tadmjones Posted August 18, 2022 Report Share Posted August 18, 2022 1 hour ago, Easy Truth said: Both. I hear opposition to this hope or philosophy, I don't understand the concern. Is it being against prosthetic limbs? Or is it a prescription to becoming "inhuman", whatever that would mean? In the other thread I mention a philosopher that seems to be linked to transhumanism. I am still researching the subject. My impression of transhumanism is that it is technological eugenics. Although I’m not sure how close that comes to an apt description, as I don’t know much about it. Actually just looking around in order to respond to your comments , I learned the ‘movement’ is ‘larger’ than I presumed apparently there is a domestic political party established enough to have fielded a presidential candidate and affiliates with other similar political organizations multinationally. Ive found what looks like a philosophic critique and perhaps a discussion on the bioethics of transhumanism. : https://academic.oup.com/jmp/article/42/3/237/3817401 Easy Truth 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Truth Posted August 18, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2022 It seems like there is some glamorization of collectivism within this movement. Not entirely, but it there is the "we will be connected" drum beat. https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-elites-horrific-transhumanist-future/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Morris Posted August 19, 2022 Report Share Posted August 19, 2022 Perhaps this is unfair, but transhumanism reminds me of the cybermen from Dr. Who. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Truth Posted August 19, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2022 Quote Most of these options are designed to disconnect the human soul from the human body, and prepare the body to be used as a shell for a new host. It seems that a fundamental question is if a human, or a consciousness can be duplicatable in the physicals realm. If one duplicates every molecule of a person, would the consciousness stay with the original body, or one single consciousness would control both bodies or will there now be two consciousnesses that diverge after that moment. https://veilofreality.com/transhumanism-the-consciousness-trap/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadmjones Posted August 19, 2022 Report Share Posted August 19, 2022 (edited) The idea of multiple identical consciousnesses or a disembodied consciousness,a discrete entity, could be incorporated is more a long the lines of science fiction, far future ,supposed possibilities of post humans. The ethics of implementing eugenics in nascent science is an actual real world problem.I don’t remember off hand where , but I had seen a talk at some conference or other where one of the panelists, who I take is a well known figure in bioengineering discussing the feasibility and attractiveness of genetic manipulation to restrict the physical stature of humans as a means to slow or survive climate change. As philosophical question the idea that an ‘exact’ molecular copy would result in a ‘consciouness’ Is hard materialist determinism. Edited August 19, 2022 by tadmjones Added comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Truth Posted August 19, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, tadmjones said: As philosophical question the idea that an ‘exact’ molecular copy would result in a ‘consciouness’ Is hard materialist determinism. Yes, and that would imply a divergence between Objectivism and this aspect of Transhumanism. From what I have gathered, the ultimate desire of Transhumanism is to put our self in a machine so we become immortal. The collectivism is of concern but this would be the most attractive part. Here is a reference to uploading your mind: https://mindmatters.ai/2019/11/transhumanism-is-it-a-dangerous-idea/ Edited August 19, 2022 by Easy Truth added link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Morris Posted August 20, 2022 Report Share Posted August 20, 2022 18 hours ago, Easy Truth said: to put our self in a machine so we become immortal. We wouldn't be immortal; the machine could still be destroyed. We couldn't reasonably expect it to last forever. If this worked, it would overcome some of our current limitations and vulnerabilities, but it would not make us immortal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadmjones Posted August 20, 2022 Report Share Posted August 20, 2022 55 minutes ago, Doug Morris said: We wouldn't be immortal; the machine could still be destroyed. We couldn't reasonably expect it to last forever. If this worked, it would overcome some of our current limitations and vulnerabilities, but it would not make us immortal. Well, theoretically immortal, just keep jumping to a new machine. Either way the notion is as arbitrary as science fiction. But to a more philosophical point what do you mean by “our” limitations and being able to overcome them? Do members of a species or individual beings have ‘overcomable’ limitations and vulnerabilities, isn’t the fact of limitations part of their identity, if there exists a state where/when a being exhibits qualities theretofore inaccessible, isn’t that really a description of a different type or A is not A at the same time ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Truth Posted August 20, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2022 25 minutes ago, tadmjones said: But to a more philosophical point what do you mean by “our” limitations and being able to overcome them? Do members of a species or individual beings have ‘overcomable’ limitations and vulnerabilities, isn’t the fact of limitations part of their identity, if there exists a state where/when a being exhibits qualities theretofore inaccessible, isn’t that really a description of a different type or A is not A at the same time ? Yes and no. I think you're talking about a certain kind of limitation because we get around limitations all the time, as in flying. But in the case of mortality, I would agree that it is part of our identity. If we were immortal, I don't know what happens with right and wrong. Like inherent values exist. A similar (but not same) problem exists with "I will become omniscient" with such and such technology. The limitation of our knowing defines us too. Although in this case it's the nature of knowledge that limits it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Morris Posted August 20, 2022 Report Share Posted August 20, 2022 1 hour ago, tadmjones said: what do you mean by “our” limitations and being able to overcome them? Please pay attention to the word "some". 1 hour ago, tadmjones said: isn’t the fact of limitations part of their identity, if there exists a state where/when a being exhibits qualities theretofore inaccessible, isn’t that really a description of a different type or A is not A at the same time ? A human consciousness transferred into a machine, if that's ever possible at all, would certainly be physically different from a human consciousness existing naturally in a human body. ******** My main point is that under no circumstances would we be immortal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadmjones Posted August 21, 2022 Report Share Posted August 21, 2022 16 hours ago, Easy Truth said: Yes and no. I think you're talking about a certain kind of limitation because we get around limitations all the time, as in flying. But in the case of mortality, I would agree that it is part of our identity. If we were immortal, I don't know what happens with right and wrong. Like inherent values exist. A similar (but not same) problem exists with "I will become omniscient" with such and such technology. The limitation of our knowing defines us too. Although in this case it's the nature of knowledge that limits it. Well yes and no ,too. Humans can not fly , we do build machines that operate on the principles of lift in a gaseous media and ride them. That is not the same thing as over coming the inability to fly. An inability , or describing the 'edges' of an inability as a limitation is just extending a floating abstraction , it's a form of rationalism and a failure to integrate. An 'inability' points to a nonexistent, a zero not a potential. Akin to understanding poverty as a lack of capital accumulation , you can not get rid of poverty , 'it' isn't a 'thing' , you can create wealth or capital or you can destroy the capital but you can not' create poverty' or 'destroy poverty', thinking in those terms in an inversion of causality. Similarly with omniscience and knowledge, human epistemology is the 'science' of how humans create concepts and use reason to understand of the data of the universe , the data is omnipresent, knowledge is the product of human minds not a quality to be incorporated. dream_weaver 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Truth Posted August 21, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2022 It's about "amount", as in amount of life (time alive) or amount of knowledge. In this case immortality or omniscience points to "all" time or all data. Acquiring all of that is not possible. The issue of flying is contextual. Granted we used tools to achieve what a bird does, but we can in fact travel in the same area above the surface. It may be metaphoric language but we communicate using it. But putting aside immortality, let us say Transhumanism is reaching beyond it's grasp, perhaps it's good in the sense that it will cause longevity i.e. improvement. I think I saw an excerpt from the Jonny Carson show where Rand objected to the idea of the "impossible dream" although she liked the way it was performed. Maybe there is a place for the impossible dream. Or is it dangerous and harmful? When does a utopian idea become a danger to be fought? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadmjones Posted August 21, 2022 Report Share Posted August 21, 2022 When and if the implementation is an objective initiation of force. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream_weaver Posted August 21, 2022 Report Share Posted August 21, 2022 10 hours ago, tadmjones said: Similarly with omniscience and knowledge, human epistemology is the 'science' of how humans create concepts and use reason to understand of the data of the universe , the data is omnipresent, knowledge is the product of human minds not a quality to be incorporated. The term "data of sense" is used in both Rand's and Piekoff's writings. I'm looking to connect it to the omnipresent data of the universe. Is it synonymous? Or is there a distinction to data as a part of consciousness that to be distinguished here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadmjones Posted August 22, 2022 Report Share Posted August 22, 2022 The data of sense would be the subjective apprehension of identity. Consciousness is the action of discerning identity through perception ,making sense of the booming buzzing flood of data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.