Tuesday, November 18, 2014
"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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think one of my main concerns with transhumanism is that I believe it would accelerate inequality rather than eliminate it. While Bostrom and Co. argue that widespread access is a fundamental tenant of transhumanism, I'm not convinced that it's a practical one. Those with funds and access will always have the next technology before those without it, and this creates a huge problem when we start dealing with modifying humanity.
ReplyDeleteThe new "standard" for a human, even if slightly increased, sets a requirement that is no longer on an equal playing field for everyone. If parents don't have money to enhance their new children, they are automatically at a disadvantage. The lines become blurred when defining average or standard, and even more complicated when dealing with things such as birth defects, but I think the point remains the same. I haven't heard any arguments to the contrary.
Interesting thoughts guys. I totally agree with Bradley that trans-humanism will accelerate technological inequality. We are so far away from establishing equality in terms of human rights around the globe, and I only think that when we establish this goal, if it is even possible, that transhumanism could be implemented fairly. I know many of the readings touched on the possibility of inequality as a major concern for transhumanism, but I do not think the authors took it as seriously as I expected. I think that we would all agree that there are human rights violations in almost every corner of the world, and these will only be magnified by transhuman efforts.
ReplyDeleteThe new definition for a human scares me. I think that the transhumanist movement had a similar effect on Paolo Bacigalupi. Without giving any spoilers, I will say that the ethical and moral decision faced by the group and their ultimate choice (and how easy it was) shook me because the story seemed so plausible. I think our current definitions of morality and ethics do not allow for many of the end transhumanist goals, and that a true shift of paradigms, or a large scale revolution would be what will eventually allow it.