Transhumanism

[_EX]

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.

I still view being Super-human as being human.

 

[Square Ninja]

I still view being Super-human as being human.

how about you elaborate and maybe tell us why

 

[_EX]

how about you elaborate and maybe tell us why

Sure thing.

I am still human if I get my leg cut off, right?
I am still human if I get a prosthetic leg, right?
I am still human if I get a mechanical prosthetic leg, right?


Well thats the basic idea. I would say the same thing towards brain chips or Doctor Octopus tentacles.

 

[frisson]

You're being a bit short-sighted about it.

 

[_EX]

You're being a bit short-sighted about it.

Why?

how about you elaborate and maybe tell us why

I couldnt have said it better myself.

 

[Hidden]

A being that cannot die, get ill, age or suffer, finally free of the human condition? I think it's pretty sui generis.

Best description I can think of it. But it feels to me, and perhaps this is my own bias, that this 'transhumanism' movement still stubbornly tries to maintain 'humanism' in that picture, where it simply does not exist. Humanity dies when this being is born; as Arthur C. Clarke puts it, it is "an end that repudiate optimism and pessimism alike."

Akin to the watered-down humanity you described we afforded to slaves and such? My point is, even with Hollywood robots still being decades, if not centuries, away from what we currently have, we still personify them, and that's a pretty good sign.

Fair enough. But what is it a good sign for? Our ability to cope with emergent technology?

Does it matter? After a while, they'll both be unrecognizable.

Properly speaking, it shouldn't matter, for precisely the reason you give. But humanity still has vested interests in the question--we want to make this future in our own image(/imagination), and for that to be the case, we have to be the ones directing its movement.

It's a projection of that "let the door swing shut behind us" mentality. We want in on a species that doesn't suffer disease, aging or death, so we set about making one and imagine ourselves part of it. But this species will not be homo sapiens, at least as we define them; as you say, it is sui generis.

I exist only at your pleasure.

Also, Song of Ice and Fire is taken holy-good-god too long. I've forgotten like half of the plot. I remember that Tyrion's great, though.

You're pretty much where I am at this point. That, and I hate (dead) Ned Stark's now-undead wife.

I still view being Super-human as being human.

What is the point of the prefix "super" in this case? Is it like "African-American"?

I am still human if I get my leg cut off, right?
I am still human if I get a prosthetic leg, right?
I am still human if I get a mechanical prosthetic leg, right?

I believe we call these people handicapped, but certainly still human, you're right. So we don't define a human being by the legs.
How do we define one?

 

[_EX]

What is the point of the prefix "super" in this case? Is it like "African-American"?

A human with a vast amount of extra ability by comparrison to the average ability of humans.
Something like that.

 

[gene chaos]

i'm human a long as i perceive myself to be one. even if i'm a bunch of codes in a metal (or whatever object i'm in) shell i would still perceive myself human. i feel its the will that defines us as humans, though one has to admit that being human is a very broad range of things. some are considered inhuman because of the way they think and their actions.

so if there are other sentient races out there, they may be considered human.

 

[Orion]

But that specifically undoes what we mean to be human, if aliens can be considered human then your definition does not work. Being human is part biological and part psychological, certainly.

 

[gene chaos]

thats true infinity( gotta find that symbol for your name) in the case of that, but if what you just said is true the moment we loose our human bodies we are no longer human. yes you are correct that being human relates to both physical and mental states.

 

[Orion]

Of course there will come a time when we no longer fit the current definition of human, but of course the definition for human has always been changing. Black people were originally not considered 'human' in some respects, now they are. As such, people will adjust their definitions and perceptions of humanity as they evolve and change over the centuries.

 

[_EX]

Of course there will come a time when we no longer fit the current definition of human, but of course the definition for human has always been changing. Black people were originally not considered 'human' in some respects, now they are. As such, people will adjust their definitions and perceptions of humanity as they evolve and change over the centuries.

Sounds like you found the answer.

 

[Phoenix]

Best description I can think of it. But it feels to me, and perhaps this is my own bias, that this 'transhumanism' movement still stubbornly tries to maintain 'humanism' in that picture, where it simply does not exist. Humanity dies when this being is born; as Arthur C. Clarke puts it, it is "an end that repudiate optimism and pessimism alike."

You have a point, I guess. But I think it's just that we're humans right now, and we have nothing else to compare it too. Would post-human be a better term?

Fair enough. But what is it a good sign for? Our ability to cope with emergent technology?

Our ability to recognize humanity in non-humans.

Properly speaking, it shouldn't matter, for precisely the reason you give. But humanity still has vested interests in the question--we want to make this future in our own image(/imagination), and for that to be the case, we have to be the ones directing its movement.

Unless it's more like evolution and less like design. Like, whatever changes (immortality) are based on our natural instincts (we don't want to die).

It's a projection of that "let the door swing shut behind us" mentality. We want in on a species that doesn't suffer disease, aging or death, so we set about making one and imagine ourselves part of it. But this species will not be homo sapiens, at least as we define them; as you say, it is sui generis.

Agreed.

You're pretty much where I am at this point. That, and I hate (dead) Ned Stark's now-undead wife.

Next book better blow my mind, I'll tell you that.

 

[Hidden]

You have a point, I guess. But I think it's just that we're humans right now, and we have nothing else to compare it too. Would post-human be a better term?

Post-human... that's a very interesting idea. It certainly sounds different, doesn't it? More apocalyptic than promising.

Our ability to recognize humanity in non-humans.

What, like WALL-E? That's old hat--Disney perfected the technique back in 1942 with Bambi, and it has confused our omniverous instinct for over sixty years since.

Unless it's more like evolution and less like design. Like, whatever changes (immortality) are based on our natural instincts (we don't want to die).

Quite possible--at which point that natural instinct which shaped the transhuman would no longer exist in the transhuman. That's the part I find absolutely fascinating.

Next book better blow my mind, I'll tell you that.

Next book also better have a refresher on who's alive and dead (and undead) at the moment, because I've desperately lost track. I've decided only to read book series that are published in full from here on out--I'm finally finishing the Harry Potter series, on books six and seven, which I hadn't gotten around to before.

 

[Wonderglow]

Everything has already been said here for me except

"The movement regards aspects of the human condition, such as... involuntary death as... undesirable.

*facepalm*

 

[Ven-Dono]

Sure thing.

I am still human if I get my leg cut off, right?
I am still human if I get a prosthetic leg, right?
I am still human if I get a mechanical prosthetic leg, right?


Well thats the basic idea. I would say the same thing towards brain chips or Doctor Octopus tentacles.

It's a paradox. Yes.

I have a head full of hair.
If I remove one hair off my head, does that make me bald?
If I remove two strands of hair, does that make me bald?
Going by that logic, how can I ever be bald by removing hair from my head?

It's similar. Just less complex.

But there would be a point that everyone would agree that the person in question isn't a human. We already have people with cow hearts. And people with holes through their prefrontal cortexes. I guess like Infinity said, you wouldn't measure humanity by how they appear.

Of course there will come a time when we no longer fit the current definition of human, but of course the definition for human has always been changing. Black people were originally not considered 'human' in some respects, now they are. As such, people will adjust their definitions and perceptions of humanity as they evolve and change over the centuries.

Best post in the thread.