I'm a big fan of science and technology as well as humans. I like the transhumanist movement and was just wondering what your thoughts and feelings are about it?
Please stay on topic and don't obsessively talk about how religion is mostly anti-human etc. I already know that. :P
I'm more interested in how humanity can be better, have more enjoyable lives and evolve in positive ways. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
Thanks and I look forward to your ideas and perspectives. :)
I simply copied the last line of your Transhumanism definition. They both have the same finality, the advancement of Homo sapiens as a all-out priority, above and beyond all else.
You did not do that. You reinserted the term 'Humanism' and then fell back on a definition of Humanism. at no point did I say that Transhumanism was a form of Humanism. They are simply not mutually exclusive.
They both have the same finality, the advancement of Homo sapiens as a all-out priority, above and beyond all else.
On what are you basing this claim? "Above and beyond all else"? I am sure there are Transhumanists who feel this way, but I have met self-described Transhumanists who definitely do not.
Kris, I think TAA really likes the word "all" This is a very absolutist way of presenting an opinion and makes me very suspicious about the logic or (freethinking) employed in her arguments.
Kris this was your post:
That doesn't really work. You could try for the ol' "You can't spell 'Transhumanism' without 'Humanism'", but it would just be something to say; it wouldn't really mean anything. As I've always understood it, the core focus of Transhumanism is transcending human barriers through technology and science, and not necessarily using that technology to advance ideals on general human welfare.
The three last words, YOUR words for Transhumanism, but those same three words are central to Humanism also.
If it were not humans above all else, then that three-word leitmotiv would be: general biosphere welfare.
I wouldn't preclude Transhumanism as a dogma, yet, whether or not it's related to Humanism. I haven't read up on it, but I also wouldn't preclude it from evolving into one or more forms of religious dogma, eventually.
I get high on science, not down on it. But I'm seriously afraid that since the common people know so little about science and its potential good vs bad, advances of many kinds--especially transhumanism--will enable more fantasy in most people's minds (and poor judgment) than enlightenment.
Some aspects of transhumanism fall into the category of fantasy at this point but maybe fantasy is a way for the brain or nature to prod us to evolve by trying out the unknowns and seeing where they take us.
And rightly you should be concerned about abuse of power. Historically speaking more power = more abuse. Now unless transhumanism can somehow breed out the gene for human corruptibility, then power = abuse. Our world is more and more abusive and invasive. Ever tried having a peaceful demonstration in Canada in the past decade? Demonstrations here are pretty well doomed, macings, beatings, imprisonment, that is the power government have over individuals, and it is growing ever faster. They are technologically assisted in their beat-down of democracy with facial recognition (in crowds), invisible inks, RFiDs, non-authorised surveillance of all sorts. You may remember the gestapo and the KGB, well imagine them with better technology. No thank you, Social politics are more important than technology, and today it's lagging behind technology, allowing for even more widespread abuse.
Actually as a TransHumanist you're doing the opposite, you're by defintition refusing all that you consider non enjoyable, you refuse to accept death and injury and pain, on using terminology such as I'm "good" and you're "evil" therefore I'm better than you, playing at the same game faithers play at. TransHumanism denies all that which provides balance in life, instead of focusing on "good" only, humans need to look at balance, without "evil" there is no such thing as "good", such absolutes simply don't jive with a freethinking mind.
Please stop using grand generalizations about what transhumanism means to people. Your overuse of the word "all" shows that you are using absolutist logic more than we are.
Sure, disregard the word all. I was not using in the absolute sense. Nothing is 100% in life, there's statistically no such thing really, it's either a strong trend, or a weak trend, generalities are very much real. Atheists of all any creeds tend to use the if God was real there wouldn't be evil stuff argument, but it's a ridiculous one. Happiness is only gauged against sadness and pain, so no matter how much pain you remove from your life, for every inch "bad" is pushed aside, the goal post is simply moved by the same amount. Philosophically speaking, you cannot increase happiness by decreasing pain, they are inseparable. Our modern societies, for all the pleasure we seek and find, we simply have more depression and suicide. A healtcare costs study came out a couple of weeks ago by the UN, assessing that in first world countries, within a few years, 1/2 the costs of health care will be mental health. And in the field of mental health, females are statistically a growing fraction. As a society we are unhappy, because we have the false expectation that pushing aside pain increases happiness, so we expect this, but reality fails to meet this heightened expectation.
TAA - before we even GET to the relevant stuff, let's get the nonsense out of the way - "Atheists of all any creeds tend to use the if God was real there wouldn't be evil stuff argument"
I, like you, have been an atheist since late childhood, and I've known a lot of fellow atheists, yet I've never heard ANY of them make that statement. The Bible (Isiah) has "god" saying that he creates evil, yet Humans created him, so what does that say about us? We are perfectly capable of creating enough evil all by ourselves, without any outside assistance.
But I will agree that without a basis of comparison, we would posssibly find it more difficult to realize that what we experience is actually pleasure, but to be a bit indelicate for a moment to illustrate my point, I don't need a nail in my foot, to know that an orgasm feels good!
If I must have a basis of comparison, who wouldn't rather have a bowl of vanilla ice cream, rather than an hour on the rack, to conclude that we like chocolate better?
Could the mental health issues found in first world countries be due to the possibility that life in first world countries is more complex, and requires a greater degree of adaptation, and not at all be directly related to the pursuit of pleasure?