• The Moron's Guide To Transhumanism, Human Enhancement And Why It's Fucking Awesome.
    472 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;32118143]Amphetamine (USAN) or amfetamine (INN) is a psychostimulant drug of the phenethylamine class which produces [B]increased wakefulness and focus[/B] in association with decreased fatigue and appetite.[/QUOTE] I mean- uh- histamines.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;32126627]Yeah yeah exactly, being augmented having wires and prostheses around your body vs. being a decent sized, strong man?[/QUOTE] Who is going to make strength-enhancing prosthesis be only as strong as a human could naturally become anyway? What would be the purpose of that?
[QUOTE=Chrille;32127957]How is it even the same? That's like saying you should get a really high salary because you've been working out a lot and it took a huge effort. You dedicate yourself to a certain skill and get better, you improve yourself. If you just buy the end result you skip the entire process, which [i]in my opinion[/i] is the lesser mans alternative. If you're crippled or something, in which case bionic legs or arms would be your only choice. So I repeat; you crave all this superhuman stuff yet you aren't even willing to push your real body to its max.[/QUOTE] Because my real body is shit and takes ridiculous amounts of time to achieve anything even remotely significant.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;32128976]Who is going to make strength-enhancing prosthesis be only as strong as a human could naturally become anyway? What would be the purpose of that?[/QUOTE] Yeah, that'd be stupid. And I'm not saying that enhanced strength isn't practical, but at the same time you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter. [QUOTE=carcarcargo;32129214]Because my real body is shit and takes ridiculous amounts of time to achieve anything even remotely significant.[/QUOTE] So you're not only ignorant about the capabilities of your own body, you're also weak willed. Okay.
Your imagination sucks if the main thing you'd want to get cybernetics for is to be stronger, and that would require some serious skeletal reinforcement and a lot of very invasive surgery anyway. There are much simpler and closer to being possible ways to better yourself in ways that aren't naturally possible at all, like eye prosthesis , implanted ID(already possible, albeit only commonly with RFID) , there's also a lot of medical devices that will become cheaper and more practical as our grasp of cybernetics matures.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32129335]Your imagination sucks if the main thing you'd want to get cybernetics for is to be stronger, and that would require some serious skeletal reinforcement and a lot of very invasive surgery anyway. There are much simpler and closer to being possible ways to better yourself in ways that aren't naturally possible at all, like eye prosthesis , implanted ID(already possible, albeit only commonly with RFID) , there's also a lot of medical devices that will become cheaper and more practical as our grasp of cybernetics matures.[/QUOTE] Not just strength, you could install things into them which would be pretty cool.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;32115896]There's a difference between disability and lack of talent.[/QUOTE] Oh? What is it? If someone has poor genes for athleticism, they're poor at running. If they want to be a marathon runner, they can't. That's a 'lack of talent' just as much as someone born with an uncreative personality and unable to create art. Neither are their faults, yet I doubt you'd consider them disabilities. Where do you draw the line between 'lack of talent' and 'disability'? Would you really say that if someone was born mediocre in running (poor physical endurance), they just have to deal with it, but if they're born very bad at running (lame leg) then corrective measures are justified?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;32128976]Who is going to make strength-enhancing prosthesis be only as strong as a human could naturally become anyway? What would be the purpose of that?[/QUOTE] Obviously not. But my point is that humans have the machinery and technology (even in terms of a suit) to do very heavy lifting. Our bodies are irreplaceable. Have you seen how clumsy the most modern robotics are? And when looking ahead to the future, I would love to see just natural, healthy humans of all kind operating technologies way beyond our imagination! That would be some awesome-humanism if you ask me. [QUOTE=carcarcargo;32129214]Because my real body is shit and takes ridiculous amounts of time to achieve anything even remotely significant.[/QUOTE] Transhumanism/augmentation shouldn't be the answer to that. And like you speaking on an individual level, we are all insignificant.
[QUOTE=catbarf;32129577]Oh? What is it? If someone has poor genes for athleticism, they're poor at running. If they want to be a marathon runner, they can't. That's a 'lack of talent' just as much as someone born with an uncreative personality and unable to create art. Neither are their faults, yet I doubt you'd consider them disabilities. Where do you draw the line between 'lack of talent' and 'disability'? Would you really say that if someone was born mediocre in running (poor physical endurance), they just have to deal with it, but if they're born very bad at running (lame leg) then corrective measures are justified?[/QUOTE] You can't be born with poor physical endurance unless you have lung problems or whatever, which I support being helped through augmentation. I call horseshit on having poor genes for athleticism. Sure, you might have to work a little harder than people who are naturally good at it, but saying it's impossible for you to compete is being just stupid and lazy. Also, once again, being a marathon runner or musician are not core jobs. It's not like you're royally fucked if you can't become a runner or musician, there's tons of other options out there. However, if you lack the ability to do basic things like walk, tons of job opportunities are taken away from you. You can not have musical ability and still have an easy time being successful. You can not have the natural ability to run a marathon and still have an easy time being successful. Not having those things is not considered being disabled. It's when you have a problem that makes you less apt than the [I]average human being[/I], that's being disabled.
[QUOTE=Chrille;32127957]If you're crippled or something, in which case bionic legs or arms would be your only choice.[/QUOTE] Now, see, that's just a load of [i]crap[/i]. I see you weren't raised in the US, but somehow you still subscribe to the same everyone's-a-winner/everyone-can-do-anything mentality that pervades American schooling. Not everyone is born with the capability of becoming an astronaut, great artist, or successful CEO. And it's decidedly not just overt, obvious disabilities that do this. You readily accept that a person's physical traits can affect their capacity to perform tasks effectively, yet ignore the fact that not every such trait is obvious as a significant flaw, or immediately recognizable as one. A person with short legs may be just as bad at running as a person with flat feet- why should only the latter be considered a fixable defect? [editline]5th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129693]Sure, you might have to work a little harder than people who are naturally good at it, but saying it's impossible for you to compete is being just stupid and lazy.[/QUOTE] How many 5-foot-tall runners were in the Olympics in '08? If I were 5ft tall with a below-average level of atheleticism and wanted to be an Olympic sprinter, would I be stupid and lazy for recognizing the sheer impossibility of it? [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129693]Also, once again, being a marathon runner or musician are not core jobs. It's not like you're royally fucked if you can't become a runner or musician, there's tons of other options out there.[/QUOTE] Here we are discussing technology that could allow people to pursue their dreams instead of being denied because of factors outside their control. And you're saying 'settle for less and deal with it'? [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129693]However, if you lack the ability to do basic things like walk, tons of job opportunities are taken away from you. You can not have musical ability and still have an easy time being successful. You can not have the natural ability to run a marathon and still have an easy time being successful.[/QUOTE] Where do you draw the line? Where does needing to work a little harder to compete become a disability that deserves sympathy? [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129693]Not having those things is not considered being disabled. It's when you have a problem that makes you less apt than the [I]average human being[/I], that's being disabled.[/QUOTE] Since I doubt you'd consider half of the human population (you know, the half that falls under the 'average') disabled, you're going to need more specific criteria than that. Setting our sights on making people [i]average[/i] when the technology to become above-average is in development is incredibly short-sighted.
Except history disproves you. Plenty of individuals with problems like that or whatever have become famous sprinters. Michael Johnson was once considered the fasted man in the world despite running with what was considered retarded form. The only thing holding people back nowadays is economic situation, which can't be helped with augmentations. Any kid with the right schooling and the right attitude can become virtually anything he or she wants to be. To say "Oh, I wasn't born with the ability to run fast so I'm just going to be lazy and try to get augments" is just outright stupid. I wasn't born fast. I run flat footed. But I busted my dick and became fast as hell. [b]Augmentations should not be used to compensate for a lack of effort.[/b] If you go to the doctor and say "I want bionic legs so I can run faster," the doctor should tell you "Go work out." However, if you can't walk or have a gimp, then they should definitely help you. As I've said a million times before, shit like running fast is not something you need to be successful at all. However, not being able to run at all is a defect. The bar should be set by the average human being, not the exceptional ones. If you can run fast enough to get out of dangerous situations fine, you don't need to run any faster. Calling yourself disabled because you can't run 100m in under 10 seconds is just beyond stupid.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129823]The only thing holding people back nowadays is economic situation, which can't be helped with augmentations. Any kid with the right schooling and the right attitude can become virtually anything he or she wants to be. [/QUOTE]Uhhh, no, it doesn't work like that, it never has. Being more than you already are is the entire point to transhumanism anyway.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129823]If you go to the doctor and say "I want bionic legs so I can run faster," the doctor should tell you "Go work out."[/QUOTE] Why? If we have the technology, why on earth shouldn't we use it? It's no more or less fair than being born naturally predisposed to a trait- if anything, it's more fair as it's available to anyone (subject to economic factors), whereas there's nothing you can do about your natural ability. [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129823]The bar should be set by the average human being, not the exceptional ones.[/QUOTE] And how far below the bar would be considered disabled? If anyone below the 'average' were, then that would mean half of all people would be disabled. Someone would have to decide what degree of inability constitutes disability.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129823]Except history disproves you. Plenty of individuals with problems like that or whatever have become famous sprinters. Michael Johnson was once considered the fasted man in the world despite running with what was considered retarded form. The only thing holding people back nowadays is economic situation, which can't be helped with augmentations. Any kid with the right schooling and the right attitude can become virtually anything he or she wants to be. To say "Oh, I wasn't born with the ability to run fast so I'm just going to be lazy and try to get augments" is just outright stupid. I wasn't born fast. I run flat footed. But I busted my dick and became fast as hell. [b]Augmentations should not be used to compensate for a lack of effort.[/b] If you go to the doctor and say "I want bionic legs so I can run faster," the doctor should tell you "Go work out." However, if you can't walk or have a gimp, then they should definitely help you. As I've said a million times before, shit like running fast is not something you need to be successful at all. However, not being able to run at all is a defect. The bar should be set by the average human being, not the exceptional ones. If you can run fast enough to get out of dangerous situations fine, you don't need to run any faster. Calling yourself disabled because you can't run 100m in under 10 seconds is just beyond stupid.[/QUOTE] Your petty efforts at clinging to the American work ethic as if it were a universal truth which can do no wrong amuses me. The bars will be set by the exceptional, because that is how a society increases in efficiency. Wasting time training to become fast or strong is useless when a less time consuming and ultimately superior alternative exists. Face it. Work means less and less. What would I need to do to discredit an argument just twenty years ago? Trawl through libraries and archives, find all referenced sources and or relevant materials, track down the person producing the information used, and then incorporate it into a response. Now I can Wiki the subject, find the relevant article with control F, check the source through a hyperlink, and then Google the researcher responsible to see if they have any sort of spotty history. One takes days, the other takes minutes, and to me, a layman, the results are indistinguishable. But that's a crude example that is, admittedly, flawed. Useful to me, but not to an actual scientist. That's why things like Watson are being created, AIs that can intelligently and accurately sift through data automatically. And as for labor, we all know that robotics is steadily replacing the human work force. DARPA has been working on autonomous military vehicles for years. Machines do jobs better, because machines are designed for the job, and not just survival as humans are. And also unlike humans, robots will exponentially increase in efficiency as time goes on. So why shouldn't men become more like machines? Because of a quaint attachment to the idea of a hard days work? Please.
[QUOTE=catbarf;32129708]Now, see, that's just a load of [i]crap[/i]. I see you weren't raised in the US, but somehow you still subscribe to the same everyone's-a-winner/everyone-can-do-anything mentality that pervades American schooling. Not everyone is born with the capability of becoming an astronaut, great artist, or successful CEO. And it's decidedly not just overt, obvious disabilities that do this. You readily accept that a person's physical traits can affect their capacity to perform tasks effectively, yet ignore the fact that not every such trait is obvious as a significant flaw, or immediately recognizable as one. A person with short legs may be just as bad at running as a person with flat feet- why should only the latter be considered a fixable defect?[/QUOTE] No I'm fucking not subscribing to that mentality, what I'm saying is that you should do your best and if that isn't enough, only [i]then[/i] should you consider getting "enhanced". This guy put it well: [QUOTE=MaverickIB;32129823][b]Augmentations should not be used to compensate for a lack of effort.[/b] If you go to the doctor and say "I want bionic legs so I can run faster," the doctor should tell you "Go work out." However, if you can't walk or have a gimp, then they should definitely help you. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130443]No I'm fucking not subscribing to that mentality, what I'm saying is that you should do your best and if that isn't enough, only [i]then[/i] should you consider getting "enhanced".[/QUOTE] And who's going to decide what's a legitimate disability and what's just not trying hard enough? How do you tell if someone's 'doing their best'? And why should they have to before becoming augmented? I don't waste hours of my time trying to do calculus in my head before deciding I've 'done my best' and pulling out the calculator. The tool's available so I use it, because then I don't have to do my best just to keep up.
[QUOTE=catbarf;32130507]And who's going to decide what's a legitimate disability and what's just not trying hard enough? How do you tell if someone's 'doing their best'? And why should they have to before becoming augmented?[/QUOTE] Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable. I'm going to ask this question again: Yeah, that'd be stupid. And I'm not saying that enhanced strength isn't practical, but at the same time [b]you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter.[/b]
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130582]Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable. I'm going to ask this question again: Yeah, that'd be stupid. And I'm not saying that enhanced strength isn't practical, but at the same time [b]you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter.[/b][/QUOTE]If someone wants to enhance their strength or endurance, has the means to have the procedure performed and is aware of the risks involved, who are you to say they can't? It's their body, and their choice to do it. Unless whatever they want is obviously a danger to other people, of course.
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130443]No I'm fucking not subscribing to that mentality, what I'm saying is that you should do your best and if that isn't enough, only [i]then[/i] should you consider getting "enhanced". This guy put it well:[/QUOTE] Why? Why should I bother appealing to your arbitrary and antiquated notions of what's good and what's bad? Oh no. I didn't put effort into being able to lift 300 pounds. I didn't put effort into being able to sprint at twenty miles an hour for hours at a time. Hulk Hogan would be so disappointed in me.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;32130622]Why? Why should I bother appealing to your arbitrary and antiquated notions of what's good and what's bad? Oh no. I didn't put effort into being able to lift 300 pounds. I didn't put effort into being able to sprint at twenty miles an hour for hours at a time. Hulk Hogan would be so disappointed in me.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Nerts;32130587]If someone wants to enhance their strength or endurance, has the means to have the procedure performed and is aware of the risks involved, who are you to say they can't? It's their body, and their choice to do it. Unless whatever they want is obviously a danger to other people, of course.[/QUOTE] Did you somehow now read this part? "Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable."
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130582]Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable. I'm going to ask this question again: Yeah, that'd be stupid. And I'm not saying that enhanced strength isn't practical, but at the same time [b]you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter.[/b][/QUOTE] Why does someone get vaccinations and yet stay neurotically clean at all times?
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130632]Did you somehow now read this part? "Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable."[/QUOTE]I was reading more the "you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter." part, you've phrased it like I should be morally obliged to stop someone from doing this.
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130632]Did you somehow now read this part? "Decide for yourself? All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable."[/QUOTE] And I'm saying your opinion is humorously outdated.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32130665]I was reading more the "you should ask why someone who has never felt the need to train his body to be capable of even a fraction of the potential the human body has, suddenly needs a pair of arms that can lift twice as much as a powerlifter." part, you've phrased it like I should be morally obliged to stop someone from doing this.[/QUOTE] I still think it's something you should ask yourself. [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;32130677]And I'm saying your opinion is humorously outdated.[/QUOTE] That you should actually work towards self-improvement? And what makes your opinion more valid?
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130582]All I'm saying is that I feel it's the easy way out, and thus less desirable.[/QUOTE] So I take it you don't use calculators, and instead have put in years of effort in learning advanced mathematics, with enough practice to be able to do it yourself, in your head? Or does it seem like a big waste of effort when you could be just as productive with no additional work needed, through the use of technology?
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130784]I still think it's something you should ask yourself.[/QUOTE]The question I think you should be asking is "Is it any of my business what other people do?". [QUOTE=Chrille;32130784]That you should actually work towards self-improvement? And what makes your opinion more valid?[/QUOTE]Improvement is improvement, cybernetic prosthesis leads to a lot more improvements than a lifetime gym membership, or some college courses.
[QUOTE=Chrille;32130784]I still think it's something you should ask yourself. That you should actually work towards self-improvement? And what makes your opinion more valid?[/QUOTE] Because my opinion makes no arbitrary assertions on what is good and what is bad. There are only actions. Actions have consequences. These consequences make life worse, and they make life better. To become augmented and gain the strength of five men without working a day in your life is an action which results in the work you do being easier and faster, increasing productivity and efficiency. The money you use to pay for that augmentation goes to fund the work of biotech corporations and surgeons, further advancing augmentation as a whole. The work you do drives down prices as a whole, increasing the standard of living for the entirety of society. That is the only metric that matters, because that is the only metric that has consequences on a physical level. Save your emotional pleas for the Care Bears.
[QUOTE=Z3r0747;32082939]Because math is quite obviously the only subject that matters in life and is what everyone needs to be doing. Show me a computer that can produce art or music (that isn't based on premade math formulas) without human interaction and then you have an argument for the "inferiority of the human brain". Comparisons between calculators/computers and brains are pointless. Sure, it would certainly help if we could increase our calculation ability exponentially, but to think that brain is "inferior" and in need of dire improvement because of this is just a ridiculous underestimation of our abilities.[/QUOTE] Well that is all very poetic, but yes math is possibly the most important subject. Sure you can try and be an artist trying to get by day by day, meanwhile everyone else gets a Ph.D. in applied physics, maths and/or whatever and rakes in huge paychecks, makes huge new discoveries and so on. Sorry but the ideas that music and art are as important as math, physics and chemistry is just wishful thinking.
[QUOTE=acds;32131055]Well that is all very poetic, but yes math is possibly the most important subject. Sure you can try and be an artist trying to get by day by day, meanwhile everyone else gets a Ph.D. in applied physics, maths and/or whatever and rakes in huge paychecks, makes huge new discoveries and so on. Sorry but the ideas that music and art are as important as math, physics and chemistry is just wishful thinking.[/QUOTE] As an artist, I must agree with this.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32130945]The question I think you should be asking is "Is it any of my business what other people do?". Improvement is improvement cybernetic prosthesis leads to a lot more improvements than a lifetime gym membership, or some college courses.[/QUOTE] It's not like I have gone out of my way to stop people from getting augmented (as if it was actually an issue), I have stated that I felt was the easy way out and I judge people based on it, just like I judge someone who is cheating in a sports match. Don't delude yourself into thinking you don't do the same, just on some different grounds. Get down from the fucking moral high ground. [QUOTE=catbarf;32130939]So I take it you don't use calculators, and instead have put in years of effort in learning advanced mathematics, with enough practice to be able to do it yourself, in your head? Or does it seem like a big waste of effort when you could be just as productive with no additional work needed, through the use of technology?[/QUOTE] If I actually wanted to be good at advanced mathematics I would have to. You could use the calculator but then you wouldn't really be good at the advanced mathematics, would you? And do you need bionic arms to get through your day, like how you need a calculator to get through a math class? If not, then why would you want it? And why do you not want it bad enough that you work out to get stronger so you're a little closer to what you actually want? [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;32131017]Because my opinion makes no arbitrary assertions on what is good and what is bad. There are only actions. Actions have consequences. These consequences make life worse, and they make life better. To become augmented and gain the strength of five men without working a day in your life is an action which results in the work you do being easier and faster, increasing productivity and efficiency. The money you use to pay for that augmentation goes to fund the work of biotech corporations and surgeons, further advancing augmentation as a whole. The work you do drives down prices as a whole, increasing the standard of living for the entirety of society. That is the only metric that matters, because that is the only metric that has consequences on a physical level. Save your emotional pleas for the Care Bears.[/QUOTE] You've made an arbitrary assertion on good and bad when you decided what you thought was the ideal way to live, despite it being based in the objective and measurable. You've made an arbitrary assertion when you decided what criteria is important when validating an opinion. You've made an arbitrary assertion when you concluded that productivity and efficiency are the only things that matter. You've made an arbitrary assertion when you decided that consumerism is an ideal, and that we should all work towards being able to consume as much as possible. Your opinion is filled with fucking arbitrary assertions on good and bad.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.