• First Steps of a Cyborg
    95 replies, posted
Carbo, you're criticizing the wrong aspects of transhumanism. If you want to make a real case against transhumanism, you ought to be challenging advocates of it with the social and economic implications of it (both of which could be quite severe), not the moral implications. Morality is a highly subjective argument, and while you may think it's "wrong" for a man to augment his body with technology, many other people undoubtedly think that it would be silly [i]not[/i] to. If you want to make an effective argument, you need to state [i]why[/i] it could be dangerous, and [i]how[/i] it could impact society and the individual in a negative way. I happen to be highly supportive of transhumanism, to a point. The idea of using technology to augment our bodies and perceptions is a very exciting one, but my actual organic mind is not something I want to alter in any way for fear that I could, indeed, destroy a part of what truly makes me "human." How would an artificial augmentation of the brain really effect our personality, our creativity, our consciousness? Would we even know if something [i]had[/i] been lost? It's not something we can say at this point, but it is a potential fear of mine. However, I find the concept of an altered perception incredibly compelling. I hope that, one day, I [i]can[/i] connect my consciousness to the future version of the internet. Can you even imagine what that would be like? All the information in the world available at a whim, the ability to learn anything just by wishing it so. Of course, there is a very strong argument to be made against that: our talents, skills, experiences, and flaws are what make us unique, but if the majority of the world is connected to a network, and is constantly uploading and downloading information from other users, might we run the risk of losing our identity in this overwhelming assault of information on our senses? Would we be able to differentiate between an original thought and an acquired thought? Just something to think about, I guess. Physical augmentations offer many advantages, with comparatively few philosophical ramifications. The most obvious case to make against physical augmentations are that they would create a very decisive split between those who could afford them, and those who could not. Marx's warning of a two-class system could become a very harsh reality. However, physical augmentations are still super badass. I guess the bottom line is that the future is very uncertain. The transhumanist vision of the future is exciting, romantic, and probably inevitable, but it brings with it a whole host of new worries for the world. One thing is certain, we must settle the issues of today before we can hope to take on the issues of tomorrow. Gay rights, immigration policies, the state of controlled substances, health care, and economic policies are very small fries compared to the social, personal, and economic challenges of the future, and if we can't learn how to finally lay these modern issues to rest, we will be swept away by the colossal changes that are certain to come.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;32052101]Carbo, you're criticizing the wrong aspects of transhumanism. If you want to make a real case against transhumanism, you ought to be challenging advocates of it with the social and economic implications of it (both of which could be quite severe), not the moral implications. Morality is a highly subjective argument, and while you may think it's "wrong" for a man to augment his body with technology, many other people undoubtedly think that it would be silly [i]not[/i] to. If you want to make an effective argument, you need to state [i]why[/i] it could be dangerous, and [i]how[/i] it could impact society and the individual in a negative way. I happen to be highly supportive of transhumanism, to a point. The idea of using technology to augment our bodies and perceptions is a very exciting one, but my actual organic mind is not something I want to alter in any way for fear that I could, indeed, destroy a part of what truly makes me "human." How would an artificial augmentation of the brain really effect our personality, our creativity, our consciousness? Would we even know if something [i]had[/i] been lost? It's not something we can say at this point, but it is a potential fear of mine. However, I find the concept of an altered perception incredibly compelling. I hope that, one day, I [i]can[/i] connect my consciousness to the future version of the internet. Can you even imagine what that would be like? All the information in the world available at a whim, the ability to learn anything just by wishing it so. Of course, there is a very strong argument to be made against that: our talents, skills, experiences, and flaws are what make us unique, but if the majority of the world is connected to a network, and is constantly uploading and downloading information from other users, might we run the risk of losing our identity in this overwhelming assault of information on our senses? Would we be able to differentiate between an original thought and an acquired thought? Just something to think about, I guess. Physical augmentations offer many advantages, with comparatively few philosophical ramifications. The most obvious case to make against physical augmentations are that they would create a very decisive split between those who could afford them, and those who could not. Marx's warning of a two-class system could become a very harsh reality. However, physical augmentations are still super badass. I guess the bottom line is that the future is very uncertain. The transhumanist vision of the future is exciting, romantic, and probably inevitable, but it brings with it a whole host of new worries for the world. One thing is certain, we must settle the issues of today before we can hope to take on the issues of tomorrow. Gay rights, immigration policies, the state of controlled substances, health care, and economic policies are very small fries compared to the social, personal, and economic challenges of the future, and if we can't learn how to finally lay these modern issues to rest, we will be swept away by the colossal changes that are certain to come.[/QUOTE] Amazing. I'll be ready to read his 2 line reply about how it's morally wrong.
[QUOTE=Carbo;32041710]Fucking transhumanism sickens me, It's just not right and so much shit can and will go wrong.[/QUOTE] This article isn't about people with neural implants and super strength robotic limbs stealing jobs from workers who can't afford them, it's about a clumsy exoskeleton that helped someone slowly walk across a stage. Are you against wheelchairs too? Think of how much of an unfair advantage they have over the poor unwheeled parapalegics! Scientists are playing god by giving them mobility. Some electric wheelchairs even have the potential to go faster than a human can run, soon everyone will be hacking off their legs to get to zoom around on these futuristic devices!
I think it is amazing that they can now make the paraplegic move, instead of being bound to a wheelchair for the rest of their lives.
[QUOTE=Fatman55;32052274]Amazing. I'll be ready to read his 2 line reply about how it's morally wrong.[/QUOTE] Don't forget the clear fact that we all want robot dicks in and around our buttholes.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.