Transhumanism

[BonsaiK]

what do you think about it? How do you see the future from this point of view?

I think you've been smoking one too many spliffs with Stelarc:

http://www.digibodies.org/online/Stelarc.htm

I don't really care what other people do with their bodies, after all it's their life. I probably wouldn't change mine though, at least not while it's currently functioning at an acceptable level.

 

[Dogstile]

I love trans-humanism. Mechanical parts could help people out so much, and the enhancements we could make to ourselves is amazing.

I for one, welcome our new cyborg overlords.

And I hope to join them.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Life on this planet is not going to get any easier in the coming centuries [provided we even make it that far]. Consider these augmentations a kind of self-directed evolution. It will become necessary, and I embrace the idea with open arms.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

I want to be an android. Like full on, everything synthetic.
My one key problem being developing a way to duplicate a human braid in an artificial sense and still retain the same 'human' being within that duplication... perhaps impossible.

 

[DJDarque]

I'm all for its use in helping people with injuries, disease, and other areas like that, but complete body customization is not where it should be taken.

Who is to say I can't have an extra arm and wings? You? You are willing to legislate my freedom of choice? On what grounds? That it "shouldn't be done?" What value system are you using? What if I have a different one? How would you justify imposing your values over mine?

I'm not attacking you, just pointing out one of the trickier aspects of transhumanism. Who decides what is acceptable when something has no obvious negative repercussions (I'm assuming, for the sake of argument, that we are talking about meaningless cosmetic changes like skin color, eye color, muscle definition, etc)? In modern Western society we don't legislate things (in general) based on arbitrary definitions. Except for pornography. And art. And stem cell research. Ha, and some other stuff. But you can get a tattoo on your eyeball tomorrow and have the bone of your skull shaved off to make your chin look bigger. How is bright blue skin any different?

Honestly, I agree with you as well. At least with the point of who decides what is wrong or right with each individual person. If, or when, we ever get to that point it will be a very, very tricky road to navigate. I realize that I have no right to dictate why someone is able to do to their bodies if the technology is available. What I said was simply my personal feelings on it. I personally don't believe being able to completely modify the human body beyond our natural state (hopefully that clarifies what I mean by modifications) is the proper route to take.

 

[DefunctTheory]

i never really understood the urge to become a mechanical monstrosity.

maybe in a generation or two, when our engineering expertise allows us to create better parts (right now, our bodies are better then anything we can construct), it will make sense. but it seems kind of silly to argue over such a thing so soon.

 

[HapexIndustries]

maybe in a generation or two, when our engineering expertise allows us to create better parts (right now, our bodies are better then anything we can construct), it will make sense. but it seems kind of silly to argue over such a thing so soon.

Because we need to have the philosophical infrastructure to deal with this when it comes up. Otherwise we'll be like America when it discovered the atomic bomb: totally unequipped to deal with the moral and human repercussions. Now is the time to discuss and determine what will and will not be acceptable.

I agree, current technology will not make a satisfying posthuman. The bionics are incredibly crude. However, "a generation or two" is within our lifetimes for most of us. That's pretty damned soon.

 

[manaman]

Even if we can build a strong fast robotic arm that can interface with a person's nervous system there is currently no energy source we have with sufficient density to power that device for long, at least without requiring you wear a backpack battery. I doesn't look like anything will be available for sometime either. Power is one of the great limiters in what we can do with this. I don't know about the rest of you but I am not holding my breath for the sci-fi fission cell's invention.

 

[HapexIndustries]

Transmetropolitan is pretty awesome. It avoids one of the most annoying things about scifi discussing transhumanism: boring alarmism and Frankenstein-esque condemnation (I'm looking at you Dan Simmons's Illium). Transmetropolitan mostly just presents the ideas without judging them. Also, Spider Jericho as a futuristic Hunter S. Thompson is awesome.

 

[Asuka Soryu]

XD If it can make me like Cyborg's 17 and 18, then hell yeah.

 

[DefunctTheory]

maybe in a generation or two, when our engineering expertise allows us to create better parts (right now, our bodies are better then anything we can construct), it will make sense. but it seems kind of silly to argue over such a thing so soon.

Because we need to have the philosophical infrastructure to deal with this when it comes up. Otherwise we'll be like America when it discovered the atomic bomb: totally unequipped to deal with the moral and human repercussions. Now is the time to discuss and determine what will and will not be acceptable.

I agree, current technology will not make a satisfying posthuman. The bionics are incredibly crude. However, "a generation or two" is within our lifetimes for most of us. That's pretty damned soon.

My time line only takes performance into account. Now, here's something interesting I thought of a year or two ago, when I wished I had robo thighs.

Would you rather have an Ashton Martin... or a Ford Fiesta that can repair itself?

Because that's the question that made me realize how quaint the idea of robotic body replacements are. We'll all be old, gray, or dead by the time machines can repair themselves like our bodies can (Nano/Microbots). Who cares if you can run 45 miles an hour when a twisted ankle requires a trip to the shop and a hefty insurance premium?

Even if we can build a strong fast robotic arm that can interface with a person's nervous system there is currently no energy source we have with sufficient density to power that device for long, at least without requiring you wear a backpack battery. I doesn't look like anything will be available for sometime either. Power is one of the great limiters in what we can do with this. I don't know about the rest of you but I am not holding my breath for the sci-fi fission cell's invention.

This too. I've gotten into many an argument about how power restrains us so, but this guy makes a much more... elegant post.

 

[Adecristo]

Exchanging healthy body part for mechanical one is in my opinion senseless. I like myself how I am. And how I don't have to worry, that power in my right arm will deplete while I'm drawing.

But there's an exception - enhanced senses. Not touch or taste, I don't really care about them; but hearing and seeing.
And I'm all "for" some small enhancements which would not replace my whole body parts, but just add to them (the less visible the change from outside, the better) - to make body/brain more endurable, effective and/or intelligent.

I also don't care about "don't play the God" stuff - hey, it's the God who made us the way we are now, including being able to modify ourselves. It's not playing God - it's doing what we're able to do thanks to the God. If you believe, that God exists, of course.

 

[Squeaky]

Wouldnt mind a new back, neck, knees and my right ankle as iv kinda screwed all those joints but id never mess with my brain or nervous system.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Wouldnt mind a new back, neck, knees and my right ankle as iv kinda screwed all those joints but id never mess with my brain or nervous system.

Replacing your back and neck would most likely require MASSIVE modification to your central nervous system.

 

[Squeaky]

Wouldnt mind a new back, neck, knees and my right ankle as iv kinda screwed all those joints but id never mess with my brain or nervous system.

Replacing your back and neck would most likely require MASSIVE modification to your central nervous system.

I ment more numbing or inhancing it behond the average human i dont want to be super human, just beable to bend would be nice.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Wouldnt mind a new back, neck, knees and my right ankle as iv kinda screwed all those joints but id never mess with my brain or nervous system.

Replacing your back and neck would most likely require MASSIVE modification to your central nervous system.

I ment more numbing or inhancing it behond the average human i dont want to be super human, just beable to bend would be nice.

To fix those issues, you'd have to replace parts of your spine, which in turn would most likely require patch work to be done on your spinal cord, if not entire sectional replacements (Which they have in today's medicine, in a crude sort of way).

Its a very tough place to work on.

 

[CharlesBronson]

I for the most part am all for the upgrades, but in the short term I see issues with socioeconomic classes. This tech is pricey (right now at least) and the idea of the rich getting richer AND a third eye that shoots sharks and does calculus concerns me. You will see the poor become a different species and possibly left behind in the evolution of "us"

 

[Living Contradiction]

I personally don't believe being able to completely modify the human body beyond our natural state (hopefully that clarifies what I mean by modifications) is the proper route to take.

Well, DJ, what is the human body's natural state? We've already got mood enhancers, muscle modifiers, bone stabilizers, blood thinners, and pretty little pills that do weird things to the brain. Does the use of these items constitute modifying our bodies' natural state? We're already crafting ways to modify these bodies through organ creation and genetic modification. Heck, we modify our bodies every time we go have a flu shot or receive an immunization. Why not go further?

Regarding the notion of "earning our change", that's what we're paying scientists to do. I'm considering working for a place that employs people to work on abstract and theoretical physics. This business actually pays people, incredibly smart people, to work on problems and ideas so far out there that practical application is almost a non-issue. Are they the ones that will one day discover a way to modify our cell structure to allow us to walk through walls? Probably. Does that mean that they should be the only ones allowed to do it? I say no.

When a human being discovers something, the natural inclination is to share it. Whether a fee is charged is immaterial because the change can and will become commonplace over time. We're already living in a world that allows instantaneous communication to anywhere. Thirty years ago, this was mindblowing. Now, kids attend school and dip their fingers into that power on a daily basis. Shared changes have brought us to where we are now, people separated by thousands of miles, carrying on a discussion in a computer server about where humans start and stop being human.

I can hardly wait to see what the next fifty years brings in the changing of the human condition. I want to see the weird and the wonderful changes proposed, even if they are scary or stupid. I might draw the line at letting them put my brain in a tank though. Then again, if they can simulate the emotional stimuli of eating, I could be flexible...