Transhumanism

[Zorceror44]

I guess we would have to create laws in order to prevent genetically modified humans being used for nefarious purposes. I'm not sure if we could prevent death, but I'm sure that we could at least add some years to the average human lifespan.

 

[Drawets Rednaxela]

...the other 90% of our brain that we don't use...

What?

 

[Yawning Bulbasaur]

I do think it's the most practical solution for humanity's future survival, considering that if we were converted into (theoretically) immortal robots or had our consciousness exist within a virtual metaphysical network, we would no longer have to rely on food, air, water or medical care and therefore require fewer resources and put less strain on our rapidly deteriorating ecosystem. On the other hand, not everyone will be accepting of this idea, especially when worldwide we have rapid overpopulation of Muslims/Catholics/fundamentalist Protestants (and in some of the most ecologically important areas no less) who will undoubtedly condemn transhumanism (like with atheism) as heresy and will try their damnedest to shut the whole thing down, and even among the political left in the first-world we have anti-GMO/anti-vaxxer activists who are actively lobbying against research and trying to impede any scientific progress in those areas on the grounds of them being "un-natural" (SPOILER ALERT: So is your hybrid car and almost every "all natural" overpriced food you happen to eat)

 

[autisticdragonkin]

I do think it's the most practical solution for humanity's future survival, considering that if we were converted into (theoretically) immortal robots or had our consciousness exist within a virtual metaphysical network, we would no longer have to rely on food, air, water or medical care and therefore require fewer resources and put less strain on our rapidly deteriorating ecosystem. On the other hand, not everyone will be accepting of this idea, especially when worldwide we have rapid overpopulation of Muslims/Catholics/fundamentalist Protestants (and in some of the most ecologically important areas no less) who will undoubtedly condemn transhumanism (like with atheism) as heresy and will try their damnedest to shut the whole thing down, and even among the political left in the first-world we have anti-GMO/anti-vaxxer activists who are actively lobbying against research and trying to impede any scientific progress in those areas on the grounds of them being "un-natural" (SPOILER ALERT: So is your hybrid car and almost every "all natural" overpriced food you happen to eat)

I think that transhumanism will take too long for any of what you said to occur. That technology will likely take at least 1000 years to develop and most likely the entire world will be atheist (but not necessarily liberal) at the end of the 21st century. We should just adapt to our current biological limitations because that would be the most cost effective, the upfront cost of what you propose will likely exceed 100,000,000,000% of all available resources for the next 10000 years at least and by that point we will likely simply not get any payout from it anymore

 

[Hat]

Anyone that wants to turn the whole world into a bunch of immortal robots should get his head looked at.

 

[AnOminous]

I think that transhumanism will take too long for any of what you said to occur. That technology will likely take at least 1000 years to develop and most likely the entire world will be atheist (but not necessarily liberal) at the end of the 21st century. We should just adapt to our current biological limitations because that would be the most cost effective, the upfront cost of what you propose will likely exceed 100,000,000,000% of all available resources for the next 10000 years at least and by that point we will likely simply not get any payout from it anymore

Something like 100,000,000,000 and a bunch of zeroes% of the energy we're currently using is dissipating uselessly away into space from a giant fusion reactor called the Sun. Put a sphere of solar panels around it and capture most of that, and you have all the energy you need to do most anything imaginable. That is called a Dyson sphere after theoretical physicist Freeman R. Dyson, who originated the concept.

Even capturing a minuscule fraction of it would be far more energy than we already have and would provide the energy for completing the project.

 

[Tehshigelisok]

Personally, I'm starting to get into the idea.

At its core, I see transhumanism as a greatly magnified extension of the fact that we as humans have already greatly expanded the average lifespan over the past century through all sorts of technological and scientific advancements. The average life expectancy has gone up about 30 years in the past century alone, and even people who aren't necessarily transhumanists are researching ways to make us live longer. I've heard even conservative estimates say that the first person to live to 200 is already alive, and possibly even already an adult.

I admit that I have a generally optimistic outlook on humanity as a whole, but at the same time, I'm not blind to the many ills still rampant in the world, nor to the risks and ethics that transhumanism presents. Could it bring a wider gap between the rich and the poor, or those who choose to shun technology? If/when AIs become advanced enough to become self-aware, then what ethics will arise then? Will political red tape hold up anything that would otherwise be beneficial? Will we truly achieve immortality? If so, how will we counter overpopulation? How long will any of these advances take before they're in place? How do we know that none of this will give way to a dystopian future?

And frankly, that's what fascinates me about it — exploring the knowns and the unknowns, the risks and benefits, and all the variables that fall under the label of transhumanism. I love seeing the discussion that the concept generates, whether it be from big names like Ray Kurzweil or Aubrey de Grey, or even just ordinary Joes on the Internet. I caught wind of the idea through a friend who's a transhumanist with a positive outlook on the world, but I didn't blindly follow him; I did my own research on both sides of many arguments before coming to my own conclusion. And that's what I like to see in this thread: the fact that, whether for or against it, almost everyone who's spoken here seems to have at least made an informed opinion.

 

[AnOminous]

Personally, I'm starting to get into the idea.

At its core, I see transhumanism as a greatly magnified extension of the fact that we as humans have already greatly expanded the average lifespan over the past century through all sorts of technological and scientific advancements. The average life expectancy has gone up about 30 years in the past century alone, and even people who aren't necessarily transhumanists are researching ways to make us live longer. I've heard even conservative estimates say that the first person to live to 200 is already alive, and possibly even already an adult.

Superannuated people have always existed, they were just far fewer in number because usually, in more primitive times, something would kill you before you reached those ages. We have eliminated a lot of those things that kill you, but that hasn't increased the natural potential lifespan humans have, and there may be as-yet unknown barriers to doing that.

A lot of transhuman dogma relies on simply extrapolating current trends. The problem is that this disregards that there are reasons that just, say, extrapolating Moore's law and doubling processing power every X number of years doesn't go asymptotic next Thursday and lead to superintelligent computer gods.

 

[Tehshigelisok]

Superannuated people have always existed, they were just far fewer in number because usually, in more primitive times, something would kill you before you reached those ages. We have eliminated a lot of those things that kill you, but that hasn't increased the natural potential lifespan humans have, and there may be as-yet unknown barriers to doing that.

A lot of transhuman dogma relies on simply extrapolating current trends. The problem is that this disregards that there are reasons that just, say, extrapolating Moore's law and doubling processing power every X number of years doesn't go asymptotic next Thursday and lead to superintelligent computer gods.

And that is part of what I'm trying to get at. The unknowns fascinate me; I want to see them become known. Likewise, I want to stay informed on what already is known, and what potential risks and benefits it has. I've spent most of my life being an incredibly linear thinker, and I think I'm just driven by finding a concept that both fascinates me in its aims, and challenges my way of thinking by being so open-ended.

 

[Marvin]

Superannuated people have always existed, they were just far fewer in number because usually, in more primitive times, something would kill you before you reached those ages. We have eliminated a lot of those things that kill you, but that hasn't increased the natural potential lifespan humans have, and there may be as-yet unknown barriers to doing that.

A lot of transhuman dogma relies on simply extrapolating current trends. The problem is that this disregards that there are reasons that just, say, extrapolating Moore's law and doubling processing power every X number of years doesn't go asymptotic next Thursday and lead to superintelligent computer gods.

Oh definitely.

Personally, I find "transhumanism" goofy. That is, the definition of the term as most internet nerds apply it.

When you press them on their claims, it just breaks down. After that, they just resort to pointing to ordinary scientific advancement. Which is amazing, and I love to encourage. But it's not the same as the matrix and robot limbs and shit like that.

Yes, science is advancing. We should do everything we can to contribute to it. But no, it's not going to lead to you being a posthuman conscious entity living in the internet a la Ghost in the Shell.

 

[melty]

Maybe I'm being optimistic because I think most of the philosophical issues with transhumanism (souls, free will, what is human etc) are nonsense, but I think at some point people will honestly just start to get over them. If you told people 50 years ago that in the future there would be devices that track your every movement and send information to the government and everyone has one willingly people would say you are nuts but here we are. As someone pointed out in another topic, people used to be very afraid of online privacy and wouldn't even shop online and then at some point everyone just stopped giving a shit and posting everything about themselves everywhere. The benefits and convenience outweigh everything else.
So I can see people getting over the weirdness of cybernetic parts, etc. Just because everyone else would start doing it and the benefits would just be so great that I think a lot of people would just naturally come to ignore the potential issues.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure it's way more likely that aging/death from old age will be solved biologically speaking far before cybernetic bodies/uploading your consciousness i.e. functional immortality, iirc that is not actually all that far off from becoming reality. Or at the very least, significantly extending lifespans. I really think it's possible that some of us will live to 200, 300 or maybe more. But if it doesn't happen, I won't be disappointed either. And I don't think I would want to live much longer but I guess it depends. I just hope they figure out some serious antiaging shit because it would suck if they figured out how to stop aging and death but if you're already old then you're just stuck in a 60 year old body forever.

 

[Sweet and Savoury]

Change will happen, technology will become part of us. I'm pretty confident this is a fact.

Will there be prejudice against early adopters? Given history I would assume so, will there be prejudice against those who later choose not to adapt? Given history probably.

Should this stop us from pushing the limits of the human experience, hell no!

 

[Picklepower]

Wow it was 2013 when I first posted in this thread, and now its almost 2016, are we any closer to Trans humanism? At the risk of sounding like an SJW, Transhumanism is something I only hear well off white guys speculate about, in between sharing pictures of space, from the, "I Fucking Love Science" Facebook page. Speculating is fun, but lets look at reality for a second, the Earth is full of poverty, imagining this future technology exists, we can tell it would be expensive, medicine can be expensive, who would be able to afford this stuff? wealthy people, in well off countries. Who wouldn't? poor people. "Oh no guiz they would get it free from the nice future government! that government would really care yippee! BULLSHIT! America it seems, cant even get its healthcare straightened out, and I don't believe rich people would give out free robot bodies or immortality pills, to the immigrants, and poor people, that they despise.

 

[exball]

Wow it was 2013 when I first posted in this thread, and now its almost 2016, are we any closer to Trans humanism? At the risk of sounding like an SJW, Transhumanism is something I only hear well off white guys speculate about, in between sharing pictures of space, from the, "I Fucking Love Science" Facebook page. Speculating is fun, but lets look at reality for a second, the Earth is full of poverty, imagining this future technology exists, we can tell it would be expensive, medicine can be expensive, who would be able to afford this stuff? wealthy people, in well off countries. Who wouldn't? poor people. "Oh no guiz they would get it free from the nice future government! that government would really care yippee! BULLSHIT! America it seems, cant even get its healthcare straightened out, and I don't believe rich people would give out free robot bodies or immortality pills, to the immigrants, and poor people, that they despise.

That doesn't mean the technology won't exist. Just that you don't get any of it.

 

[Derbydollar]

Wow it was 2013 when I first posted in this thread, and now its almost 2016, are we any closer to Trans humanism? At the risk of sounding like an SJW, Transhumanism is something I only hear well off white guys speculate about, in between sharing pictures of space, from the, "I Fucking Love Science" Facebook page. Speculating is fun, but lets look at reality for a second, the Earth is full of poverty, imagining this future technology exists, we can tell it would be expensive, medicine can be expensive, who would be able to afford this stuff? wealthy people, in well off countries. Who wouldn't? poor people. "Oh no guiz they would get it free from the nice future government! that government would really care yippee! BULLSHIT! America it seems, cant even get its healthcare straightened out, and I don't believe rich people would give out free robot bodies or immortality pills, to the immigrants, and poor people, that they despise.

Okay guys, we need to stop talking about crazy cool new technology because the poor might not be able to use it.
I guess by this logic we shouldn't talk about books, movies, or video games either.

You know, poor people are starving in the world and we're talking about entertainment all the time.
They can't afford stuff like that... I mean, how monstrous can we be to speculate about entertainment?
I bet it's mostly white guys who like space and technology talking about it too. Sheesh, they've probably never met adversity in their entire lives.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

Wow it was 2013 when I first posted in this thread, and now its almost 2016, are we any closer to Trans humanism? At the risk of sounding like an SJW, Transhumanism is something I only hear well off white guys speculate about, in between sharing pictures of space, from the, "I Fucking Love Science" Facebook page. Speculating is fun, but lets look at reality for a second, the Earth is full of poverty, imagining this future technology exists, we can tell it would be expensive, medicine can be expensive, who would be able to afford this stuff? wealthy people, in well off countries. Who wouldn't? poor people. "Oh no guiz they would get it free from the nice future government! that government would really care yippee! BULLSHIT! America it seems, cant even get its healthcare straightened out, and I don't believe rich people would give out free robot bodies or immortality pills, to the immigrants, and poor people, that they despise.

You can say the same about any technology. The rich always have a technological edge and its the best reason to want to become rich. Being able to get gallstone surgery in the 1890s didn't increase the gap between the rich and the poor and neither will transhumanism in the long run

 

[Picklepower]

No I'm saying that even if it existed, it wouldn't lead to a magical utopia, the poor would die out. People in the thread earlier, speculated that everyone would get this technology, and I'm saying that's bullshit. We are talking about immortality, not a Playstation 5.

 

[exball]

the poor would die out.

Lol no, the poor always have and always have been the best at breeding.

People in the thread earlier, speculated that everyone would get this technology, and I'm saying that's bullshit. We are talking about immortality, not a Playstation 5.

Initially only the rich could afford cars, phones, microwaves, etc. As technology becomes older, more understood, and widespread, it becomes cheaper and more available.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

No I'm saying that even if it existed, it wouldn't lead to a magical utopia, the poor would die out. People in the thread earlier, speculated that everyone would get this technology, and I'm saying that's bullshit. We are talking about immortality, not a Playstation 5.

The catch-up effect will prevent this from happening. Diminishing returns on capital investment would mean that poor people will be able to improve themselves with this technology more quickly than rich people who already have invested a lot in it all things being equal

 

[Derbydollar]

No I'm saying that even if it existed, it wouldn't lead to a magical utopia, the poor would die out. People in the thread earlier, speculated that everyone would get this technology, and I'm saying that's bullshit. We are talking about immortality, not a Playstation 5.

I hope you realize that you framed your post poorly. These kinds of technology trickle down as they are adopted and infrastructure is made to support them.
Just because the rich can afford 65" OLED 4k tvs doesn't mean we won't be able to someday. It means the technology isn't cheap enough yet.

There's also no reason I can think of to believe that immortality is any different. As the process to achieving it becomes better documented and honed, the price will come down.
The issue of over population will probably be fixed by the terraformation of different planets, too. So, not much reason to keep this kind of change from the public.
Let alone the kind of backlash there would be from the poor to the rich never dying and continuing to rule.