transhumanism- a belief that makes sense

[Xyrael]

#1 the number of the beast IS 666, do not confuse the beast the whore of Babylon rides upon (i think its actually Gilgamesh, but i forget) with Satan, which is 616

#2 we dont need trees. oceans produce over 2/3 the worlds oxygen. Keep the oceans clean, cut down ALL the trees.

#3 we have air conditioning in case of global warming, and if worst comes to worse we'll have massive death in Asia and Africa and South America to lower the amount of food we need to produce, and with genetically altered foods im sure the plants will survive.

#4 how cool would it be to watch roaches and ants become the next civilized race? Asia be teh pwn

#5 psychology is idiotic and hypothetical, i have yet to meet a person who did not have a psychological flaw. besides, who's to say what is normal and what is deviant, with the prevalence rate of ADHD i would consider normal deviant.

#6 i'd be more worried about desertification rather than ice melting. More salt water = better desalinization industry, more desert = less fertile land for plants, and if worse comes to worse we'll have increased storms, which means rain water collection cisterns and more fertile land... for food we can grow rice and, since many ports will be destroyed, the fish will replenish themselves in many oceans since we wont be able to exterminate them with mass fishing

#7 without global warming and melting ice caps the Mediterranean would dry up and become a giant salt flat. im sure that'd boost Venice's tourism, it'd also significantly diminish the ocean size, which means less phytoplankton (earth's premier source of oxygen) more water > ice caps

#8 it is human flaw and error that makes the species great, i have no quarrel with humanity as is, let evolution take us anywhere, we can't play god with everything imo

#9 if the ice caps melt... and temperatures rise, maybe i won't have to shave things to please my girl... after all evolution would eliminate the need for unnecessary functions. of course it's also my belief that baldness is evolutionary progression caused by hats. We lost body hair b/c of clothes, we're losing hair on our head b/c of hats.

sorry PUR, im all for humanity altering nature and forging a path for itself, but i think altering ourselves is slightly beyond ourselves unless we understand ourselves, and that my friend i beyond our grasp

[LLANYDERN]

Basically what I'm saying is that some conditions e.g. dyspraxia is a disadvantage in the modern world due to the fact that some things we either can't do or cannot do as well as "normal" people, there are advantages for instance we make great architects due to the fact that we can think in 3D while the norms need to do it on paper or on a computer.

Its the climate change I'm worried about more then the warming (though if the cascade kicks in then we burn my lovelies then we burn) as it would screw over almost all the inland crop areas and also destroy huge amounts or really important/interesting ecological areas.  note I said inland crop areas, the coastal crop areas would be screwed by the flooding.

Also I live in Wales I don't want tornadoes and hurricanes I also don't want another glaciation here (though my house would be alright I guess)

[Myroria]

Children aren't equals. They don't know what the hell's going on, and just crap and cry all day. No pussy "time-out" bullshit. Any mental illness save real ones like OCD, Schizophrenia, and Dyslexia/Dyspraxia can be solved by spanking and/or smacking. It's not child abuse, it's discipline. Once you cross the line into beatings and bruisings, it's child abuse. They need discipline, otherwise all these kids will be running around watching Oprah, becoming emos, and cutting themselves.


^{We should have more people like Maddox.}

[Turdganistan]

This belief system is utopianism, and as unfeasible as Plato's Republic or the Christian Kingdom of Heaven (because an en masse genetic transformation is, to me, as unlikely as an en masse societal or spiritual transformation). It places excellence on genetics and, this, to me is more than than a bit disturbing. The horrors of Third Reich eugenics should make everyone very wary of such beliefs that have as the stated goal the creation of a human supercaste.

 Just my

[Xyrael]

By that logic, the horrors of Chernobyl should prevent us from seeking nuclear power, the horrors of Hitler should deter us from Democracy (you must remember they did elect him into power), etc. If one bad thing justified it's end, nothing would be accomplished. We'd have ended the space program, and many other things.

The assumption that genes are perfect is a systemic problem caused by the fact there are parts of the gene we do not understand, it is the same for the people that believe if you unlock a higher percentage of your brain you can get psychic powers, etc. It's the mysteries of the unknown that conjure fantasies and marvels that, if possible, we would love to acheive, and if skeptical we would never have the courage to discover. It's also a problem because people are unsatisfied, on some level, with the life they lead. This is perpetuated by globalism and consumerism, but that's just another problem caused by dissatisfaction. Suicide is also caused by being dissatisfied with ones life, so you seek to make it better. Everything revolves around making ones life better, when one does not realize maybe it's fine the way it is. Don't fix something if it's not broken.

[Turdganistan]

Hitler used the democratic process to seize power. I wouldn't call him a paragon of democracy by any means; the Munich Putsch of 1923 saw him land in jail for attempting to seize power by force in Bavaria. He failed, and then came out of jail and went about democratically gathering his power. That in itself says nothing to me; democracy pre-exited Hitler in Athens by over 2,500 years or so.

Anyways... You hit on a problem that transhumanism fails to address: all of the belief in genetic superiority and the eventual transhuman singularity fail to take into account that human life can be made better by simple effort to make one's life better. That's why mankind has a plurality of religions, philosophies, et cetera. It doesn't take a genetic superman to live well, and who determines who is fit to be one of these elites? That's why I refer to it as a utopian fantasy, like Eden or Shangri-La. People become fixated on these transcendent ideas and forget that real progress can be made right here, right now. Nature can't be forced, and I think that any attempt to play God in the part of humanity will backfire. Transhumanism sort of reminds me of the story of the Tower of Babel; humans wanted to reach heaven, and the powers-that-be tore their tower down and scattered humans to and fro.

[Xyrael]

Eugenic's was quite popular before Hitler, the only reason it seems the two appeared together is that the gene was not actually discovered until around the rise of Hitler. At the time, many determinists (including Hitler) were becoming eugenists, so Hitler isn't a paragon either. Nor is his anti-semitic dogma, which has been expressed by every European nation save Poland. To think Hitler was in any way unique is madness, his methods were, however, brilliant. To create a business out of burning Jews, why, that would make Bustos proud.

And your second point is quite valid, people seek better things, no matter what they be or the method they use. PUR is merely stating her belief that altering gene's is more logical and scientific than prayer as a method to attaining 'enlightenment', and the results are more real (you can see what altering genes does, you'll never know whether or not heaven exists unless you die, and no one has spoken to the dead)

Your point of the "Tower of Babel" humors me. I think of genetic modification as a parallel to designer babies. Who decides what "perfect" is? Is a elephant penis the size of a leg or breasts the size of a 5 year old child actually beneficial. And do not say it will not occur, I would be willing to bet not only would people create designer babies, they would alter their babies for money to permanently advertise companies, they would think of it as a joke and create a farce out of their child, and should rape victims not be allowed abortion, they could ask for some sort of genetic defect be applied to their baby.

The idea that creating perfection through genes yet calling psychology imperfect is foolish. Both require diagnosis and treatment and a stereotypical view or what is "right" and "wrong"

[Khem]

it is merely my belief system. we all need to believe in something and this is what i choose. i am glad you all took an interest in discussing this, i especialy thank Xyrael for sticking up for my beliefs even though they are not his own. but even more than transhumanism i believe in pluralism and as such i believe  that everyone is entitled to believe and live as they wish. perhaps someday we will all share this ideal of pluralism but its farther off than designer babies.

[LLANYDERN]

Personally I think most religions are a bit mad but this one is one of the saner ones.

The main reason I disagree with religions is not because of what they were (or said they were) about originally but what they are like in practice.

So Christianity and Islam great original ideas but look at how they turned out.

Myro got me thinking about what he said and then the simpsons episode where Flanders finally snaps and ends up in the asylum, I just hope his/her kids arn't that screwed up.

[Turdganistan]

Eugenic's was quite popular before Hitler, the only reason it seems the two appeared together is that the gene was not actually discovered until around the rise of Hitler. At the time, many determinists (including Hitler) were becoming eugenists, so Hitler isn't a paragon either. Nor is his anti-semitic dogma, which has been expressed by every European nation save Poland. To think Hitler was in any way unique is madness, his methods were, however, brilliant. To create a business out of burning Jews, why, that would make Bustos proud.

And your second point is quite valid, people seek better things, no matter what they be or the method they use. PUR is merely stating her belief that altering gene's is more logical and scientific than prayer as a method to attaining 'enlightenment', and the results are more real (you can see what altering genes does, you'll never know whether or not heaven exists unless you die, and no one has spoken to the dead)

Your point of the "Tower of Babel" humors me. I think of genetic modification as a parallel to designer babies. Who decides what "perfect" is? Is a elephant penis the size of a leg or breasts the size of a 5 year old child actually beneficial. And do not say it will not occur, I would be willing to bet not only would people create designer babies, they would alter their babies for money to permanently advertise companies, they would think of it as a joke and create a farce out of their child, and should rape victims not be allowed abortion, they could ask for some sort of genetic defect be applied to their baby.

The idea that creating perfection through genes yet calling psychology imperfect is foolish. Both require diagnosis and treatment and a stereotypical view or what is "right" and "wrong"

It's like you say, who decides what perfect is? Or who becomes perfect? I suspect that there will be a case of the supermen and the submen if this vision of the future comes to pass. The movie Gattaca is illustrative of a world with a genetically-engineered overcaste and an underclass that is only guilty of being born normal. That's why I used the Babel analogy of humans building a tower to heaven. They wanted to usurp God's prerogative, and they paid the price for it when heaven destroyed their little building project. Tinkering with Nature is bound to backfire, I'm sure of it. I also think that transhumanism looks to much to the imagined future, a would-be at best, and this is a trait of utopianism.

As to prayer, I think it's more beneficial because it directly plays upon human consciousness on a day-to-day basis. It might play up to a higher power (God Almighty, the god within, et cetera), but the devotee has a real desire to make progress as a person. This is what's important, not a potential utopia in the distant future populated by genetic superbeings. Is anyone alive right now that will be able to take advantage of this possibility, or should we let Nature run its course? Evolution can't be forced, and there's this hubris that humans have that they can now influence their own development as a species through the power of technology. Well, physical development, anyways. But what about moral development? Or the development of consciousness and conscience? Will the mind and spirit develop into godlike realms alongside the body? A transhuman superman might be as physical perfect as Adam or Eve, but still be an emotional idiot. I'd say this might be moreso, because a transhuman would have a very real reason for at least being narcissistic and arrogant. Look at the myths, the Greek gods are perfect examples of this sort of being: physically perfect, but oftentimes emotional and capricious to the point of stupidity.

I'm not going to gainsay anyone who wants to build a better world. That's been a dream for as long as there have been humans to dream about it. The better world isn't in the past (like the Garden of Eden) or in the future (like the Second Coming); it's here right now, and we all can pitch in to create it. I'm of the mind to allow Nature to play its own hand; whatever God is, God has done a fine job as far as I'm concerned. By saying this, allow Nature to play its own hand, I'm not saying "survival of the fittest." I don't like that phrase. What I'm saying is that humans should seek to "play God" by trying to undo natural processes. If humans are meant to evolve, it will happen on its own. Any attempts to force it might end up going very badly. In the meantime, real progress can be made by our own efforts. If humans could collectively come together, say, to do something about climate change, well, that'd be more of a miracle than a possible future inhabited by genetic superbeings. 

[Khem]

actualy transhumanists wish to do alot about current ecological, geopolitical and medical problems. whats the point of a longer life in a shitty world.

anyhow hees another nifty link for ya.
http://www.changesurfer.com/Acad/TranshumPolitics.htm

[Turdganistan]

It still doesn't strike me as being a very useful belief system because it doesn't focus on behavioral aspects and it relies entirely on technology and the power if science, neither of which I am entirely trustful of. I like the old adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I prefer the approach that the theists take on the condition of the world, “and behold it was very good,” as they say God said after he made the world. I'd hate to think that the world, including mankind, is an unfinished project.

If the world is in an unfinished state, then it's incumbent upon humans to finish it up. This can't be a short process, given the age of the earth, and we'd have two have a transformation so as to redefine what it means to be human, as an entire species. It just can't be confined to a few who can afford gene therapy, it has to affect us all in the same way- a universal benchmark like the day when our primate ancestors first came down from the trees.

[Khem]

well this is where my libertarian side comes out. people who wish to do this should be allowed to. hell we transhumanists are already working on our evolutionary paths with a widespread eugenics program. *grumbles* damned neo-Luddite. the addage if it ain't broke don't fix it is silly for this case because we aren't fixing anything we are merely looking to upgrade. yet just like the socialist movement we are currently too fractured a group to do anything major.

[St Oz]

Sorry, I didn't read through the article, but just its introduction brought an issue to my mind. Concerning the development of humans, will we strive to eliminate our flaws or to amplify our better qualities? Because in my opinion, having no flaws means that there is no natural direction for the person to go. If you can do anything, why bother?

So if Transhumanism is going for a flawless humanity, thanks, I'll pass, I like being a personality. Being without error is effective, but not very interesting or humane. I think I'll hold on to my "flawed, but perfect" point-of-view for the time being.

Interesting line of thought, though. It's about time someone published that.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

Finally they made that video. I hate global warming crack theories. I remember reading the atmosphere of the Earth, I saw that Carbon Dioxide was a very very small part of the atmos. This confused me, How could such a small thing create an apocalyptic effect. I also found it strange that we weren't the only ones giving out CO2. I kept reading and reading in it, looking at damn charts that made no sense. The graphs on an inconvenient truth are brilliant at getting people, they're measured in 1000s of years on such a small scale that it looked like it had a great effect. Except when you look at it at a closer scale you see that it has no effect whatsoever and that the real reason is just the basic constants behind our climate. The sun, clouds, water, etc. Not some bizarre Commie Theory that's all against Capitalism progression. Any liberal/environmentalist is just fueling this Communist theory. What a waste of money, that's all this does.

[Turdganistan]

well this is where my libertarian side comes out. people who wish to do this should be allowed to. hell we transhumanists are already working on our evolutionary paths with a widespread eugenics program. *grumbles* damned neo-Luddite. the addage if it ain't broke don't fix it is silly for this case because we aren't fixing anything we are merely looking to upgrade. yet just like the socialist movement we are currently too fractured a group to do anything major.

Neo-luddite?  That's a bit extreme, I'd say. If I was opposed to technological progress, I'd smash my PC and go and live the lifestyle of a medieval peasant. Ned Ludd I ain't, but I am against drastic applications of technology. The creation of so-called posthumans is something that just doesn't sit well with me, and there are very real dangers involved: are human beings, a complex organism with several trillion cells, as easy to genetically modify as, say, a single-celled bacterium? Or a stalk of corn? What agencies will oversee and regulate such activity? What's to stop someone from creating transhuman supersoldiers?

Just some questions to ponder.