Is Trans-humanism all it seems to be?

Bostrom's paper is very effective in highlighting the supposed benefits of trans-humanism... I would like to pose a few question however, regarding some draw backs that I personally have against a few points he made in the paper.

I cannot argue with the fact that happy, healthier, more intelligent people is something that we should, and for the most part do, strive for. I myself strive for all of these things, and while it may not be as effective as if I were implementing post humanism technology, I still get personal benefit and self motivation from doing so. Without following trans-humanism, most of us, or maybe simply the small group of the population who are similarly minded to us Mines students, tend to take the problem-solving approach to problems. Bostrom seems to imply that this is a trans-humanist quality, as they tend to "think it better to take the initiative to 'do something about it' rather than sit around complaining". It seems that this is quite a bold statement to make, implying that normal humans aren't focus on solving problems and sit around waiting for someone else to do. I highly doubt that everyone studying engineering,  medicine, the sciences, etc follows the trans-humanist doctrine.

What are your thoughts on this?

Another argument that Bostrom made was that "technological progress is closely linked to economic development, economic growth - more more precisely, productivity growth...". I would argue that this is not always the case. While researching for my discovery paper I found an article from The Economist relating to the subject, which quoted economics professor Robert Gordon who argued that "invention since 2000 has centered on entertainment and communication devices that are smaller, smarter, and more capable, but do not fundamentally change labor productivity or the standard of living in the way that electric light, motor cars, or indoor plumbing changed it" (Buttonwood).

I'm aware this statement applies mostly to the civilian sector, but what are your thoughts on technological development and direct benefit and economic growth the to the general population? Does this always hold true? Is there a difference between the effects in westernized countries as opposed to those who are currently industrializing, or even developing?

Personal Drone Regulations

Just came across this link online, figured I'd post.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/faa-can-make-all-drone-flights-illegal-appeals-court-rules?utm_source=mbtwitter

"Better to reign in hell, than to serve in heaven."

Obviously, the gains of transhumanism are great, here is just a few that I took from Nick Bostrom's "Transhumanist Values":

-Increased Lifespan
-Increased Intellectual capacity
-Increased bodily functions

It seems that becoming transhuman is positively a great thing it seems that there are no setbacks to transhumanism. This of course made me pause, for if Houser's economics has taught me anything, rarely is anything 100% good.

So the question I ask is this: What are we to lose by becoming transhuman?

My answer follows: If we choose to become transhuman, we would lose, if not all, of our humanity.
Is this such a bad thing? I would argue yes. Yes, for we would lose our purpose.

According to Bostrom, the entire core belief of transhumanism is to explore the trans- and posthuman realms.

Then, what is the purpose of humanity?
I of course, hold no definitive answer. However, I believe that we should accomplish this undefined purpose first, then possibly move on to other realms.

Or at least, that is my 'human' (read, flawed) understanding of it.

Let's Arrest the Robot

So I've been reading a lot about robots and androids and all of that good stuff and I wanted to get the classes opinion on something. If autonomous machines hurt someone, or commit some type of crime who should be held responsible? Can we hold a robot responsible? Would the fear of law even affect them?

I think this is an important moral dialogue that needs to be addressed before robots are out and about in the world. Even in a military setting, if a robot were to kill an innocent civilian who would take the blame?

The Holy Fool

I would like to talk about John Isidore, the "special" from Philip Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Lincoln challenged us to think about Isidore as a "holy fool," but after some research I find myself questioning the details of how Isidore fits that description. Here's a little of the information that I've come across in my research:

• There's an obvious religious connotation to the term. Commonly referred to as "foolishness for Christ," these individuals sell all their possessions, act crazed to draw attention to religion, and spend their time and energy to serve their God.
• However, holy fool has expanded to have a more general meaning. The British & World English Dictionary define a holy fool as one "who appears unintelligent and unsophisticated but who has other redeeming qualities."
• There was a man known to people of the Orthodox faith as Blessed Isidore the Fool for Christ who died in the late 1400s. This man abandoned the privileged lifestyle that he was raised in to live in rags, preach about God, and stay up late into the night praying for those he met during the day.

Do you think Philip Dick thought about holy fools, or more specifically the Saint, when he wrote about the character John Isidore?

I can see at least three aspects of Isidore that might be interpreted as having the qualities of a "holy fool", each with less aspects of religion. There is his following of Mercerism. Also, he quickly develops an obsession with Pris, brings home wine and other delicacies to share with her, and is willing to quit his job to stay and protect her. And finally, Isidore is a low-IQ individual with many loyal and empathetic qualities.

Do you see John Isidore as a holy fool? What parts of the novel stand out to you in relation to this term and which description do you think fits him the best?

What is There To Fear About Artificial Intelligence?

When I was about twelve I remember a friend of mine saying "It must suck to be a robot or clone."
     "Why?" I asked him.
     "Because" he replied, "It's like you're alive but you don't have a soul."
I do not remember the context of this brief conversation other than that it took place outside a movie theater. For obvious reasons reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep made it come back into my head.

I remember at the time feeling conflicted. I am not a religious person, so my reply to my friend was that no one has a soul, we all just have our minds so how could being a hyper intelligent robot or an exact biological copy of another human be less of an existence? Yet, despite my own world view granting me a logic in which there was nothing wrong, the idea of a non-naturally occurring intelligence did bother me. In reading Philip Dick's book I realized that that sentiment still lingers. I do have sympathy for the androids, they have a great deal of injustice thrust upon them. Yet there is a part of me that says they all should be done away with, not just if they kill owners on other planets and come to earth but that their production, use, and existence should stop.

I have to think I am far from unique in this sentiment. Besides Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep there are many other stories in writing and film, Frankenstein, 2001 A Space Odyssey, Terminator to name just a few, in which an artificial intelligence seeks to destroy its creator, us. So culturally we seem to have a phobia of intelligence that mirrors our own. I wonder why we have such a fear. Is it the conscious belief that all artificial intelligence will eventually hold a revolution against us that drives our fear? Or is that just an argument we have invented to justify a more instinctual fear? If it is instinctual, what evolutionary pressures droves the development of that instinct?

Reflecting on Nevada

During class last week we read the poem Early Morning Test Light over Nevada, 1955. This particular poem struck a chord within me. Yes, it beautiful verses and illustrations moved me, but the true influence came from the depiction of my home state. The author painted this beautiful backdrop of a family surviving in the rural farms of a tested land. He mentioned some of the landscape and living conditions while still focusing on the effects of the testing. The author repainted my home in a wonderful way.

After reading and discussing the poem I really started to wonder what all he and we had left out. Granted, the poem was about the effects of testing a bomb and not Nevada, but the poem left me with a false sense of my home state. He made it seem as if the testing destroyed the lives of the poor people who just wanted to survive. Yes, this was a horrific event and time in our history that destroyed much of what we call humanity. I am, in my personal life, seeking to further understand this. I am not focusing on that aspect, but instead the art of exclusion. The author never mentioned how bare the state of Nevada is. People don't fully comprehend what I mean when I say that there is literally nothing out there. I appreciate and love my state, but I also acknowledge that it isn't the greatest of living conditions. So, while reading through this poem I couldn't help asking myself what are we missing.

The bombs and bomb testing destroyed the planet. I would like to again emphasis that I do not disagree with this. However, this particular poem really made me question whether or not we as artists, scientist, and even poets are obligated to include all aspect of what we are depicting. Should we prove a point or present a situation?

So, I ask you: what are we missing?

Drones - Poem and Video

Here's the video I was talking about that inspired my Drone poem. Apt for next week.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4NRJoCNHIs


Overcast

I wish they could have tasted my grandmother’s vegetables,
savored the flavors from the bright red tomatoes
before they traveled half-way across the world.

I wish I could see the face of the person in control.
I wish he would relinquish control
I wish I had control

I wish only for a few questions,
to share a small piece of my family.
I wish only for a few moments,
to give them the justice the media hasn’t.

I wish to be more than a number.
I wish to be more than a shape.
I wish you understood shapes
other than concentric circles and X’s.

I wish your cameras had better resolution
so you could see the true face of terror.
I wish your fear was my fear
at least faces have form,
bounds,
limits.

I wish for bright blue sky
without the deathly hum of silence.
I wish looking up didn’t remind me of staring down
at my grandmother’s grave.

I wish for cloudy days.
I wish for blankets of grey,
for days where I don’t feel afraid.

McRevolutionaries, please share your poems

Joan’s Rib

Science Friday, National Public Radio: Scientists conduct DNA tests on what is believed to be the remains of Joan of Arc. DNA tests will show if the human bone is from a man or a woman, and carbon-14 testing should help date it. A study of pollens will determine if it originated in the 15^th Century and if, like Joan, it was burned in the spring.

A split bone wedged between two smooth stones

made international headlines as I wondered

why 600 years later they’d go looking for it.

Convicted of heresy, witchcraft, for wearing

the wrong clothes, burned alive, three times, at 19.

They looked past the curve of her hips,

the hint of breast beneath the armor,

La Pucelle, the maid,

with the saintly voices in her head.

In the name of the god she roared for,

on horse, sword drawn to the sky,

the politicians and scientific men thought nothing

of saviors and bones, or histories being made.

Stranger still that they found the fragment,

the mere chip of DNA, larger than a pebble,

a fish scale, a weathered piece of bark,

in the river Seine, near Paris, 69 miles

and six centuries from where her flesh burned.

And I imagined the man combing

the shoreline that day,

who thought to pick up the blackened bone,

slip it into his pocket, thumb smoothing

over the indentation where it once attached

to the spine,

the man, in which the thought occurred

to take it to the lab, where a connection

was found from a  piece of woven cloth—

the only genetic match for Joan of Arc’s rib—

saved in 1492, blood-burnt

and smoldering in the coals,

picked up from the ashes by a child

who locked it away in a small wooden box,                                                    

placed it carefully under her bed

and prayed.                             

Threnody

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HilGthRhwP8

Should have posted this before tonight's discussion, not sure how I did not think to do so when so many of our readings being focused on Hiroshima. This is Krzysztof Penderecki's Threnody for the Victim's of Hiroshima.  It is wildly considered to be one of the greatest 20th century pieces of music, though you will hear why it is not very popular to listen to or perform. It was revolutionary in its composition. It was written in 1960 when it was thought by many that all possible sounds of a string orchestra had been already been discovered and used. Penderecki proved this theory wrong. There are no digital noises in this piece, the only instruments used are violin, viola, cello, and double bass, just as in a classical string orchestra.

Found Poem - Trave

Before I forget to post it, here is my found poem Lincoln asked me to post on the blog.

Trave noun \trāv\

1.       A frame to confine an unruly horse or ox for shoeing

Origin: Middle English

To the trave

ler: Even

ts of re

cent have mad

e it obvious

 that the

re is no fool

-pro

of way of

detecting a Terror

ist.

The Terror

ist

individual

however, is often

a “type”

exemplified by the

beard,

turban,

& clothing of the like,

with revolution

ary time bomb

in brief

case.

Terrorists may come

from all

walks of life,

but profess a

single

faith, and exercise

one

go

al in trade and

profession.

In addition,

the Terrorist organ

izations have made concert

ed efforts to go under

ground for the purpose

of infiltration and

destruct

ion.

Footnote: This poem was constructed based off of the “How to Spot a Communist” pamphlets and printed by popular magazines distributed in the 1950s during the Red Scare. It has been adjusted to reflect the widespread prejudice after the attacks on 9/11. Below is the opening paragraph from the original text.

How to Spot a Communist

Events of recent years have made it obvious that there is no fool-proof way of detecting a

Communist. The Communist individual is no longer a "type" exemplified by the bearded and

coarse revolutionary with time bomb in briefcase. U.S. Communists come from all walks of life,

profess all faiths, and exercise all trades and professions. In addition, the Communist Party,

USA, has made concerted efforts to go underground for the purpose of infiltration.

http://www.niu.edu/~rfeurer/labor/PDF%20Files/How%20to%20Spot%20a%20Communist.pdf

Atomic Bomb Art

Here is a link to a gallery of some powerful and evocative artistic pieces created by Japanese following the WWII bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The art above is of a depiction of when the artist came across an intact skeleton still sitting in a tilted barber's chair. Haunting stuff, for sure. Powerful works come from powerful feelings. I was wondering which is your favorite (or piece you connect to the most) and why? I chose this image because of the intriguing way such a catastrophic event can cause normal life to halt instantaneously. A real tragedy.

I found this short and powerful video of part of Oppenheimer's speech after the trial run of the atomic bomb in New Mexico. I interpreted his show of emotion as remorse, what do you see in his tone and expressions?

Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8H7Jibx-c0