature of a villain? How plausible or feasible is that really? Far-fetched example is far-fetched.

AND HERE'S THE BIG ONE

"You are born with your flaws, with your flaws you live, and with your flaws you die: is it so difficult to accept this simple truth? Humans are the only race that ever spent time speculating about being something other than humans."

And look at what we've accomplished by speculating about trying to do things better, and then going out and trying to put theory into practice. Humans are special in their capacity to think, imagine, and dream of something beyond what is into what could be... and then start making it possible. The same desire for control of the world by petitioning unknowable deities also drives the desire to understand and manipulate physical laws so that we can reshape reality as much as we are capable of. This is a fundamental part of humanity that has driven its change and evolution since its inception. And to deny it would be to leave us stuck in a rut. A world devoid of imagination and change is truly a world without individuality- that thing some of you are afraid of happening as a result of change is surely what will result if we completely refuse to change, and simply accept now as the pinnacle of existence.

---------------------------

There's a story I want to share with you all. It happens to be the one full episode I watched of Dr. Who I watched. I saw it years ago and parts of it still stick with me.

It was the episode where he shows this girl the End of the World. In the future, they are at a space station where they can watch the natural end of the Earth. And the one presiding over this viewing party is 'the last human'. But this 'human' is literally just a flap of skin with a mouth and eyes- her form having been plastic surgeried to hell, with major airs of importance to boot. And they wheel out the last ostrich egg, which is rumored to have had a wingspan of 50 ft and breathed fire. They also wheel out a juke box and call it an ipod. And then no one but the girl and Dr. Who watch the world explode as the sun dies and takes the earth with it. This flap of skin is the last vestige of humanity, or as close as a creature is left of them in that day.

But that isn't the whole of it. As Dr. Who explains it, humans didn't really end, and certainly not with this pompous flap of self-important skin. Many humans had left earth for the stars long ago. They weren't the same shape and form as they had been. Humanity had evolved. Humanity and its descendants are alive among the stars, but humanity as it had been was well and truly gone.

Think about it.

[Narckarth]

My opinion on transhumanis is fine. like any scientific endeavour it needs to be tempered with caution but otherwise why not improve ourselves?

isn't it the over arching goal of life to evolve?

however there are some common and legitimate concerns most in this thread so I'm going to give my opinion cause you asked.

Longer life span and in some cases immortality are linked to a number of issues. first and foremost is what you would do if you could live anywhere between 300 years to forever. my response is just because you can doesn't me you have to. Live your life enjoy it and when you are satisfied end it, simple. (NOTE: don't think I'm advocating for suicide you have to think of this from the perspective of a culture where people live to be 300+)

In the case of people saying that they would hate to see our planet waste away. For one I think that sounds kind of interesting. But on a less evil note if peoples life span suddenly multiplied to the point where they think the effects of abusing the planet will impact them in their lifetime I get the feeling attitudes would change quickly.As for the opinion that our weaknesses are important I agree. But I think our weaknesses wouldn't disappear they would be traded for new weakness ones that we might not yet even know of.

In short pushing the limits is what humans do really well and to reiterate from the start like any scientific endeavour it needs to be tempered with caution but otherwise why not improve ourselves?

also It would the best thing ever to be Immune to burns on myself