h+ Magazine

The Revolt Against Transhumanism

  • This topic has 5 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by Jay.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #19287
    Peter
    Member

    Having introduced transhumanists ideas to university students over the years, I am familiar with typical objections: if we don’t die the world will become overpopulated; not having a body would be yucky; this is all science fiction; lots of things can go wrong; technology is bad; death makes life meaningful; immortality would be boring; etc.

    [See the full post at: The Revolt Against Transhumanism]

    #19299
    TAHS
    Participant

    Transhumanists or others arguing for technological advancement that will benefit the species should consider the following when conversing with a sceptic or detractor:

    Oftentimes they will argue that what we aspire for is unnatural or, if they don’t use that exact word, their arguments typically revolve around the idea that it’s unnatural. In such cases, you should remind them that a skyscraper is as natural as a straw hut. A jackhammer is as natural as using the old bones and stones. And so-on.

    Humans are natural tool-users and environment-manipulators, which makes jobs easier and improves the quality of life. Whether we manipulate sticks or particles, it is the same thing. If an anti-transhumanist then, predictably, says that our ancestors did not manipulate atoms, tell them that it is a matter of process; that the sticks led to stones which led to metals which led to…

    We are naturally projected to create AI, change our bodies and “minds” in a myriad of ways and eventually even leave this planet.

    Something else that many anti-transhumanists care about is choice. They may not specifically mention that, but you can tell they’re worried about being forced into something they don’t want to do. Individually, I espouse the idea that everyone on Earth, no matter who or where, should have access to the same transhuman tech as everybody else. And most importantly they should be able to choose what tech, if any, they want to have and utilize. Nothing should be forced upon anyone. And no one should have to suffer for choosing anything, including abstention. The transhuman technological capabilities by themselves will allow this idea of ‘choice’ to be possible, I believe. Now, not every transhumanist recognizes this idea, but I think it is the right thing, a good thing and a way to reach out and touch those who are so mindlessly, stupidly against transhumanism.

    #19300
    Nim Mac
    Participant

    I would like to entertain my thoughts by looking at a listing of arguments raised by Transhumanism objectors, along with suggested or possible replies to those arguments. Is there such a list? If there isn’t, perhaps it would be fun to create one.

    #19302
    Brad Arnold
    Participant

    I believe a more cogent argument can be summoned against technological Luddites wearing the mask of religion: if we don’t pursue augmentation technology, then Godless countries will, and they will dominate us. Dominance/submission is a powerful force that drives much of our technological growth (consumerism is another power force, as in extended life, improved quality of life, and a more productive life). It is simply logic: augmentation makes a human superior – either we do it, or the Chinese (for example) will.

    #19304
    Tim
    Participant

    I do a lot of work in politics, and in any political entity there are arguments and crises and uninformed attacks (even those political entities that seem from the outside to be unified and coherent). Makes for good entertainment certainly, but it also makes for thoughtful dialog.

    For myself, I’m primarily interested in the science of transhumanism, purely selfish reason. But I’ve noted some radical views on both pro and anti sides of the fence, it forces us to consider questions “what is human” “what is consciousness” and how do we know the difference between a conscious being and a machine. I get the feeling we won’t be able to answer these questions for a long time.

    Personally, I don’t want to have my consciousness uploaded or transferred, logic tells me that this does not enhance me as a person, but would be (if it were possible) just an unconscious copy. Perhaps someday I’ll be persuaded this is not the case.

    I also don’t believe we should “boldly go” without thought the consequences of the research. As our technological leverage becomes greater, so do the dangers of unleashing uncontrollable forces or great power in the hands of uncontrollable idiots (in my opinion, far more likely – as I said I work in politics a lot…).

    But one thing I am sure of – Let’s keep talking and let everyone have a voice…

    #23999
    Jay
    Participant

    The opposition as well as the agreement is manipulated on the basic fulcrum of double speak; an orwellian concept— You think the catholic church opposes transhumanism eh… well don’t these guys own a chunk of nasa and have a massive telescope? Havent they acknowledged the possibility of life in other universes(the pope did)? This is an exersize in futility. In the hands of the elites, transhumanism would merely be a tool to alter drastically the face of the planet to justify genocide and yes, eugenics. What of those who do not wish to be augmented? They wouldnt be able to compete, therefore become obsolete— Theyre gonna help the handicapped eh? You think a dozen youtube videos and few cases that illustrate such a thing is proof that theyll extend it to everyone? Look at big pharma and the health care system. How much of it is assisting the ppl who are disabled? I have a parapalegic sister who cant even get money outside of ssi to assist with living expenses. This has never been about ppl being lifted from their present position– its about upping the elitists and dropping everyone else down into an ultra low class. But too many of you think its about religion opposing it? From one angle it does and another it does not. Look closer. The dalai lama advocates it yet teaches the doctrines of reincarnation… Hmmmm. System scan? Might wanna looka bit deeper. rReligion has been working together with transhumanism forever and feigning opposition. For crap sakes, theres a Mormon associatioon for transhumanism. Its gonna be about who opts out and who opts in and i fear for the ppl that have to make that choice. Why dont ppl care more about developing psionic potential? Developing telepathy? Because plugging into a manipulated server and having instant gratification is easier? What a pc can do, a person can also do– but ppl dont want to work that hard now do they? All i know is that with no matter how many advances these guys claim, none of them are going to assist my sister or brother for that manner or any of yours, UNTIL THEY GET ON TED TALKS SHOW, haha. My babylon is over….. finis

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.