• Hello everybody! We have tons of new awards for the new year that can be requested through our Awards System thanks to Antifa Lockhart! Some are limited-time awards so go claim them before they are gone forever...

    CLICK HERE FOR AWARDS

Transhumanism



REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS
Status
Not open for further replies.

Phoenix

Legendary Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,809
Awards
7
"Transhumanism is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of science and technology to improve human mental and physical characteristics and capacities. The movement regards aspects of the human condition, such as disability, suffering, disease, aging, and involuntary death as unnecessary and undesirable. Transhumanists look to biotechnologies and other emerging technologies for these purposes. Dangers, as well as benefits, are also of concern to the transhumanist movement.[1]"

Transhumanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Day after day, our technology becomes even more advanced, giving us access to alternatives that might have seemed sci-fi 10, 20, 50 years ago. Now we look to the future, when technologies like mind-uploading, cryonics, cyborgs, genetic engineering and so on seem quite plausible. But some fear that, in the process, we will lose our humanity.

What is to be human? Is it our species, to be Homo Sapiens? To have a conscious, thinking mind? Is it possible to lose our humanity if we modify ourselves, or is our humanity inalienable? Do we want to remain human, or do we want to be something different?

Discuss.
 

Tenyas

RE: +"T!red"+
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
8,398
Location
gallivanting about
Humanity, scientifically speaking, is a large intelligent species that has managed to take control as the top of everything on this earth.

In a spiritual way, I think it's our minds that make us human, few other creatures even think relatively akin to us. Our physical shape is changing anyway, we've grown a standard 2-3 feet compared to people several thousand years ago, so I don't think it's a biggy to change ourselves, so long as we retain our state of mind.
 

Hidden

A boy named Crow
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,615
Awards
6
Age
35
Location
A world that never was
Website
www.freewebs.com
It is remarkable how strongly we identify ourselves through our limitations. Once these limitations are removed, how do we know ourselves?

But I remain confused--is it the technology itself which is supposed to provide the "trans-" prefix to this transhumanism?
 

Phoenix

Legendary Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,809
Awards
7
But I remain confused--is it the technology itself which is supposed to provide the "trans-" prefix to this transhumanism?

Technology or nature (particularly evolution), but technology would get there faster, so yes.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
3,098
Awards
5
[12:32:00 AM] Sam says: My first thought when I read about that was that people find ways to lose their humanity every day without technological means. Working at the top of a corporation for too long can rid a person of their humanity quite effectively.
[12:32:26 AM] Eduardo says: but what's humanity? Empathy for the follow man?
[12:32:29 AM] Eduardo says: fellow*
[12:32:31 AM] Sam says: Then it occured to me that I was going by a very loose, romantic definition of humanity, and that ultimately it can only be defined a- exactly
[12:33:03 AM] Sam says: And when I realized that, I decided that I was more interested in whether or not the human state was worth preserving at all than when the condition was transcended.
[12:33:49 AM] Eduardo says: Do you include us being homo sapiens in the human state?
[12:33:54 AM] Eduardo says: I should've named the topic humanity.
[12:34:01 AM] Eduardo says: Since we'll probably debate that for like 5 pages.
[12:34:15 AM] Sam says: The human mental state? No.
[12:34:40 AM] Sam says: I think that theoretically, an AI could very easily be considered a human being on a mental level.
[12:34:47 AM] Eduardo says: I was going to ask that, yeah.
[12:34:53 AM] Eduardo says: Would a computer be human.
[12:35:03 AM] Sam says: We're all just machines, but some of us are organic and some of us are metal.
[12:35:17 AM] Sam says: ...or at least, that statement might apply in a few hundred years.
[12:35:25 AM] Eduardo says: But then you can have humanity without you being human.
[12:35:38 AM] Sam says: Sounds weird, doesn't it?
[12:35:48 AM] Eduardo says: Perhaps personhood is the right concept here.
[12:35:58 AM] Eduardo says: You can be a person without being human.
[12:36:09 AM] Sam says: If that is even a word then yes, I'd probably go with that.
[12:36:18 AM] Eduardo says: Yeah, it's a word.
[12:36:29 AM] Eduardo says: Then the word humanity becomes obsolete.
[12:36:40 AM] Sam says: Say we discovered an alien species that was roughly the intellectual equal of humankind -- would we say that they posess humanity?
[12:37:08 AM] Sam says: If not then humanity is probably a biological rather than a mental state of being.
[12:37:11 AM] Eduardo says: And if they were 100 times smarter than us, would they consider us to have humanity?
[12:37:40 AM] Eduardo says: Because we know chimps are pretty smart, yet we afford them no rights.
[12:38:25 AM] Sam says: We should just copy and paste this conversation in the thread, along with the disclaimer that I'm writing all of this on about three hours of sleep.

hello!
 

Tenyas

RE: +"T!red"+
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
8,398
Location
gallivanting about
That was a lot to read, but you all made some very good points. Really makes you think about how we see ourselves and consequences like that.
 

Hidden

A boy named Crow
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,615
Awards
6
Age
35
Location
A world that never was
Website
www.freewebs.com
For purposes of this thread, I think we can define humanity first as a shared set of experience. This is not exactly the same as 'empathy for fellow man', but I think that's rather close. It is what makes this empathy possible--that we can recognize our own experiences in other human beings, experiences of joy and pain, desire and disgust, et cetera. It is by this shared experience that we recognize ourselves and others as "human", and why we would not extend that recognition to other intelligent animals/objects based purely on cognitive ability.

Of course, we have also denied this recognition to other homo sapiens in the past, based on race, class, and culture, and we have justified this denial by calling them "animal" or "subhuman" and assuming that they are not capable of the same thought and feeling we experience.

The problem of transhumanism in this sense then is that it proposes to take away some of the most fundamental experiences the human race shares--pain, sickness, and death. Though we do not like them, we identify by them--I will experience these things as surely as you, and we recognize this in each other; thus we recognize each other as sharing in the human experience. What happens when one or both of us no longer does?

Phoenix said:
Technology or nature (particularly evolution), but technology would get there faster, so yes.
And why didn't the cotton gin accomplish this?
 

Phoenix

Legendary Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,809
Awards
7
The problem of transhumanism in this sense then is that it proposes to take away some of the most fundamental experiences the human race shares--pain, sickness, and death. Though we do not like them, we identify by them--I will experience these things as surely as you, and we recognize this in each other; thus we recognize each other as sharing in the human experience. What happens when one or both of us no longer does?

We already try our damnedest to avoid these, don't we? We go to hospitals, drink medicines and so on. All humans try to eliminate these experiences.The difference between a human and a hypothetical transhuman is that the latter actually succeeds.

And why didn't the cotton gin accomplish this?

We no, it just made our lives easier. It didn't change our bodies or minds in any way.
 

Hidden

A boy named Crow
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,615
Awards
6
Age
35
Location
A world that never was
Website
www.freewebs.com
We already try our damnedest to avoid these, don't we? We go to hospitals, drink medicines and so on. All humans try to eliminate these experiences.The difference between a human and a hypothetical transhuman is that the latter actually succeeds.
That's precisely the point--that every human, from Ponce de Leon to Achilles, ultimately experiences this failure, this 'limitation' that goes so far in defining humanity. You're right, we've tried a million different ways to overcome it, but we're united in our failure to do so. It is a shared experience that connects even otherwise god-like men, such as Gilgamesh and Achilles, to the rest of us.

Properly speaking, man did not exist before Adam took the apple from the tree of knowledge and introduced us into this world of experience; that we've been looking for a way out ever since is just another shared aspect of this world.

Phoenix said:
We no, it just made our lives easier. It didn't change our bodies or minds in any way.
Let's try another then. You may have seen 2001: A Space Odyssey (wiki link). In an iconic scene of the film, an ape-like creature, supposedly one of man's precursors, is scavenging through bones as it always has. But it discovers that it can use one bone in particular to smash others bones... to fight other apes... to kill for food. It has discovered the use of tools. The ape then screams and throws the bone high into the air; it becomes a spaceship, and we are brought into the world of humanity, as envisioned in the year 2001.

It's obviously something of an "artistic leap", but is this the transcendence you're looking for?

.:Kazuma:. said:
Rise of the Cybermen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Let's hope humanity doesn't become so depend on technology were this happens lol.
If you want a truly excellent vision of transcendent humanity, I would suggest Arthur C. Clarke (partially responsible for 2001: A Space Odyssey), "Childhood's End".
 
Last edited:

Phoenix

Legendary Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
13,809
Awards
7
That's precisely the point--that every human, from Ponce de Leon to Achilles, ultimately experiences this failure, this 'limitation' that goes so far in defining humanity. You're right, we've tried a million different ways to overcome it, but we're united in our failure to do so. It is a shared experience that connects even otherwise god-like men, such as Gilgamesh and Achilles, to the rest of us.

Properly speaking, man did not exist before Adam took the apple from the tree of knowledge and introduced us to this world of experience; that we've been looking for a way back out ever since is just another shared aspect of this world

But we wouldn't actually overcome this completely. We might extend our lifespan a great deal, but we can't overcome death. How is this any different than drinking medicines?

Let's try another then. You may have seen 2001: A Space Odyssey. In an iconic scene of the film, an ape-like creature, supposedly one of man's precursors, is scavenging through bones as it always has. But it discovers that it can use one bone in particular to smash others bones... to fight other apes... to kill for food. It has discovered the use of tools. The ape then screams and throws the bone high into the air; it becomes a spaceship, and we are brought into the world of humanity, envisioned as in the year 2001.

It's obviously something of an "artistic leap", but is this the transcendence you're looking for?

Not yet. The spaceship didn't change our bodies or minds either. It allows u to overcome some limitations, but the human itself isn't modified in any way.
 

Hidden

A boy named Crow
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,615
Awards
6
Age
35
Location
A world that never was
Website
www.freewebs.com
But we wouldn't actually overcome this completely. We might extend our lifespan a great deal, but we can't overcome death. How is this any different than drinking medicines?
Then it isn't; but I wouldn't call that transcendent either.

Phoenix said:
Not yet. The spaceship didn't change our bodies or minds either. It allows u to overcome some limitations, but the human itself isn't modified in any way.
I didn't describe the scene sufficiently--the creatures at the beginning of the film are nothing we would identify as human; but the ability to use tools, from a bone to a spaceship, is what we see spark this transition from proto-human to human (some physical evolution is left assumed). This is perhaps the only sense in which I can also see technology moving us from human to transhuman.

The problem being, how can human technology or human-directed evolution create anything but a human product?
 
Last edited:

frisson

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
3,332
I dunno, I sort of figure it's another step in evolution. The point where the species takes a bigger role in its own advancement.

And yes through Transhumanism we'll lose our humanity, because we're transcending it?
 

Leonard

Married to Crimson ♥
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
2,391
Age
31
Location
Germany
For purposes of this thread, I think we can define humanity first as a shared set of experience.

The problem of transhumanism in this sense then is that it proposes to take away some of the most fundamental experiences the human race shares--pain, sickness, and death. Though we do not like them, we identify by them--I will experience these things as surely as you, and we recognize this in each other; thus we recognize each other as sharing in the human experience. What happens when one or both of us no longer does?

But wouldn't the striving for a method to escape death and every thing that belongs to that be such a factor, too?

The problem being, how can human technology or human-directed evolution create anything but a human product?

This pretty much sums up my opinion on this matter. No matter how much we try to alter ourselves, we still have a certain "origin", right?

Every change and every invention we make on ourselves is still, in the end, man-made (human-directed evolution) and as such, in a way something "human" and a part of us. If that makes any sense.

I am aware that this statement is a little shaky though, because I don't quite know where the boundaries of this lie. :l
 

Orion

Prepared To Die
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
20,385
Awards
10
DEUS EX MACHINA!

Okay, so, I had some predictions for the future, but didn't know whether to post them. I eventually just said 'fuck it' and have decided to post them.

1 - The realisation of sexual and/or existential fantasies
tl;dr: furries and tentacle rape become reality lol/Gattacca says hi

As medical technologies become more advanced and cheaper, we can expect cosmetic operations to become more complex and also customised. One such thing might be to remove all a man's (or woman's) facial hair permanently, although that can be done today with lasers and other treatments. Perhaps another of these would be the removal of sweat glands in inconvenient places (I'll be honest here, I sweat like a pig (lol pigs don't actually sweat) in my armpits no matter what I try, and sweat, at least there, has never done me any good and has only been an inconvenience. If such intricate surgery was available now as there would be in the future, I would get the sweat glands in my arm pits, and probably in other places, removed. That's just an example of the application of such nanotechnology-assisted/-done surgery).
As genetic modification and engineering progresses, we can expect not only generally superior humans, but also those that choose to have their genes spliced with those of animals. Yes, animals. Some animals have extremely helpful genetic features; some lizards, I believe it might have been the Komodo dragon, have a phenomenal immune system that would be greatly beneficial to any human if it could be safely applied. Genetic modifications would likely be made in the womb or soon after birth, and I see such modifications/splicings as difficult to perform later in life, but I don't think that'll stop people from trying them. The rest is the sort of stuff from Gattacca, parents choose, before their child is born, the genetic improvements they want to have.
Now of course, with ultra-fine and -detailed surgery, and such genetic modifications, there will be those who push the envelope. Or tear it apart. This is where a more unusual prediction comes in: The realisation of 'furries' (I dislike furries, but I wouldn't go out of my way to harm or inconvenience them), but I see this as being another thing that is made possible in the future. Where some of them can only dream of being anthropomorphic, or in a perfect fursuit, with cheap and intricate surgery and genetic modification, furries would become a reality for those with enough money and dedication to their eccentricities. The only way I see something not coming true is if it were made illegal, but I just can't see that happening.
Because of the sexual connotations with furries, the thought of another unusual sexual fetish: Tentacle rape/sex/hentai (btw, I'm a /b/tard and visit 4chan and Encyclopedia Dramatica regularly, that's how I know of these). I suppose this is just another of those things that'd become a reality, unless it were considered bestiality and made illegal. Women (or men) who would want it bad enough, could likely have a creature genetically engineered to fulfil their sexual fantasies.

2 - The value of the human
tl;dr: furries, tentacle rape, and now CP too? Awww shiit
I think it's already accepted that at some point in the future, it will be possible, if not also mainstream, that human bodies, or possibly fully-fledged humans will be grown and not just born, ie, 'test tube babies'. This will have massive implications on humanity, namely, the value of an individual human. If it possibly to give these test-tube-people sentience, or to have people's minds uploaded into them as a new body, what does that mean to normal people? If 'people' are able to be made from their raw materials, an adult body from 70 litres (or was it kilograms?) of water, and all the other carbon, iron and whatnot, then I'm pretty sure the 'human stock market' or at least the value of human beings, would basically collapse.
If sentience too can be put into these creations? Then I think murder as a crime would be much less punishable. We kill someone for murder because they killed someone, but what if that person who was murdered could have their mind uploaded into a machine or a grown body? Suddenly, a murder does not become so permanent. Unless of course the brain itself is destroyed or damaged, or the body isn't retrieved quickly enough, then I can see murder being punished with murder; otherwise, I think the death penalty for murder would be removed.
So, the human being has just been devalued. We now have test-tube-people walking amongst us. If we 'die' we can just have our brain uploaded to a machine or another body. The rights of the individual would change dramatically, and the problem of overpopulation would become immense. Age limits would, unless we moved to other solar systems (once this one is too full), have to be imposed to curb overpopulation.
Now onto a very touchy subject. I don't care if you think me sick for bringing it up or considering it, I do not support it, nor do I wholly care what you think about me for saying it. I'm a /b/tard, I don't have to support these things, but I'm certainly aware of it and joking of it. What is it that makes child pornography illegal? (lol if I get v& for typing that)
Is it that they are unable to fully understand what they are getting into? Is it because such a thing could damage them in some way? I'm pretty sure that in the future, with genetic engineering and faultless cosmetic surgery, we'd see women grown and perfected (in terms of beauty) whose only existence, the purpose for them being made, was to be in pornography? Such specified creation could also easily be applied to other fields of recreation or work, too, don't forget. So hey, someone/thing's life just became all about pornography. Do they know any better? Will they do anything else with their life? More than likely not. If a child is to never do anything than what they are currently doing, what is the true harm in keeping them doing it? They have no parents, no guardians, only scientists or machines that grew them. Because of that, I could also see child pornography (only by those created, not those born) becoming possible in the future.

Sorry if some of the stuff above is grossly misinformed, but I just felt like saying some of that.
 

Hidden

A boy named Crow
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
1,615
Awards
6
Age
35
Location
A world that never was
Website
www.freewebs.com
And yes through Transhumanism we'll lose our humanity, because we're transcending it?
This is necessarily true.

But wouldn't the striving for a method to escape death and every thing that belongs to that be such a factor, too?
Indeed, and a very important one; but so is our failure to do so.

Leonard said:
This pretty much sums up my opinion on this matter. No matter how much we try to alter ourselves, we still have a certain "origin", right?

Every change and every invention we make on ourselves is still, in the end, man-made (human-directed evolution) and as such, in a way something "human" and a part of us. If that makes any sense.

I am aware that this statement is a little shaky though, because I don't quite know where the boundaries of this lie. :l
I think there is sense to it, that we can't intentionally make ourselves into something that is not human--so far as our intention extends, so far does our humanity.

However, perhaps there is a point, quite separate of our own intention, where the world changes significantly enough that humanity as we experience it ceases to exist. But we cannot presume to anticipate, much less predetermine, the transhuman--as the term itself implies, it is something irretrievably beyond our experience as humans.

I want to throw another example to you, Phoenix, but this one is more literary. It is from Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zarathustra".

Zarathustra said:
I teach you the Ubermensch. Man is something that is to be surpassed. What have you done to surpass man?

All beings hitherto have created something beyond themselves: and you want to be the ebb of that great tide, and would rather go back to the beast than surpass man?

[...]

Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Ubermensch--a rope over an abyss.

A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous trembling and halting.

What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal; what is lovable in man is that he is an over-coming and a going-under.
The Wikipedia article you linked in the opening post says that Nietzsche is not a precursor to transhumanist thought (and I think there's something to that), but what of this passage? Are we on the right track mentally?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top