Let's discuss transhumanism (H+) and how it will affect politics, religion, culture and economy etc.
What is your ideology?
What makes it the most "legitimate"?
How do you think it will be affected by H+?
How do you want it to be affected by H+?
Transhumanism thread
Camden Davis
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
yudkowsky.net
twitter.com
Noah Hill
We're already there.
Jackson Edwards
This is a response to the OP of the previous tranhumanism thread
>
Ideological susceptibility and creation is determined by homeostasis of brain structure and sensory input.
Put simply if you are going to fantasize about trans-humanity at least inform yourself on tech so that you don't splurt out false ideals that are implicitly shaped by personal taste (racial supremacy, carbon based organism supremacy).
All modern day robots, computers, brain-machine interfaces use some form of nanotechnology.
Nano-materials are being put in the electronics you use and the food you eat (because of irresponsible markets and sluggish legislature).
Scientists are already constructing nano-tools such as CRISPR to edit dna.
DNA and protein are an assembly of self replicating nano-structures. (nano-machines)
There are scientists working, right now, on creating "life" with elements in the periodic table that aren't essential to any living organism on this planet.
LIMITING YOURSELF TO DNA, THE HUMAN FORM, PLANETARY COLONIZATION AND SPACE TRAVEL IS RETARDED...unless you have some sort of aesthetic or ethical fetters.
Caleb Rodriguez
Gavin Nguyen
Jacob Brooks
>Taste the redpill
Also why are these threads so rare on Jow Forums?
Jayden Jenkins
Chase Rodriguez
Lincoln Johnson
There's no such thing as transhumanism
Zachary Cook
>low IQ faggot or bait
en.wikipedia.org
Jack Wood
Henry Wood
Thomas Gutierrez
Aaron Green
Ethan Cruz
Joshua Hughes
Logan Jackson
William Roberts
Levi Cox
William Barnes
Wyatt Harris
Jack Flores
Austin Roberts
Jacob Sanders
Josiah Rodriguez
Transhumanism is nothing more than a generalized form of humanism. In my view, transhumanists tend to emphasize crazy sci-fi shit and futurism too much--it turns people away from the commonsense view that we should do more to increase the rate of technological innovation. The only viable path for a successful transhumanist politics would be to talk a lot about disability, wounded veterans, and health/medicine. Drop everything else, at least in mass-public communications.
yudkowsky.net
Nicholas Hernandez
>transhumanists tend to emphasize crazy sci-fi shit and futurism too much--it turns people away from the commonsense view that we should do more to increase the rate of technological innovation.
How so? yes it's sensational but it's still in the same direction as that common sense view to increase technological innovation.
Landon Miller
Alexander Rivera
Dominic Wilson
Hunter Sanchez
Caleb Edwards
Evan Allen
>wikipedia
No I mean the language itself is stupid.
see
You can make any modifications to humans as you want. They will remain human. Do you understand this? Cutting a males penis off and inverting it into a vagina does not create a female.
It's pseudoscience.
Isaac Phillips
Brandon King
>You can make any modifications to humans as you want.
What about cognitive prosthetics?
Ian Jackson
>You can make any modifications to humans as you want. They will remain human.
You're not accounting for cognitive prosthetics, it wouldn't seem too crazy for a christian couple to treat their child, that has microcephaly, by sticking a computer in it's head.
Is it still human?
Ryder Perry
idk what that means, tell me. Tell me your thoughts and ideas since nobody else will talk to you, I'll listen
Grayson Flores
I guess I really meant to say that the constant emphasis on sci-fi/futurism turns people away from the *general philosophy of transhumanism*. I do think that in some cases it might actually turn people away from pro-innovation preferences (by making them afraid of scary dystopian scenarios, etc.), but I agree in general most people are weakly pro-technology in most contexts and transhumanists being wacky won't change that much. I'm just saying that in order for transhumanists to effectively accelerate the rate of technological innovation and adoption, they should de-emphasize the sci-fi stuff and refocus on the tangible, bread-and-butter, existing-today benefits of technology. It's absolutely absurd that there are major disability-rights activists, organizers, and political lobby groups operating in US politics today and aren't at all connected to transhumanism. Building a coalition with disability groups is a no-brainer.
I understand that most transhumanist people are math/sciencey types who are naturally attracted to the sci-fi/engineering aspects of transhumanism, but there are other ways to do transhumanism, and other angles to emphasize. The Xenofeminism people are a pretty wacky, but do provide a good example of how transhumanism is actually really broad and able to accept a wide variety of coalitional partners.
Isaiah Rivera
Technology will allow us to abolish gender; not in the sense that physical differences won't exist, but rather technology will eliminate 'scarcity' and eventually make biological characteristics like having a penis no more important than eye color, with respect to social hierarchies. That's the Xenofeminist thinking, anyways.
Brandon Phillips
You're assuming all transhumanists are "whacky sci-fi futurist" who aren't being pragmatic, but you're wrong and google is one of the most obvious examples, come to think of it transhumanism is a pretty redundant since nearly every one is in favor of empowering the disabled, prolonging life and playing with/paying the latest tech toys from silicon valley.
anyway i shouldn't have started the thread this late, i need sleep, did an all nighter. sorry, will chrck back later to see if this thread hasn't died too soon.
Owen Bennett
thanks for posting