Preach to the choir, brother!

But yeah. I'll be happy when I can get a bionic eye.

But a minute ago you were against killing the sick babies?

One thing I always think about when eternal life is brought up is how it would disrupt human development in several ways. Our societies progress and change naturally over time via generation shifts. New ideas, values and social norms are introduced as the older generations are phased out from their positions of power. What if this is was no longer the case?

well, its not necessarily going to happen to them, so why would they have to kil themselves?


I see us becoming more intergrated with technology, for sure.
We are able to send commmands over PC with our brain waves. people are starting to opt for cybernetic modifications to replace hands, instead of opting for transplants.
we are essentially, at least socially living in this scenario now. everyone has a phone that can give them any practically amount of information that one would find elsewhere.
RFID chips implanted to keep track of people and animals.
artificial organs
nonobots that will monitor your bloodstream and being developed.
exoskeletons in development.,
all of theese are either here, or on the verge.



But i also see a huge backlash.
theres nothing wrong with being a flawed, biological human and i bet there are a lot of people who agree with that.
look at your own youtube video post around 5:30.
aside from that, the actual resources and facilities that would be needed for these to become commonplace, i am on the fence about.
we are on the verge of a population explosion and a lot of our powersources are not sustainable.
technology is great, but unless we find new power sources and amterials, we wont even be able to sustain what we ahve now for very long.

I like my flesh, if snyone tries to implant me I'm getting out the shotgun.

No thank you, nothing good can really come of it. Just like everything else, at least we're familar with our current problems. I don't need to go to computer therapy because my mechanical arm replcement is trying to choke me due to the Bio-Mecha Share and Spare Center sent me a mass murderer's arm for my insurance from damaging my old arm.

Becoming perfect? What about flaws? Its just not right whether from a scientific or religous standpoint. I really dislike the narrator's claim of one or the other.......Bleh.

There's a difference between genetic screening and premature babies. A genetic disease is, for all intents and purposes, a life-long condition that can severely impact the quality of life. Being born premature, however, can be a bit of a "wait and see" gamble. I am very fortunate, for example, to have the IQ that I do and only one physical condition due to my prematurity at birth.

In terms of genetic diseases (aside from the ones I already mentioned) there are those like Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome, which causes abnormally fast aging - children affected by this genetic disorder tend not to live past the age of 13. And then there are some really horrible genetic diseases that I won't list because the images associated with them just won't go away.

Oh goody! Let's continue to play God and see what other monstrosities we can come up with...

Ha! For some reason this conversation reminds me of this quote by Gandalf: “Don’t tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good. But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine. ”

The fear mongering and paranoia in this thread is a little astounding. How many here have actually examined what transhumanism entails and how many are just spouting knee-jerk premonitions of apocalypse because they read this one scifi story this one time where robots did some bad stuff? Seriously, mass murderers' arms choking their new hosts? This is so beyond silly.

How many are opposed to prosthetics? Pacemakers? Organ transplants? Hair Plugs? Plastic surgery? Glasses? These are all examples of using technology to surpass and compliment our biological bodies. Transhumanism isn't just hive-mind horror stories. No one is robbing anyone of their free agency. The men in white coats will not abduct you in the night and forcefully install controller chips in your brain stem. It isn't eugenics. It isn't genocide. No one steals your individuality leaving you as a mindless husk. Any claims to this are pure and utter [censored].

Further, the idea that we should force technological stagnation because, "Hey, man! Who knows what kind of problems there might be, man!" seems, to me, to lack any degree of empathy. Do we ban a cancer cure because the longer life that results from it will give rise to other problems? Anyone who suggested this would rightly be seen as incredibly callous, at best. There will always be problems we face in the future, those that we know about and those that we don't. Will we be better equiped to deal with those future problems with modern physical ailments largely solved or while still contending with unnecessary death and disease?

Forgive me if I don't trust governments or corporations to do what's best for us.

Making Ghost in the Shell a reality? I'm all for it.

That is an entirely separate issue that is still a problem without continued technological advancement. Would you care to address any of my actual arguments?

I hope not, people in that show seem miserable all the time.

Batou generally seems pretty happy much of the time. And then there's Togusa. Plus, are we talking about the movies or the manga?

I drop in and watch the shows on advlt swim so I'm probably not on cue with the whole GITS universe. Very well done for an anime/manga. But its a rare time when I see a smile in that show.

Batou seems to be one of the more depressed to me. buying all that workout equipment to make himself remember who he is.

Oh, Batou remembers all right. He just doesn't talk about it (in the anime). Kinda like Saito. Also, the Major isn't typically fond of revealing much about herself either. But anyways...

while it may be an issue in other areas, its a pretty powerful argument in and of its self in reltation tot he topic.

Aside from the show which is pretty deep in some episodes, I'm not a fan of augmenting myself. I'm expecting people when give these advancements might acquire some kind of an addiction with this. much like with plastic surgery, tattoos, piercings, etc there will be plenty of people who will abuse this and possibly hurt themselves because they beleive they need it.

I'm ok with having a prothetic limb or fixing a genetic issue, but uploading your mind into an alternate universe to escape death? Would you really be alive, would that really be you? So many questions and uncertainities.

The Major should definately have a bit more to talk about, but might ruin the mystique around her. At one point I thought she was just a very well developed AI or something modified like the personalities you hear from the "spider-tanks".

Not really. It's no more convincing than any conspiracy theory. There is no shadow government or secretive corporate cabal bent on world domination. They want your money and they want your vote. Their motivations are pretty simple. Transhumanism is medical science. If people here are really suggesting we stop curing disease and saving lives because maybe somehow the Gub'mint will do something bad, then there is really nothing I can say. This is no different than anti-vaccination loons.

I mean (and this is edging into politics so maybe we should steer this another direction) there are a lot of health care problems in this country and around the world, but the fact that we offer it is definitely not one of them.

That alone, explains why such advanced technology would be misused. But transhumanism isn't really about saving people's lives, is it? It's about turning humans into what you want them to be. If some of us opted out, the rest of society would continue to change, to the point where we would be so different, we would be a hindrance to it. Medical progress for sure, but when you go beyond that and charge ahead for some imaginary futurist end goal, then it becomes ludicrous.


On a purely personal level, I don't like the idea because it's biggest advocates tend to be full of impotent nerdrage and are not all around very nice people.

We have advanced technology right now! Seriously, please explain how this hypothetical future tech is any different than modern medicine? Prosthetics, vaccines, anti-bodies, transplants, etc. Has each of these technologies substantially improved or harmed the average individual's quality of life? Why would this suddenly be different for more advanced versions of these exact same things?

Edit for yer edit:

Transhumanism is absolutely about saving lives and improving quality of life. It's exactly the same as basically every technology ever invented. Opting out is absolutely anybody's right, and the state of the rest of the population will not change that. It may become more difficult to operate in a world where biological and mechanical augmentation is the norm, but that's no different than present day for those suffering from deafness or blindness. And yet we currently have laws protecting the deaf and the blind from discriminatory practice. I think it's pretty ridiculous that some people would decry transhumanism as eugenics and then go on to demand we cease medical advancements that would prevent unnecessary deaths.

I'm sure someday there will be real actual meaningful debate about this issue, but it's not going to happen in my lifetime, so nothing to worry about.

I'll just play Deus Ex now.

Those things exist to improve human life, not change humans into something that scientists think would be better. But while you're on the topic, yes, vaccines have harmed people, and antibodies are a natural thing, not a technology.

If I am to assume you meant antibiotics, they have caused the creation of medicine resistant bacteria. There are always unforseen problems that will dog any new invention. In any case, at the current rate it seems like industry is set to recede, not increase in the future.

Transhumanism is not social engineering, it's not a cohesive movement that all scientists subscribe to. It's individual technologies and developments that exist to improve quality of life.

Have vaccines on the whole, harmed more people than they have helped? No one is suggesting that there exists some sort of no-risk panacea to correct all of society's ills. But the idea that since someone out there might react badly to a medical advancement that we should disallow all those who would benefit from using it is bordering on sociopathic.

-----

Yes, I meant antibiotics. Trying to multitask too much...

So, if you had knowledge of the future, you would have suggested banning antibiotics because it wasn't the final solution to the problem? Even though they have saved countless lives? As I said, there will always be problems that arise. I don't see how preserving current problems is more ideal than fixing them because we might have different problems in the future.

but its not purely medical science. sure its science. but youre forcing the entirety of the subject into the catergory of curing peoples ailments, when theres much more tot he picture.
im not gonna focus on the actual medical aspects, because ashas been said, we have that now.

I will instead come from a place that realizes this is also a conversation about augmentations that enhance performance.

Strictly as a regulartory body, the government would need to set up societal laws to ensure that people with or without these modifications arent discrimated against and if law makers cant agree, then there must be compromise, which means some out in the cold. theres a whole lot of government stuff that would be tricky to figure out that has nothing to do with conspiracy.

I'll only touch on this part breifly because youre right, we dont need to get too political, but its most certainly not to say that the gevernment always has your best interest in mind. true, they want votes and money- but all that says is that they have some peoples best interest in mind.

I for one would be interested to see how it is handed in the work force. I believe companies would be more inclined to hire someone who can do a better job, even if its a result of a techno-surgical enhancement. This would seem to create a lot of friction on both sides. Should people have to go under the knife and/or soldering iron just to stay competitive in the workforce?
Think about this. Driving a car is a privelage, and not a right. And while some can get around it by taking lower paying less demanding jobs or using other means of transport, you'd be hard pressed to have a lucrative career without one.

Thre are huge multitudes of rammifications that would come with a society's majority augmenting themselves and at the end of the day, theres mothing wrong with being a human and knowing that some day youre going to die.

And being a lawyer without a law degree is kinda hard too. You don't have to go to medical school to be a doctor, in theory, but it sure helps!

And companies already have to deal with "being more inclined" to hire the better worker - they have to deal with disability laws in relation to work all the time. Companies can get sued to oblivion if they discriminate against someone with a disability who otherwise would be capable of performing the job with moderate accommodations. Likewise, if a company discriminated against a non-augmented human, there will be plenty of lawyers happy to sue the company. Or vice-versa.