Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 1:28 pm.
I hope this entire article was meant as merely provocative trolling…
Submitted by Editor on December 10, 2010 at 3:08 pm.
For some of you, this article may seem to stand out as particularly provocative and you may wonder why I ran it. But if you have been paying attention, you will know that I’ve run a series of Top 5/Top 10 Favorite This-and-that’s of Transhumanism, Posthumanism, Singularitarianism ad infinitum. I asked probably 50-some people for their responses and I received responses from maybe about half of them. This is one of those responses. What would have been unusual or different from where I sit would have been to exclude Rachel and Jason’s contribution (or her photograph… Incidentally, they present themselves with more dignity than many of the commentors here.)
So unbunch your panties, take a deep breath, and soon there will be a piece from a different person with another different point of view. That’s how it works.
Submitted by Editor on December 13, 2010 at 5:10 pm.
As the result of a legalistic complaint (not from the author), I’ve removed all comments that are personally abusive in nature from this piece and I will not accept any more.
& i was getting tired of it, besides…
R.U.
Submitted by Jason Schoenecker on December 10, 2010 at 3:11 pm.
How about a new law? If you claim that an argument or posture is juvenile high school angst because it is in conflict with your beliefs, you may want to rethink the relevance of your contribution to any discourse about it headed in the direction of progress. I mean, couldn’t it just as easily be said that constructing a persona around a societal impression that pulls one farther and farther from introspection and creates stagnation in all things even resembling progress as a species is vapid high school mediocrity? I refuse to ignore the things that frustrate me and sap my hope for this species. If that makes one immature, then I’m afraid I don’t want any part in that operation of thought.
I’m glad this has people thinking. I’m glad this has people upset. When people get upset, great things can happen. I’m a little confused at the uproar of accusatory banality, though, because there is little in the manifesto, I believe, to provoke such misplaced frustration. In fact, the manifesto is quite aware, clear, and thoughtful about its purpose and intention. This is only the beginning. Get used to it.
And please, have the courage to post with your name if your critique is going to consist of mindless insulting cliches. I may take them more seriously. In the meantime, will the anonymous poster who accused the manifesto of containing “mangled English grammar” please construct a list of said discrepancies? I’ll be sure to take them into consideration.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 5:38 pm.
“We are the one’s who can rely on one another without conscious submission.”
you used the possessive apostrophe there. don’t do that.
Just as there needs to be a distinction between posessive “its” and the contraction of “it is” (it’s), there also needs to be a distinction between the contraction of “one is” (one’s) and posessive “ones” (no apostrophe of posession, just as in the case of posessive “its”:
“It’s losing its tail” and “One’s eating ones dinner”. (1) is correct.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 3:51 pm.
This is “juvenile high school angst”, not because it conflicts with any ‘beliefs’, as you so cumbersomely and cutely phrase it. It is juvenile as it is poorly written, and much more shabbily thought out. It reads at exactly the 7th grade level of the schoolwork that I correct everyday for grammar and clarity. I don’t expect much coherent writing or deep thinking from my 7th graders, but I damn sure expect it from H+. Also, this atrocious wad of garbled text simply does not reach at all a level of adult discourse. Sorry, those are cold facts. Go and read ‘Elements of Style’ and some Hegel, then come back perhaps ; and perhaps shift your musical taste from Slipknot and “valley girl screeching over Fruityloops presets” to something more refined and adult as well while you endeavor in this course of self-improvement. Nothing betrays deeper fundamental insecurity than elisitst delusions of being some kind of “X-man” or “para human” coupled to a truly stereotypical junior high school ranting “manifesto.”
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 4:56 pm.
“The Human mind was the framework, the foundation of the transhuman one, as the transhuman mind will be for the next when evolution decides it.”
But you insulted the hell out of the comma in that convoluted run on sentence! Treat the comma better, She is a grand old Lady and deserves better treatment.
You can pay me for any further lessons in basic English writing skill.
Also, look up what the term “evolution” actually means, it isn’t clear here whether or not you are referencing Darwinian evolution. If you are discussing Darwinian evolution, the statement “when evolution decides it” it totally without meaning and contrary to the entire theory. Evolution doesn’t “decide” anything, ever! Such casual anthropomorphism is a major sign of the sloppy and unprepared thinking that goes into most adolescent essay writing.
Submitted by Madrigorne on December 20, 2010 at 11:35 am.
Settle down Grammatica, not everyone speaks English. If it’s that important to you, go back to reading the Dictionary and the Encyclopedia – and stay away from new and raw ideas, as they may not fit your formatting requirements.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 20, 2010 at 3:49 pm.
1. The “writer” for want of a better word here speaks and writes only in English. And if it were written in German I would certainly demand it be written in correct German, not childish gibberish.
2. I do have to question why the EDITOR of this magazine seems to refuse the traditional duties of EDITING – chief among these duties are rejecting poorly written material, or at least correcting it himself before publication!
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 5:29 pm.
There isn’t enough coherent English (or coherent thought for that matter) presented in this essay for it to be possible to disagree with!
Submitted by Ruy Vazquez on December 10, 2010 at 6:20 pm.
Yes, the article may not present the most sophisticated view on transhumanism but it’s the perspective of a group within society that has willfully separated from the norms. In a transhumanist society this schism may have different connotations, they may embrace extreme body modifications, new and dangerous practices, the point it raises is that there is always someone within the human race who wants to be separated from their humanity and may turn to transhumanism to compensate.
On a future where body modifications are common and the technology is readily available there may be more danger from groups comprised of aggrieved teenagers. Or unscrupulous beings who may become the dark side of the movement, now with biological constrains removed.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 10:59 pm.
Very interesting perspective. I find that a lot of teenagers into body modification are also starting to take an interest in Transhumanism. It’s no longer about fashion but transcending to the next step. Which is why we now have bio-mechanical implants in addiction to piercings. Have you ever seen the documentary on body modification called Modify?
Submitted by Khannea Suntzu on December 13, 2010 at 2:03 am.
Stick in here. Don’t let these alienated geeks chase you away darling.
They know you are the face of the future and they won’t be able to keep up. Fuck em.
Submitted by Khannea Suntzu on December 13, 2010 at 2:03 am.
Stick in here. Don’t let these alienated geeks chase you away darling.
They know you are the face of the future and they won’t be able to keep up. Fuck em.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 13, 2010 at 6:25 pm.
Thanks! I don’t let the opinions of other people get to me. I absolutely love your blog.
Submitted by Jason Schoenecker on December 10, 2010 at 8:04 pm.
It’s too much — how can I be expected to contain my laughter in the face of all this self-aggrandizement? Self-aggrandizement that purports to be critiquing our supposed self-aggrandizement, nonetheless. This one for that one, I suppose. Since it’s quite clear that all these “anon” messages are from the same person who obviously has some personal beef beyond the level of any human stupidity I’ve encountered, all one can say is sorry you can’t move on with your life. Psychological bedwetting in its most pitiable form… I truly hope that for the people who do realize this and acknowledge that there are plenty more of us in the Transhumanist community who understand and relate to the issues in the manifesto, we can all co-exist in much less petty and conservative ways. Any philosophical view is open to criticism and discourse, although I suppose it’s much easier to lambast and critique than it is to actually present one. When any of our harshest critics do, I’ll be sure to check their ideas out. Until then, I’m just sort of going to, I don’t know, continue living my life? Yeah, that’s what I’ll do.
Best,
J
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 8:19 pm.
All I can say is that if we’re stirring up this much debate over our vision of utopia we must be doing something right.
Submitted by Theo on December 10, 2010 at 8:25 pm.
You aren’t as new as you think you are.
You aren’t as different as you think you are.
You aren’t as alone as you think you are.
You, just like the rest of us, are an iteration of a familiar pattern. Every society has its iconoclasts, its outliers, its self-styled rebels and rouges. Counter-culturally and unpragmatically you are each other. Our Human ancestors relied on individualism and a conscious defiance of conformity, as was necessary for progress. The more you strive against social norms, the better you serve society. The more you hold yourself apart from society, the closer you adhere to your social role. So welcome back, it’s nice to hear from you again.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 10:38 pm.
I like the way you put this. One of the reasons I love the Transhumanist community is because of these sorts of debates.
Submitted by Ken's Tech on December 10, 2010 at 8:56 pm.
It occurs to me that there is nothing about transhumanism that is made better by adding a whole heaping mound of paranoid, marxoid victim vending.
I know playing the “oppressed minority” is loads of fun for some, but please just stick your head in a bucket of water and hold it there until you get over it.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 10:50 pm.
The minute you told me to stick my head in a bucket of water you completely discredited anything else that you said. Which was nothing more than an annoying flame and a link to your website in the first place.
Submitted by Khannea Suntzu on December 13, 2010 at 2:02 am.
Again behold the face of victorian medicine –
The “Let’s teach them a lesson” school of managing society.
Disgusting.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 10:55 pm.
Since people have used H+ to insult my musical project I’m going to put this link up here:
Samples of my music for you guys to hear. Judge for yourselves. Topics covered include Transhumanism, chaos magick, social commentary on technology, fighting against nazi fascism, dystopic visions of the future, etc.
It’s definitely not for everybody but fans of the industrial and dark electronic genres might dig it.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 11, 2010 at 2:35 am.
The music is actually pretty good, and I don’t understand why people bash it. Tastes differ.
But my point still stands, a separatist attitude is very harmful for H+ public image. It’s childish at best.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 13, 2010 at 3:24 pm.
Fair enough. I’m wouldn’t consider this to be about public image though. The public image of H+ is to post articles from their contributors. They are an extremely open-minded publication.
Submitted by Santa_Dan on December 12, 2010 at 12:17 pm.
was your crass attempt at abusing H+ to hawk your meager and pitiful merchandising lot successful?
Submitted by Kalki on December 11, 2010 at 7:03 am.
Many of “you” are not that much superior being
“You” Think “you” exist as A/ONE “specy”
“YOU” are wrong
You cannot construct an identity, most of you, transhumanist are wrong, or stupid : the identity is COMPLEX
The reason why you can be strong : is because technology is most powerfull social force : in our system :
but you are wrong for everything else : in your movement ( and in other movement build on technological paradigm ) there are many opposite forces
Even if the desire for progress, or the technology as drug, and illusion : is STRONG : it is DANGEROUS
It a drug
TECHNOLOGY CAN DO EVERYTHING
SHOULD WE DO EVERYTHING ?
AND SHOULD WE LET EVERYONE DO EVERYTHING ?
For the question : should we do everything ? the addicted guy would say : yes. And the reasonnable guy would say : on moment please, let’s apply the precaution principle : i don’t to die, because of you addiction and illusion to technology
IS transhumanism movement a clan of stupid pro technologist ?
The atomic bomb is cool ? And we should give it to every babies in the world : in my opinion most of you guys, are childrens, and the humanity is a child
the humanity don’t exist as adult being, you want to be h+ : but you are just kids !
We are at the singularity : and kids want to try bad things, and “it is for the economy” : should try !
At the same : we have only One chance : and i think your addiction is DANGEROUS
Submitted by Tylox on December 11, 2010 at 11:08 am.
unmistakably the most beautiful person I have ever laid eyes on.
Submitted by NMIlluminati on December 11, 2010 at 7:36 pm.
I thought part of Transhumanism was about rising above the hatred of normal humanity.
I believe what she is talking about is how the rise of counterculture underground can be construed in Transhumanistic terms, and how it has mutated into something far beyond a rebellious social strata. Yes, there are rebels, iconoclasts and followers, but there is a core element of who have been involved in all of it; the whole current of chaotic rebellion. Which now manifests in the myriad of artistic, musical, and spiritual endeavors we now have, all of which are all connected in some way. Maybe this core element is a product of the evolution of the human mind; part of that which questions and challenges itself allowing humanity to push further. Some of these folks are so alien to “regular” humanity as to be almost a separate species in some ways. The Chaos folks she speaks of are a prime example.
To discount this is to toss the baby out with the bathwater. You guys should let her have her say…
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 13, 2010 at 3:03 pm.
I really appreciate this. You definitely understood the point of the article. It’s about the artistic revolution of the youth. Thank you for “getting it.”
Submitted by greyson on December 11, 2010 at 9:16 pm.
the eschaton.
Submitted by Winston on December 12, 2010 at 5:47 am.
At first I hoped it’s just a provocation, but the comments from the authors, sadly, proved me wrong. It’s been a long time since I last read such raving bullshit.
Sick fantasies of techno-emos, how come they were allowed to publish here?
The text doesn’t even deserve constructive criticism (what the hell, why would I even attempt to consensualize my “definition of reality” with them?
Immature nonsense, H+ magazine, please do better.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 13, 2010 at 2:01 pm.
I agree. H+ has been disappointing from the getgo. And I am a serious transhumanist.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 13, 2010 at 7:30 pm.
I read your article on hplusmagazine, and thought it totally missed the point of transhumanism and the Singularity. You say that transhumanism actively rejects collectivism, and then go on to blame collectivism for such things as the Holocaust. These assertions are wrong. The Singularity will never occur (in a peaceful manner, anyway) if we do not learn how to effectively act in a collective manner as a species. Your lambasting of collectivism is further discredited by your own stated desire to “find other people who know what it feels like to be this way and empower them,” i.e. build a community which promotes/supports a particular view; you are promoting collectivism.
Transhumanism isn’t worth a damn if everyone isn’t given the choice to be included, it is at its core an integrating philosophy; to suggest that separateness, exclusivity, or individuality have a place in the posthuman future is preposterous. Post humans will be so collective they will probably tend to not even have individual egos! Parts of their minds will be in the ‘cloud’ and they will operate like a linked hive mind. It doesn’t get more collective than that. Are you done spinning Ayn Rand now? She is the opposite to transhuman philosophy, are you aware of this?
-We are the Borg, long live the dictatorship of the proletariat
Submitted by Valkyrie Ice on December 13, 2010 at 8:25 pm.
*Sigh*
Wrong on so many counts.
Collectivism is an evolutionary survival strategy. It provides a means for a group of people to pool their resources to make survival easier for all members in proportion to the size and efficiency of the collective. The collective exists to divide labor effectively, and to administer those shared resources efficiently, and equally to all members of the collective. Every inequality in a collective can be traced to an individual or group of individuals diverting the collective’s resources to serve personal desires. In it’s undiverted state, all members share equally. Both you and the articles author misunderstand what a collective actually is, and both your “Protests” against collective apply only to the “Diverted” form of a collective, which is understandable, considering you’re both simply quoting ideologies which equate “Collective” with either communism or socialism, all examples of which we have had are diverted forms.
A collective is not about “Hive minds” and transhumanists are not at all looking to create a “Borg” mentality.
Transhumanism is above all about freedom, individuality, and choice. If an individual is not free to make an individual choice, and accept the consequences of making that choice, then that individual is not truly free. It does not under any circumstances mean losing individuality to become a mindless drone.
And being part of a collective does not mean elimination of individuality. A true collective exists to serve the individuals within it equally. There is no conflict between collective responsibilities and individual liberties in a true collective in which each individual has made a choice to belong to the collective. Only in diverted collectives, which are misusing collective power to serve limited individual’s desires, does the “collective” attempt to repress personal liberty and deny the individual the choice of belonging or not.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 4:12 am.
Technology is already beginning to make a global hive mind, this is inevitable. The internet is just the merest beginning of the end of the Individual. Advances in brain-mind interface are on the near horizon which will take digital connectivity far beyond a keyboard interface. You are simply behind the curve on knowledge of emerging technology.
Submitted by Valkyrie Ice on December 14, 2010 at 10:18 am.
No, you are simply shading things to fit your world view.
Are BCI’s emerging? Indeed. But you are jumping from the ability of an individual to access and control a computer to your concept that such abilities will cause a loss of individuality and force everyone to become identical “mind clones”. The majority of first gen BCI is all one way from the mind to the computer, and even the next several generations will have extremely limited ability to send signal data to existing nerve inputs. The kind of BCI you envision would need whole brain rewrite ability, and I doubt we will ever reach that level without massive safeguards to prevent exactly what you are envisioning without the complete and willing consent of an idividual.
I have no doubt that some people will attempt to become “hive minds”. There are after all millions of people unwilling to think for themselves, but to truly create a hive mind means overwriting all existing personalities with a single “master personality”. Bee’s have no individuality. For all purposes, they are simply the extended body of the Queen. Same with the borg, in which the only individual is the queen. Your vision is basically the same concept, mass murder of millions of individuals so that they are all mind clones of a single individual. That’s neither a transhumanist vision, nor an inevitable outcome of advancing technology. It makes one wonder if you envision yourself as “Queen” or “Drone”
The truth is that there is far more diversity in the future than has ever existed in human history. We may fragment into a million different species of “humanoid”. AS VR and BCI advance, we will have the freedom to not only explore virtual worlds, but an endless variety of forms as well, both in VR and out.
You might lack the imagination to conceive of such a reality but it will exist nonetheless. There may be some “hive minds”, but it is extremely unlikely that there will be many. The “Borg Collective” you envision is just one of those dark fantasies that is never going to happen.
I’m all too aware of the “borg collective” BS you are spouting, and it’s just another attempt by those who fear the future to make it sound so terrible that people will try to prevent progress of any and every sort. If you truly look forward to ending your existence this way, as just a expendable host for someone else’s ideology, I strongly recommend you read this book:
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 11:31 am.
What are your educational credentials? Because your writings on H+ are not coming across as someone who has much understanding of the topics they are pontificating upon.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 12:13 pm.
Mass marketing, propaganda, media conditioning, information spin, widespread use of prescribed anti-depressant and anti-psychotic drugs for no real medical condition.
Technology will trump all your weakly constructed arguments and ill-informed ideals.
And people will purchase it. It won’t be forced on anyone. “Google Brain” is at most 20 years away.
Go and watch ‘Caprica’, that nicely wrought piece of fiction comes fairly close to a possible post-human future.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 12:43 pm.
a super powered individual with all the muscles and big tits and Control adolescent males crave. actual post humanity will look nothing like that infantile fantasy.
you aren’t gonna like it, if you even have the option to dislike it. facebook has no dislike button for very good reasons…
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 14, 2010 at 3:14 pm.
I find this response funny coming from someone who claims to be a collectivist. You’ve stooped down pretty hard.
Please accept that all of us have a different vision for the future. It is up to us to pave the way for a better tomorrow. If people associate this with Individuality is that really a reason to dismiss them as Ayn Rand drones? Does Ayn Rand own Individuality?
You are giving her far too much power.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 4:03 pm.
You do not write coherently, and you do not even rise to the use of 7th grade levels of English grammar. You have nothing to say and at best clumsy means of communicating such crude and confused ideas as come to you. Come back when you have at least a GED.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 14, 2010 at 6:25 pm.
What does formal education have to do with you dismissing anyone who advocates Individuality as an Ayn Rand drone? Should I tell you to come back when you have at least a holiday in Cambodia? If you can’t argue for yourself without dismissing someone for what you perceive to be a “lack of education” nobody is going to take you seriously. Even if you have an Masters from Harvard. What exactly is your thesis? That Individuality is harmful to Transhumanism because Ayn Rand is so uncool? Pot kettle black.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 14, 2010 at 8:01 pm.
You can not use the comma or the apostrophe correctly. No one deserves a voice who writes for publication at the level of a 5th grade student of English.
Submitted by Madrigorne on December 20, 2010 at 11:26 am.
Perhaps you would prefer they respond to you in French? German? Chinese? Their lack in grammar and punctuation does in no way diminish their intent. They communicate clearly, though you refuse to cope with the real life intricacies of dealing with a global communication profile. It is NOT necessary that all the rules of language are followed to the letter, but that the ideas and intrinsic meaning are conveyed. Everyone deserves a voice; you should print out the parts that offend you and correct them with your red pencil to assuage your OCD, and ask questions regarding the points that you cannot follow or that you believe require clarification.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 20, 2010 at 2:22 pm.
an article of this caliber finger painted in Rachel’s very own feces? Because what is written here isn’t far from that standard of quality.
Submitted by Valkyrie Ice on December 14, 2010 at 8:12 pm.
This makes it quite apparent that you’ve never read anything I’ve written previously, or you would realize how much a think Randians are idiots. They are all convinced that absolute license is all that it will take for them to gravitate to the top of the social pecking order, if only all these laws preventing them from enforcing their wills at gunpoint would just go away. They dream of the day when they will be free to take what they want from everyone without any accountability, and never dream that they would probably be shot within the first day of their “anarchist paradise.”
But congratulations, you’ve been added into the same category.
Rejoice, you’ll eventually be able to lock yourself away in a VR fantasy and pretend to be the borg queen, and never have to cope with the fact that there are people out there who are not *you*. I wish you every happiness.
But I’ll take reality over that any day.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 15, 2010 at 5:55 pm.
Your (dork kitsch anime fanboy) reality appears to be a garish 2nd life avatar with medically morbid gynocomastia.
I’ll pass.
I don’t bother to read anything written by anime obsessed (clown?) titty fetishists.
Is it a clown? Are those massive, grotesque zeppelins Clown Tits?
Nothing more pathetic exists in human culture than the mindless tedium of 2nd Life.
Submitted by Valkyrie Ice on December 15, 2010 at 7:50 pm.
Couldn’t come up with anything better to insult than my avatar, hummmmm?
I truly pity you. It must be such a sad existence you live that you want to retreat into mindlessness and lose of all self identity. Even most of the suicidal people I know want to keep their identity, even if they don’t value their life.
Submitted by 7 of 9 on December 15, 2010 at 8:14 pm.
you are….
“Not Even Wrong”
An argument that appears to be scientific is said to be not even wrong if it cannot be falsified (i.e., tested) by experiment or cannot be used to make predictions about the natural world. The phrase was coined by theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or sloppy thinking.[1] Rudolf Peierls writes that “a friend showed [Pauli] the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli’s views. Pauli remarked sadly, ‘It is not even wrong.’ “[2]
Submitted by Anonymous on December 14, 2010 at 11:11 am.
Obviously Borg are the future. It is a logical transhumanist outcome.
H+, on the other hand, is less about transhumanism and more about Ayn Rand.
They are insane liberaltarian objectivist laissez-faire wingnut randroids.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm.
For publishing articles from all their contributors? Would you rather them only publish articles that agree with your Borg version of the future?
Submitted by Liberated Anonymous on December 14, 2010 at 6:15 pm.
1st thing – The interests of conscious submission lie in Humanity.
The interests of conscious (social) submission lie in nature of Human Society. And above all – conscious submission is a nature of Civilization. And we want our new world to be civilized. We don’t want us to became a new specie just to differ from any other species in a terms of species differentiation, we don’t want us to became a stronger then wolf or bigger then bear creature, but we want our abstract ego to cross platform to set us free of biology and all rules of biology that are not tolerant to conscious ego of individual. And we are aware of people who blindly want to attack society for its weaknesses as it is now the only positive form of conscious cooperation between humans. All other forms of cooperation with lack of civilized frameworks look like shrewdness of apes or pack of wolves. Human collectivism is a vast range of relations and if to fight with one – first imagine the opposite.
2nd thing – We want a nation. We want sovereignty. transhuman sovereignty.
Transhuman society is indeed a collection of individuals. And most importantly, if you try to make an army out of transhumanists it could be possible, but the resulting combined force will be concerned not with combating all forms of oppression against gender, race, ethnicity, thought, age, and disability, but with equal political entities – military groups, governments, so it will be one good direct martial law submission and a good nail in the coffin of transhumanist’s dreams.
3rd thing – From birth, transhumans experience an innate alienation from the Human race.
The only possible and healthy way to feel this alienation is abstract idea of being someone but not being human. And we can only wonder how we would feel then, because we think of it with our human brains and feel with human feelings. If we imagine our biological human nature to be replaced by some other nature some electro-mechanical for example – it is a good way for abstract modeling and good practice in separating what in your nature is an object and what in your nature is you and a subject. But if you already “experience” an innate alienation, tell me how.
No offence. And I like the whole thing except for word “manifesto” – do you really want anyone first to see transhumanists find us in a row of commie/nazi/anarch type of political groups?
Submitted by Rox on December 15, 2010 at 5:28 pm.
I suspect the drive for separatism by an individual or group is actually a response to the segregation or isolation that group experiences from the majority. It’s sort of ‘taking charge of the fact that the majority is kicking me out’.
So, I do feel this talk is somewhat empowering.
The irony, however, is that the transhumanist ‘movement’ is just as bad as everyone else with respect to ostracizing or isolating folk, especially those folk who are in the forefront of actually ‘doing it.’
Race and gender, for instance. A majority of the speakers at the singularity summits, as well as most transhumanist blogs, are white men.
Believe it or not, a fair portion of the body modification going on in the western world is by women, via cosmetic surgery. And transsexuals make most so-called body modification advocates look like amateurs, not just modifying their body but stepping outside gendered norms.
The various edgy subcultures? Burners, goths, phish-heads, etc. They’re the ones experimenting with alternative social structures. No, they wouldn’t normally be seen as ‘proper, kid-friendly representatives’ of the transhumanist movement, but they’re the ones actually doing the experimenting. They’re not just talking about it.
Gamers? While they’d often be seen as wasting away their time killing zombies, they’re the ones actually living in virtual reality, forming communities, driving the development of new worlds.
There are all sorts of folk out there who aren’t forward-thinking business leaders or academic researchers, who happen to be making great strides in practicing the future.
Seems a bit of separatism does cut away some of the social baggage that prevents experimentation…
Submitted by Lazerus on December 15, 2010 at 7:33 pm.
I believe a theoretical Transhumanist country, colony or what have you, should openly embrace Collectivist principles when establishing an economic system, while socially pushing the individual to strive forward and achieve personal greatness. It is also my belief that we should not close ourselves off from the intolerant, and often ignorant, world of man, but instead look at with mercy and pity, try to educate them, and embrace those who wish join us. For if we let the superstition and fear that conquers men poison us we are no more ignorant then they are.
Submitted by Shaun S on December 15, 2010 at 9:07 pm.
The ideas are great. But overall this article is a load of rubbish. Don’t try to speak for me. Transhumanism isn’t an identity, it’s an ideology, a philosophy. Don’t try an define a “Transhuman Personality.” I’m not your goddamn soldier.
This “manifesto” is offensive, and hypocritical. “Lets be different by grouping together and doing the same thing!”
I understand the urge to feel significant, but christ.
Submitted by Sean on December 27, 2010 at 2:50 pm.
The notion that we need to create division to advance transhumanism seems pretty backwards.
I feel like it would be more productive to continuously educate the rest of the humans around us and create awareness about the state of technology and the new social structures that we could literally build tomorrow if the world worked together.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 28, 2010 at 6:55 pm.
Lazerus said: “It is also my belief that we should not close ourselves off from the intolerant, and often ignorant, world of man, but instead look at with mercy and pity, try to educate them, and embrace those who wish join us. For if we let the superstition and fear that conquers men poison us we are no more ignorant then they are.”
Unfortunately, whenever someone posts something on the TS facebook page that is intolerant or ignorant, instead of debating them and trying to educate them, Rachel just bans them. The intolerance of the TS facebook page is no better than a group of neo-nazis who exclude anyone not of their ilk. I called this to everyone’s attention and got banned, too.
Personally, I wish more racist and homophobic people would comment so we can explain our point of view to them, but Rachel calls it “mobbing” and then shuts everyone who disagrees with her out.
If being the “next step in human evolution” means being a closed-minded control freak, then I guess you can count me out of the evolution revolution. There is a word for people who think their way and only their way is right.
That word is asshole.
Submitted by Kara on December 31, 2010 at 10:59 pm.
“5. The cancellation of the Magneto movie”
Yeah…Xavier vs Magneto much ?
I won’t put any money on wondering which pov you support.
This is the kind of mentality that causes wars and discrimination, not helps heal society and promotes the peaceful, educated future that most Transhumanists work for…
For all our sakes, I hope your vision is not *needed*…but, time will tell…
Submitted by Michelle on March 8, 2011 at 6:46 pm.
Top 5 Reasons for a Transhumanist Militia
1. Witch trials
2. School shootings
3. Public executions
4. Forced surgery that removes evolutionary mutations
5. The cancellation of the Magneto movie
I’ve never seen Magneto. lol
Please expand on “forced surgery that removes evolutionary mutations”.
This article is very thought provoking and entertaining. I like the music too. I’m not going to join any militant transhumanist cult, but I do appreciate your colorful style.
Submitted by anhrefn blaidd on March 24, 2011 at 4:01 am.
I find your article and views worth looking into, despite what the naysayers and elitists say. Ironically, discrediting ones views based on grammatical hiccups, amongst other hostile reactions just make me more open to your ideas. In fact, I see, amongst the grammar flaws, a hint of letting ideas and ideology flow without worrying about the outline and proper structure.
Ideologies that differ from the accepted norm have, throughout history, been the catalysts for something greater to emerge.
It can be argued that Transhumanism is being stifled for various reasons, be it political, religious or purely fear based. For us as a species to transcend the physical and mental boundaries nature has cursed us with, we need to break free from the nightmarish spiders web of bureaucratic and theological thought and embrace the idea of research and true technological progress being done outside of regulation by the “elite”. No more restriction of genetic research or idea implementation.
I agree, Ms. Haywire: We need sovereignty
Submitted by Alexander on December 9, 2010 at 3:22 pm.
Hopefully, ATF and FBI will deal with such dangerous extremism. *cough* Waco Siege *cough*
Submitted by Jason Schoenecker on December 9, 2010 at 4:49 pm.
Alexander,
To this day, the ignorance of human impulsiveness still surprises me. Your endorsement for the ATF or FBI “deal”-ing with Transhuman Separatists perplexes me because the Waco Siege is one of the most widely known fiascos in our government’s history. You claim that we are “dangerous,” yet seek comfort in our destruction through the hands of organizations responsible for one of the most bungled operations to date? The last time I checked, I hadn’t heard of any Transhuman Separatists with the blood of innocent women and children on their hands.
Please illuminate me on the “danger” of Transhuman Separatism. Please.
Submitted by Jason Schoenecker on December 9, 2010 at 6:12 pm.
Alexander,
You owe it to your integrity to justify yourself. Watch this video – Google will provide you with a free education so that you’re better equipped to talk about this subject in the future.
Submitted by Aetherius on December 9, 2010 at 7:36 pm.
I liked the article mostly until i got to “Time has revealed we cannot co-exist within a society …We must rise above the weeds” which had me reconsider the entire meaning.
Generally i find whenever i start to trust the average person, im immediately reminded why thats a stupid thing to do. You can’t teach (the ironically named) common sense, but you can point people in the right direction by giving them obvious motives. It’s better to wait on stragglers then to take a chance which could endanger the entire species.
btw, coming from a person who likes aggrotech, your music is terrible :/
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 9, 2010 at 8:04 pm.
Thank you for your input. This is an idealistic vision of utopia. My music is not for everyone but thank you for taking the time to listen. Not sure what “aggrotech” means as I do not classify myself. I seek an understanding between all members of the Transhumanist community regardless of viewpoints. What is wrong with something being radical? It is radical thinkers who have shaped our time.
Submitted by John Grigg on December 9, 2010 at 11:38 pm.
Hello Rachel and Jason,
Yes, transhumanists often feel very frustrated by living in a larger world that is steeped in ignorance and waste. But this essay made me feel like I was encountering the self-pity of a depressed teenager! lol
I admit that we live in a dark time where governments want to use advancing technologies to spy on and exploit their own people. But still, I think an “us versus them” attitude is not a good one, and could even potentially blow up in our collective faces. Many kinds of people question society, not just us, and we need to build bridges with them. And so disengaging by living on a reservation, island or space colony, to escape the rest of humanity, is just not the way to go.
We *are* humanity and we *are* human. But we have a vision of better and happier societies and individuals that we must successfully share. I see organizations like Humanity+ and the Singularity Institute, doing a great job reaching out to leading academics, scientists, journalists and others, to impart our message.
The greater society we live in will become increasingly transhumanist due to the effects of corporate and global competition. The military invests billions in research programs to create superior warriors and machines. Corporations invest huge sums in biotech and computing research and development. I realize some pet projects of transhumanists such as radical life extension are not funded as they should be, but I am confident that as science in general advances, people will catch on that such things are actually possible.
And believe me, when a visit to a medical clinic allows parents to have their unborn child genetically modified to be more intelligent, healthy and athletic, no force on Earth will be able to stop them. If their particular government bans such things, they will go on “vacation” overseas to have it done. Competition is good and through it (and also lots of hard work on our part) we will see our visions come to be.
Best wishes,
John
P.S. You never know, the Magneto movie project may sometime down the road be brought back… : )
Submitted by James T. on December 10, 2010 at 2:09 am.
What you propose is in clear violation of U.S. laws. Do you want H+ to be viewed as dangerous extremists by the government? You endanger the entire community with such reckless proposals.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 7:47 am.
Why must the internet subject us to such juvenile and empty ranting that was once confined to lined paper notebooks in study hall period or passed around and laughed at in Public School Teacher’s Lounge? On all levels from the mangled English grammar to the grating naiveté of the worthless pseudo-philosophical posturings, this is total bollocks. If anyone over 15 wrote this, then they are a spectacularly sad case of ignorance, confusion and toxic adolescent nit-wittery.
Submitted by Anonymous on December 10, 2010 at 9:46 am.
I agree with you. This is very juvenile and doesn’t belong on the website of a respectable transhumanist magazine. See “Godwin’s law”.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 3:36 pm.
Thank you for your response. I appreciate you reaching out to me as a person in disagreement with the manifesto. I think it is important for us to discuss these things. If we all held one point of view we would never create any change. It’s funny that you mention the teenage crowd because this is definitely targeted at the youth. The Us vs. Them mentality gives us a reason to create art. Many of us have been outsiders our entire lives find unity in defining ourselves as a separate entity from the masses.
Nothing written here is intended to hurt anybody or discuss a new direction for Tranhumanism. I am happy that technological progress is not being stopped and look forward to becoming something more than human. We are not fighting against humanity but the forces that oppose creativity and free thought.
Submitted by Rachel Haywire on December 10, 2010 at 4:03 pm.
H+ is not viewed as a group of dangerous extremists and to propose that they would ever be viewed that way for printing articles from their contributors is absurd.
Submitted by Khannea Suntzu on December 13, 2010 at 2:06 am.
Who cares about the US? I’s a scam anyways.
Submitted by Madrigorne on December 20, 2010 at 11:40 am.
Obvious troll is obvious
Submitted by Michelle on March 8, 2011 at 6:56 pm.
75 Comments
I hope this entire article was meant as merely provocative trolling…
For some of you, this article may seem to stand out as particularly provocative and you may wonder why I ran it. But if you have been paying attention, you will know that I’ve run a series of Top 5/Top 10 Favorite This-and-that’s of Transhumanism, Posthumanism, Singularitarianism ad infinitum. I asked probably 50-some people for their responses and I received responses from maybe about half of them. This is one of those responses. What would have been unusual or different from where I sit would have been to exclude Rachel and Jason’s contribution (or her photograph… Incidentally, they present themselves with more dignity than many of the commentors here.)
So unbunch your panties, take a deep breath, and soon there will be a piece from a different person with another different point of view. That’s how it works.
As the result of a legalistic complaint (not from the author), I’ve removed all comments that are personally abusive in nature from this piece and I will not accept any more.
& i was getting tired of it, besides…
R.U.
How about a new law? If you claim that an argument or posture is juvenile high school angst because it is in conflict with your beliefs, you may want to rethink the relevance of your contribution to any discourse about it headed in the direction of progress. I mean, couldn’t it just as easily be said that constructing a persona around a societal impression that pulls one farther and farther from introspection and creates stagnation in all things even resembling progress as a species is vapid high school mediocrity? I refuse to ignore the things that frustrate me and sap my hope for this species. If that makes one immature, then I’m afraid I don’t want any part in that operation of thought.
I’m glad this has people thinking. I’m glad this has people upset. When people get upset, great things can happen. I’m a little confused at the uproar of accusatory banality, though, because there is little in the manifesto, I believe, to provoke such misplaced frustration. In fact, the manifesto is quite aware, clear, and thoughtful about its purpose and intention. This is only the beginning. Get used to it.
And please, have the courage to post with your name if your critique is going to consist of mindless insulting cliches. I may take them more seriously. In the meantime, will the anonymous poster who accused the manifesto of containing “mangled English grammar” please construct a list of said discrepancies? I’ll be sure to take them into consideration.
“We are the one’s who can rely on one another without conscious submission.”
you used the possessive apostrophe there. don’t do that.
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1017
Just as there needs to be a distinction between posessive “its” and the contraction of “it is” (it’s), there also needs to be a distinction between the contraction of “one is” (one’s) and posessive “ones” (no apostrophe of posession, just as in the case of posessive “its”:
“It’s losing its tail” and “One’s eating ones dinner”. (1) is correct.
This is “juvenile high school angst”, not because it conflicts with any ‘beliefs’, as you so cumbersomely and cutely phrase it. It is juvenile as it is poorly written, and much more shabbily thought out. It reads at exactly the 7th grade level of the schoolwork that I correct everyday for grammar and clarity. I don’t expect much coherent writing or deep thinking from my 7th graders, but I damn sure expect it from H+. Also, this atrocious wad of garbled text simply does not reach at all a level of adult discourse. Sorry, those are cold facts. Go and read ‘Elements of Style’ and some Hegel, then come back perhaps ; and perhaps shift your musical taste from Slipknot and “valley girl screeching over Fruityloops presets” to something more refined and adult as well while you endeavor in this course of self-improvement. Nothing betrays deeper fundamental insecurity than elisitst delusions of being some kind of “X-man” or “para human” coupled to a truly stereotypical junior high school ranting “manifesto.”
“The Human mind was the framework, the foundation of the transhuman one, as the transhuman mind will be for the next when evolution decides it.”
But you insulted the hell out of the comma in that convoluted run on sentence! Treat the comma better, She is a grand old Lady and deserves better treatment.
You can pay me for any further lessons in basic English writing skill.
Also, look up what the term “evolution” actually means, it isn’t clear here whether or not you are referencing Darwinian evolution. If you are discussing Darwinian evolution, the statement “when evolution decides it” it totally without meaning and contrary to the entire theory. Evolution doesn’t “decide” anything, ever! Such casual anthropomorphism is a major sign of the sloppy and unprepared thinking that goes into most adolescent essay writing.
Settle down Grammatica, not everyone speaks English. If it’s that important to you, go back to reading the Dictionary and the Encyclopedia – and stay away from new and raw ideas, as they may not fit your formatting requirements.
1. The “writer” for want of a better word here speaks and writes only in English. And if it were written in German I would certainly demand it be written in correct German, not childish gibberish.
2. I do have to question why the EDITOR of this magazine seems to refuse the traditional duties of EDITING – chief among these duties are rejecting poorly written material, or at least correcting it himself before publication!
There isn’t enough coherent English (or coherent thought for that matter) presented in this essay for it to be possible to disagree with!
Yes, the article may not present the most sophisticated view on transhumanism but it’s the perspective of a group within society that has willfully separated from the norms. In a transhumanist society this schism may have different connotations, they may embrace extreme body modifications, new and dangerous practices, the point it raises is that there is always someone within the human race who wants to be separated from their humanity and may turn to transhumanism to compensate.
On a future where body modifications are common and the technology is readily available there may be more danger from groups comprised of aggrieved teenagers. Or unscrupulous beings who may become the dark side of the movement, now with biological constrains removed.
Very interesting perspective. I find that a lot of teenagers into body modification are also starting to take an interest in Transhumanism. It’s no longer about fashion but transcending to the next step. Which is why we now have bio-mechanical implants in addiction to piercings. Have you ever seen the documentary on body modification called Modify?
Stick in here. Don’t let these alienated geeks chase you away darling.
They know you are the face of the future and they won’t be able to keep up. Fuck em.
Stick in here. Don’t let these alienated geeks chase you away darling.
They know you are the face of the future and they won’t be able to keep up. Fuck em.
Thanks! I don’t let the opinions of other people get to me. I absolutely love your blog.
It’s too much — how can I be expected to contain my laughter in the face of all this self-aggrandizement? Self-aggrandizement that purports to be critiquing our supposed self-aggrandizement, nonetheless. This one for that one, I suppose. Since it’s quite clear that all these “anon” messages are from the same person who obviously has some personal beef beyond the level of any human stupidity I’ve encountered, all one can say is sorry you can’t move on with your life. Psychological bedwetting in its most pitiable form… I truly hope that for the people who do realize this and acknowledge that there are plenty more of us in the Transhumanist community who understand and relate to the issues in the manifesto, we can all co-exist in much less petty and conservative ways. Any philosophical view is open to criticism and discourse, although I suppose it’s much easier to lambast and critique than it is to actually present one. When any of our harshest critics do, I’ll be sure to check their ideas out. Until then, I’m just sort of going to, I don’t know, continue living my life? Yeah, that’s what I’ll do.
Best,
J
All I can say is that if we’re stirring up this much debate over our vision of utopia we must be doing something right.
You aren’t as new as you think you are.
You aren’t as different as you think you are.
You aren’t as alone as you think you are.
You, just like the rest of us, are an iteration of a familiar pattern. Every society has its iconoclasts, its outliers, its self-styled rebels and rouges. Counter-culturally and unpragmatically you are each other. Our Human ancestors relied on individualism and a conscious defiance of conformity, as was necessary for progress. The more you strive against social norms, the better you serve society. The more you hold yourself apart from society, the closer you adhere to your social role. So welcome back, it’s nice to hear from you again.
I like the way you put this. One of the reasons I love the Transhumanist community is because of these sorts of debates.
It occurs to me that there is nothing about transhumanism that is made better by adding a whole heaping mound of paranoid, marxoid victim vending.
I know playing the “oppressed minority” is loads of fun for some, but please just stick your head in a bucket of water and hold it there until you get over it.
Ken
http://www.kenstech.com
The minute you told me to stick my head in a bucket of water you completely discredited anything else that you said. Which was nothing more than an annoying flame and a link to your website in the first place.
Again behold the face of victorian medicine –
The “Let’s teach them a lesson” school of managing society.
Disgusting.
Since people have used H+ to insult my musical project I’m going to put this link up here:
http://experimenthaywire.bandcamp.com
Samples of my music for you guys to hear. Judge for yourselves. Topics covered include Transhumanism, chaos magick, social commentary on technology, fighting against nazi fascism, dystopic visions of the future, etc.
It’s definitely not for everybody but fans of the industrial and dark electronic genres might dig it.
The music is actually pretty good, and I don’t understand why people bash it. Tastes differ.
But my point still stands, a separatist attitude is very harmful for H+ public image. It’s childish at best.
Fair enough. I’m wouldn’t consider this to be about public image though. The public image of H+ is to post articles from their contributors. They are an extremely open-minded publication.
was your crass attempt at abusing H+ to hawk your meager and pitiful merchandising lot successful?
Many of “you” are not that much superior being
“You” Think “you” exist as A/ONE “specy”
“YOU” are wrong
You cannot construct an identity, most of you, transhumanist are wrong, or stupid : the identity is COMPLEX
The reason why you can be strong : is because technology is most powerfull social force : in our system :
but you are wrong for everything else : in your movement ( and in other movement build on technological paradigm ) there are many opposite forces
Even if the desire for progress, or the technology as drug, and illusion : is STRONG : it is DANGEROUS
It a drug
TECHNOLOGY CAN DO EVERYTHING
SHOULD WE DO EVERYTHING ?
AND SHOULD WE LET EVERYONE DO EVERYTHING ?
For the question : should we do everything ? the addicted guy would say : yes. And the reasonnable guy would say : on moment please, let’s apply the precaution principle : i don’t to die, because of you addiction and illusion to technology
IS transhumanism movement a clan of stupid pro technologist ?
The atomic bomb is cool ? And we should give it to every babies in the world : in my opinion most of you guys, are childrens, and the humanity is a child
the humanity don’t exist as adult being, you want to be h+ : but you are just kids !
We are at the singularity : and kids want to try bad things, and “it is for the economy” : should try !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc&feature=channel
At the same : we have only One chance : and i think your addiction is DANGEROUS
unmistakably the most beautiful person I have ever laid eyes on.
I thought part of Transhumanism was about rising above the hatred of normal humanity.
I believe what she is talking about is how the rise of counterculture underground can be construed in Transhumanistic terms, and how it has mutated into something far beyond a rebellious social strata. Yes, there are rebels, iconoclasts and followers, but there is a core element of who have been involved in all of it; the whole current of chaotic rebellion. Which now manifests in the myriad of artistic, musical, and spiritual endeavors we now have, all of which are all connected in some way. Maybe this core element is a product of the evolution of the human mind; part of that which questions and challenges itself allowing humanity to push further. Some of these folks are so alien to “regular” humanity as to be almost a separate species in some ways. The Chaos folks she speaks of are a prime example.
To discount this is to toss the baby out with the bathwater. You guys should let her have her say…
I really appreciate this. You definitely understood the point of the article. It’s about the artistic revolution of the youth. Thank you for “getting it.”
the eschaton.
At first I hoped it’s just a provocation, but the comments from the authors, sadly, proved me wrong. It’s been a long time since I last read such raving bullshit.
Sick fantasies of techno-emos, how come they were allowed to publish here?
The text doesn’t even deserve constructive criticism (what the hell, why would I even attempt to consensualize my “definition of reality” with them?
Immature nonsense, H+ magazine, please do better.
I agree. H+ has been disappointing from the getgo. And I am a serious transhumanist.
I read your article on hplusmagazine, and thought it totally missed the point of transhumanism and the Singularity. You say that transhumanism actively rejects collectivism, and then go on to blame collectivism for such things as the Holocaust. These assertions are wrong. The Singularity will never occur (in a peaceful manner, anyway) if we do not learn how to effectively act in a collective manner as a species. Your lambasting of collectivism is further discredited by your own stated desire to “find other people who know what it feels like to be this way and empower them,” i.e. build a community which promotes/supports a particular view; you are promoting collectivism.
Transhumanism isn’t worth a damn if everyone isn’t given the choice to be included, it is at its core an integrating philosophy; to suggest that separateness, exclusivity, or individuality have a place in the posthuman future is preposterous. Post humans will be so collective they will probably tend to not even have individual egos! Parts of their minds will be in the ‘cloud’ and they will operate like a linked hive mind. It doesn’t get more collective than that. Are you done spinning Ayn Rand now? She is the opposite to transhuman philosophy, are you aware of this?
-We are the Borg, long live the dictatorship of the proletariat
*Sigh*
Wrong on so many counts.
Collectivism is an evolutionary survival strategy. It provides a means for a group of people to pool their resources to make survival easier for all members in proportion to the size and efficiency of the collective. The collective exists to divide labor effectively, and to administer those shared resources efficiently, and equally to all members of the collective. Every inequality in a collective can be traced to an individual or group of individuals diverting the collective’s resources to serve personal desires. In it’s undiverted state, all members share equally. Both you and the articles author misunderstand what a collective actually is, and both your “Protests” against collective apply only to the “Diverted” form of a collective, which is understandable, considering you’re both simply quoting ideologies which equate “Collective” with either communism or socialism, all examples of which we have had are diverted forms.
A collective is not about “Hive minds” and transhumanists are not at all looking to create a “Borg” mentality.
Transhumanism is above all about freedom, individuality, and choice. If an individual is not free to make an individual choice, and accept the consequences of making that choice, then that individual is not truly free. It does not under any circumstances mean losing individuality to become a mindless drone.
And being part of a collective does not mean elimination of individuality. A true collective exists to serve the individuals within it equally. There is no conflict between collective responsibilities and individual liberties in a true collective in which each individual has made a choice to belong to the collective. Only in diverted collectives, which are misusing collective power to serve limited individual’s desires, does the “collective” attempt to repress personal liberty and deny the individual the choice of belonging or not.
Technology is already beginning to make a global hive mind, this is inevitable. The internet is just the merest beginning of the end of the Individual. Advances in brain-mind interface are on the near horizon which will take digital connectivity far beyond a keyboard interface. You are simply behind the curve on knowledge of emerging technology.
No, you are simply shading things to fit your world view.
Are BCI’s emerging? Indeed. But you are jumping from the ability of an individual to access and control a computer to your concept that such abilities will cause a loss of individuality and force everyone to become identical “mind clones”. The majority of first gen BCI is all one way from the mind to the computer, and even the next several generations will have extremely limited ability to send signal data to existing nerve inputs. The kind of BCI you envision would need whole brain rewrite ability, and I doubt we will ever reach that level without massive safeguards to prevent exactly what you are envisioning without the complete and willing consent of an idividual.
I have no doubt that some people will attempt to become “hive minds”. There are after all millions of people unwilling to think for themselves, but to truly create a hive mind means overwriting all existing personalities with a single “master personality”. Bee’s have no individuality. For all purposes, they are simply the extended body of the Queen. Same with the borg, in which the only individual is the queen. Your vision is basically the same concept, mass murder of millions of individuals so that they are all mind clones of a single individual. That’s neither a transhumanist vision, nor an inevitable outcome of advancing technology. It makes one wonder if you envision yourself as “Queen” or “Drone”
The truth is that there is far more diversity in the future than has ever existed in human history. We may fragment into a million different species of “humanoid”. AS VR and BCI advance, we will have the freedom to not only explore virtual worlds, but an endless variety of forms as well, both in VR and out.
You might lack the imagination to conceive of such a reality but it will exist nonetheless. There may be some “hive minds”, but it is extremely unlikely that there will be many. The “Borg Collective” you envision is just one of those dark fantasies that is never going to happen.
I’m all too aware of the “borg collective” BS you are spouting, and it’s just another attempt by those who fear the future to make it sound so terrible that people will try to prevent progress of any and every sort. If you truly look forward to ending your existence this way, as just a expendable host for someone else’s ideology, I strongly recommend you read this book:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2532766/God-Wants-You-Dead
What are your educational credentials? Because your writings on H+ are not coming across as someone who has much understanding of the topics they are pontificating upon.
Mass marketing, propaganda, media conditioning, information spin, widespread use of prescribed anti-depressant and anti-psychotic drugs for no real medical condition.
Technology will trump all your weakly constructed arguments and ill-informed ideals.
And people will purchase it. It won’t be forced on anyone. “Google Brain” is at most 20 years away.
Go and watch ‘Caprica’, that nicely wrought piece of fiction comes fairly close to a possible post-human future.
a super powered individual with all the muscles and big tits and Control adolescent males crave. actual post humanity will look nothing like that infantile fantasy.
you aren’t gonna like it, if you even have the option to dislike it. facebook has no dislike button for very good reasons…
I find this response funny coming from someone who claims to be a collectivist. You’ve stooped down pretty hard.
Please accept that all of us have a different vision for the future. It is up to us to pave the way for a better tomorrow. If people associate this with Individuality is that really a reason to dismiss them as Ayn Rand drones? Does Ayn Rand own Individuality?
You are giving her far too much power.
You do not write coherently, and you do not even rise to the use of 7th grade levels of English grammar. You have nothing to say and at best clumsy means of communicating such crude and confused ideas as come to you. Come back when you have at least a GED.
What does formal education have to do with you dismissing anyone who advocates Individuality as an Ayn Rand drone? Should I tell you to come back when you have at least a holiday in Cambodia? If you can’t argue for yourself without dismissing someone for what you perceive to be a “lack of education” nobody is going to take you seriously. Even if you have an Masters from Harvard. What exactly is your thesis? That Individuality is harmful to Transhumanism because Ayn Rand is so uncool? Pot kettle black.
You can not use the comma or the apostrophe correctly. No one deserves a voice who writes for publication at the level of a 5th grade student of English.
Perhaps you would prefer they respond to you in French? German? Chinese? Their lack in grammar and punctuation does in no way diminish their intent. They communicate clearly, though you refuse to cope with the real life intricacies of dealing with a global communication profile. It is NOT necessary that all the rules of language are followed to the letter, but that the ideas and intrinsic meaning are conveyed. Everyone deserves a voice; you should print out the parts that offend you and correct them with your red pencil to assuage your OCD, and ask questions regarding the points that you cannot follow or that you believe require clarification.
an article of this caliber finger painted in Rachel’s very own feces? Because what is written here isn’t far from that standard of quality.
This makes it quite apparent that you’ve never read anything I’ve written previously, or you would realize how much a think Randians are idiots. They are all convinced that absolute license is all that it will take for them to gravitate to the top of the social pecking order, if only all these laws preventing them from enforcing their wills at gunpoint would just go away. They dream of the day when they will be free to take what they want from everyone without any accountability, and never dream that they would probably be shot within the first day of their “anarchist paradise.”
But congratulations, you’ve been added into the same category.
Rejoice, you’ll eventually be able to lock yourself away in a VR fantasy and pretend to be the borg queen, and never have to cope with the fact that there are people out there who are not *you*. I wish you every happiness.
But I’ll take reality over that any day.
Your (dork kitsch anime fanboy) reality appears to be a garish 2nd life avatar with medically morbid gynocomastia.
I’ll pass.
I don’t bother to read anything written by anime obsessed (clown?) titty fetishists.
Is it a clown? Are those massive, grotesque zeppelins Clown Tits?
Nothing more pathetic exists in human culture than the mindless tedium of 2nd Life.
Couldn’t come up with anything better to insult than my avatar, hummmmm?
I truly pity you. It must be such a sad existence you live that you want to retreat into mindlessness and lose of all self identity. Even most of the suicidal people I know want to keep their identity, even if they don’t value their life.
you are….
“Not Even Wrong”
An argument that appears to be scientific is said to be not even wrong if it cannot be falsified (i.e., tested) by experiment or cannot be used to make predictions about the natural world. The phrase was coined by theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or sloppy thinking.[1] Rudolf Peierls writes that “a friend showed [Pauli] the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli’s views. Pauli remarked sadly, ‘It is not even wrong.’ “[2]
Obviously Borg are the future. It is a logical transhumanist outcome.
H+, on the other hand, is less about transhumanism and more about Ayn Rand.
They are insane liberaltarian objectivist laissez-faire wingnut randroids.
For publishing articles from all their contributors? Would you rather them only publish articles that agree with your Borg version of the future?
1st thing – The interests of conscious submission lie in Humanity.
The interests of conscious (social) submission lie in nature of Human Society. And above all – conscious submission is a nature of Civilization. And we want our new world to be civilized. We don’t want us to became a new specie just to differ from any other species in a terms of species differentiation, we don’t want us to became a stronger then wolf or bigger then bear creature, but we want our abstract ego to cross platform to set us free of biology and all rules of biology that are not tolerant to conscious ego of individual. And we are aware of people who blindly want to attack society for its weaknesses as it is now the only positive form of conscious cooperation between humans. All other forms of cooperation with lack of civilized frameworks look like shrewdness of apes or pack of wolves. Human collectivism is a vast range of relations and if to fight with one – first imagine the opposite.
2nd thing – We want a nation. We want sovereignty. transhuman sovereignty.
Transhuman society is indeed a collection of individuals. And most importantly, if you try to make an army out of transhumanists it could be possible, but the resulting combined force will be concerned not with combating all forms of oppression against gender, race, ethnicity, thought, age, and disability, but with equal political entities – military groups, governments, so it will be one good direct martial law submission and a good nail in the coffin of transhumanist’s dreams.
3rd thing – From birth, transhumans experience an innate alienation from the Human race.
The only possible and healthy way to feel this alienation is abstract idea of being someone but not being human. And we can only wonder how we would feel then, because we think of it with our human brains and feel with human feelings. If we imagine our biological human nature to be replaced by some other nature some electro-mechanical for example – it is a good way for abstract modeling and good practice in separating what in your nature is an object and what in your nature is you and a subject. But if you already “experience” an innate alienation, tell me how.
No offence. And I like the whole thing except for word “manifesto” – do you really want anyone first to see transhumanists find us in a row of commie/nazi/anarch type of political groups?
I suspect the drive for separatism by an individual or group is actually a response to the segregation or isolation that group experiences from the majority. It’s sort of ‘taking charge of the fact that the majority is kicking me out’.
So, I do feel this talk is somewhat empowering.
The irony, however, is that the transhumanist ‘movement’ is just as bad as everyone else with respect to ostracizing or isolating folk, especially those folk who are in the forefront of actually ‘doing it.’
Race and gender, for instance. A majority of the speakers at the singularity summits, as well as most transhumanist blogs, are white men.
Believe it or not, a fair portion of the body modification going on in the western world is by women, via cosmetic surgery. And transsexuals make most so-called body modification advocates look like amateurs, not just modifying their body but stepping outside gendered norms.
The various edgy subcultures? Burners, goths, phish-heads, etc. They’re the ones experimenting with alternative social structures. No, they wouldn’t normally be seen as ‘proper, kid-friendly representatives’ of the transhumanist movement, but they’re the ones actually doing the experimenting. They’re not just talking about it.
Gamers? While they’d often be seen as wasting away their time killing zombies, they’re the ones actually living in virtual reality, forming communities, driving the development of new worlds.
There are all sorts of folk out there who aren’t forward-thinking business leaders or academic researchers, who happen to be making great strides in practicing the future.
Seems a bit of separatism does cut away some of the social baggage that prevents experimentation…
I believe a theoretical Transhumanist country, colony or what have you, should openly embrace Collectivist principles when establishing an economic system, while socially pushing the individual to strive forward and achieve personal greatness. It is also my belief that we should not close ourselves off from the intolerant, and often ignorant, world of man, but instead look at with mercy and pity, try to educate them, and embrace those who wish join us. For if we let the superstition and fear that conquers men poison us we are no more ignorant then they are.
The ideas are great. But overall this article is a load of rubbish. Don’t try to speak for me. Transhumanism isn’t an identity, it’s an ideology, a philosophy. Don’t try an define a “Transhuman Personality.” I’m not your goddamn soldier.
This “manifesto” is offensive, and hypocritical. “Lets be different by grouping together and doing the same thing!”
I understand the urge to feel significant, but christ.
The notion that we need to create division to advance transhumanism seems pretty backwards.
I feel like it would be more productive to continuously educate the rest of the humans around us and create awareness about the state of technology and the new social structures that we could literally build tomorrow if the world worked together.
Check out the Resource Based Economy at http://www.thevenusproject.com for an example.
Lazerus said: “It is also my belief that we should not close ourselves off from the intolerant, and often ignorant, world of man, but instead look at with mercy and pity, try to educate them, and embrace those who wish join us. For if we let the superstition and fear that conquers men poison us we are no more ignorant then they are.”
Unfortunately, whenever someone posts something on the TS facebook page that is intolerant or ignorant, instead of debating them and trying to educate them, Rachel just bans them. The intolerance of the TS facebook page is no better than a group of neo-nazis who exclude anyone not of their ilk. I called this to everyone’s attention and got banned, too.
Personally, I wish more racist and homophobic people would comment so we can explain our point of view to them, but Rachel calls it “mobbing” and then shuts everyone who disagrees with her out.
If being the “next step in human evolution” means being a closed-minded control freak, then I guess you can count me out of the evolution revolution. There is a word for people who think their way and only their way is right.
That word is asshole.
“5. The cancellation of the Magneto movie”
Yeah…Xavier vs Magneto much ?
I won’t put any money on wondering which pov you support.
This is the kind of mentality that causes wars and discrimination, not helps heal society and promotes the peaceful, educated future that most Transhumanists work for…
For all our sakes, I hope your vision is not *needed*…but, time will tell…
Top 5 Reasons for a Transhumanist Militia
1. Witch trials
2. School shootings
3. Public executions
4. Forced surgery that removes evolutionary mutations
5. The cancellation of the Magneto movie
I’ve never seen Magneto. lol
Please expand on “forced surgery that removes evolutionary mutations”.
This article is very thought provoking and entertaining. I like the music too. I’m not going to join any militant transhumanist cult, but I do appreciate your colorful style.
I find your article and views worth looking into, despite what the naysayers and elitists say. Ironically, discrediting ones views based on grammatical hiccups, amongst other hostile reactions just make me more open to your ideas. In fact, I see, amongst the grammar flaws, a hint of letting ideas and ideology flow without worrying about the outline and proper structure.
Ideologies that differ from the accepted norm have, throughout history, been the catalysts for something greater to emerge.
It can be argued that Transhumanism is being stifled for various reasons, be it political, religious or purely fear based. For us as a species to transcend the physical and mental boundaries nature has cursed us with, we need to break free from the nightmarish spiders web of bureaucratic and theological thought and embrace the idea of research and true technological progress being done outside of regulation by the “elite”. No more restriction of genetic research or idea implementation.
I agree, Ms. Haywire: We need sovereignty
Hopefully, ATF and FBI will deal with such dangerous extremism. *cough* Waco Siege *cough*
Alexander,
To this day, the ignorance of human impulsiveness still surprises me. Your endorsement for the ATF or FBI “deal”-ing with Transhuman Separatists perplexes me because the Waco Siege is one of the most widely known fiascos in our government’s history. You claim that we are “dangerous,” yet seek comfort in our destruction through the hands of organizations responsible for one of the most bungled operations to date? The last time I checked, I hadn’t heard of any Transhuman Separatists with the blood of innocent women and children on their hands.
Please illuminate me on the “danger” of Transhuman Separatism. Please.
Alexander,
You owe it to your integrity to justify yourself. Watch this video – Google will provide you with a free education so that you’re better equipped to talk about this subject in the future.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4298137966377572665#
I liked the article mostly until i got to “Time has revealed we cannot co-exist within a society …We must rise above the weeds” which had me reconsider the entire meaning.
Generally i find whenever i start to trust the average person, im immediately reminded why thats a stupid thing to do. You can’t teach (the ironically named) common sense, but you can point people in the right direction by giving them obvious motives. It’s better to wait on stragglers then to take a chance which could endanger the entire species.
btw, coming from a person who likes aggrotech, your music is terrible :/
Thank you for your input. This is an idealistic vision of utopia. My music is not for everyone but thank you for taking the time to listen. Not sure what “aggrotech” means as I do not classify myself. I seek an understanding between all members of the Transhumanist community regardless of viewpoints. What is wrong with something being radical? It is radical thinkers who have shaped our time.
Hello Rachel and Jason,
Yes, transhumanists often feel very frustrated by living in a larger world that is steeped in ignorance and waste. But this essay made me feel like I was encountering the self-pity of a depressed teenager! lol
I admit that we live in a dark time where governments want to use advancing technologies to spy on and exploit their own people. But still, I think an “us versus them” attitude is not a good one, and could even potentially blow up in our collective faces. Many kinds of people question society, not just us, and we need to build bridges with them. And so disengaging by living on a reservation, island or space colony, to escape the rest of humanity, is just not the way to go.
We *are* humanity and we *are* human. But we have a vision of better and happier societies and individuals that we must successfully share. I see organizations like Humanity+ and the Singularity Institute, doing a great job reaching out to leading academics, scientists, journalists and others, to impart our message.
The greater society we live in will become increasingly transhumanist due to the effects of corporate and global competition. The military invests billions in research programs to create superior warriors and machines. Corporations invest huge sums in biotech and computing research and development. I realize some pet projects of transhumanists such as radical life extension are not funded as they should be, but I am confident that as science in general advances, people will catch on that such things are actually possible.
And believe me, when a visit to a medical clinic allows parents to have their unborn child genetically modified to be more intelligent, healthy and athletic, no force on Earth will be able to stop them. If their particular government bans such things, they will go on “vacation” overseas to have it done. Competition is good and through it (and also lots of hard work on our part) we will see our visions come to be.
Best wishes,
John
P.S. You never know, the Magneto movie project may sometime down the road be brought back… : )
What you propose is in clear violation of U.S. laws. Do you want H+ to be viewed as dangerous extremists by the government? You endanger the entire community with such reckless proposals.
Why must the internet subject us to such juvenile and empty ranting that was once confined to lined paper notebooks in study hall period or passed around and laughed at in Public School Teacher’s Lounge? On all levels from the mangled English grammar to the grating naiveté of the worthless pseudo-philosophical posturings, this is total bollocks. If anyone over 15 wrote this, then they are a spectacularly sad case of ignorance, confusion and toxic adolescent nit-wittery.
I agree with you. This is very juvenile and doesn’t belong on the website of a respectable transhumanist magazine. See “Godwin’s law”.
Thank you for your response. I appreciate you reaching out to me as a person in disagreement with the manifesto. I think it is important for us to discuss these things. If we all held one point of view we would never create any change. It’s funny that you mention the teenage crowd because this is definitely targeted at the youth. The Us vs. Them mentality gives us a reason to create art. Many of us have been outsiders our entire lives find unity in defining ourselves as a separate entity from the masses.
Nothing written here is intended to hurt anybody or discuss a new direction for Tranhumanism. I am happy that technological progress is not being stopped and look forward to becoming something more than human. We are not fighting against humanity but the forces that oppose creativity and free thought.
H+ is not viewed as a group of dangerous extremists and to propose that they would ever be viewed that way for printing articles from their contributors is absurd.
Who cares about the US? I’s a scam anyways.
Obvious troll is obvious
I’m so tired of Godwin’s law.