Transhumanism

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

STWELCH

I'm all for it. There's a hell of a lot of things to take into consideration (especially when messing around with dna) but if it can be done safely then I would advocate it being done.

I would totally get a flamethrower implant on my arm.

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

domatron23

I'm all for it. There's a hell of a lot of things to take into consideration (especially when messing around with dna) but if it can be done safely then I would advocate it being done.

I would totally get a flamethrower implant on my arm.

[QUOTE="domatron23"][QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

THUMPTABLE

I'm all for it. There's a hell of a lot of things to take into consideration (especially when messing around with dna) but if it can be done safely then I would advocate it being done.

I would totally get a flamethrower implant on my arm.

Yup. She was awesome.

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

STWELCH

I think I agree with you, if I understood what you meant. I'm for improving living people with disabilities, and possibly if a birth defect could be fixed before birth, but no further than that.

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

btaylor2404

I think I agree with you, if I understood what you meant. I'm for improving living people with disabilities, and possibly if a birth defect could be fixed before birth, but no further than that.

Exactly. I'm more advocating that it be used for repairing, not for radically changing the human condition physically, emotionally, psychologically, etc.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

STWELCH

I think I agree with you, if I understood what you meant. I'm for improving living people with disabilities, and possibly if a birth defect could be fixed before birth, but no further than that.

Exactly. I'm more advocating that it be used for repairing, not for radically changing the human condition physically, emotionally, psychologically, etc.

Say if mucking around with the genes of a zygote could make it so that wisdom teeth and the appendix never formed later in life would you condone that?

I'm for it to the max. I want to be a cyborg, it's the only way we'll compete with computers in the future.

I think it will replace biological evolution. Evolution through technology will be the future: We can die when we want to, space will be nowhere near as limited as it is today, we can live on any planet, etc. It brings out so many possibilities.

Why are you against it Stwelch?

[QUOTE="STWELCH"][QUOTE="btaylor2404"][QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Just want to get some secular perspectives on the tampering with humans. Cybernetic implants, tampering with DNA, etc.

Personally, I am strongly against purposefully enhancing humans for the sake of it; this does not preclude attempts at restoration of say, eyesight or the like.

domatron23

I think I agree with you, if I understood what you meant. I'm for improving living people with disabilities, and possibly if a birth defect could be fixed before birth, but no further than that.

Exactly. I'm more advocating that it be used for repairing, not for radically changing the human condition physically, emotionally, psychologically, etc.

Say if mucking around with the genes of a zygote could make it so that wisdom teeth and the appendix never formed later in life would you condone that?

Eh, that's a toss up. As a person who has both their wisdom teeth and appendix taken out, the idea would be somewhat appealing.

Either way, it doesn't radically change the physical human condition, so it wouldn't be a huge loss for me.

I'm for it to the max. I want to be a cyborg, it's the only way we'll compete with computers in the future.

I think it will replace biological evolution. Evolution through technology will be the future: We can die when we want to, space will be nowhere near as limited as it is today, we can live on any planet, etc. It brings out so many possibilities.

Why are you against it Stwelch?

SimpJee

Besides the religious reasons?

Well, on one hand, who will be able to afford these improvements? Only the rich, which will hurt the already shaky divide between rich and poor.

Also, you have the fun sci-fi scenarios where you would have Terminator like war happen (It's amazing to see how many bioethicists believe that may happen)

Also, any attempt to create a true democracy after any form of transformation becomes available will be void; any free society is found on the ideal of "natural rights", or rights inherently guaranteed due to one's humanity. However, now we will have transhumans walking around, throwing that concept for a loop.

Besides the religious reasons?

Well, on one hand, who will be able to afford these improvements? Only the rich, which will hurt the already shaky divide between rich and poor.

Also, you have the fun sci-fi scenarios where you would have Terminator like war happen (It's amazing to see how many bioethicists believe that may happen)

Also, any attempt to create a true democracy after any form of transformation becomes available will be void; any free society is found on the ideal of "natural rights", or rights inherently guaranteed due to one's humanity. However, now we will have transhumans walking around, throwing that concept for a loop.

STWELCH

I guess in my world where this happens, capitalism is king still. Companies that make this technology want to make tons of money, so why would you only sell to the rich? I mean, comapanies target products at the rich or early adopters all the time, it's where we get the trickle down effect. Why would this be different? Also, if we modify ourselves to we can fight those terminators :P That's why I mentioned it's the only way we'll be able to compete with computers. If we combine part of ourselves with technology.

Have you ever seen Ghost in the Shell? That is what my dream is, to not only be a cyborg, but to be completely free of the body and enter the internet. I'm such a horrible nerd, and ever since I became an atheist now it all seems possible as it's based on science. Not the free of body part, that kind of combines religion with science somewhat.

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Besides the religious reasons?

Well, on one hand, who will be able to afford these improvements? Only the rich, which will hurt the already shaky divide between rich and poor.

Also, you have the fun sci-fi scenarios where you would have Terminator like war happen (It's amazing to see how many bioethicists believe that may happen)

Also, any attempt to create a true democracy after any form of transformation becomes available will be void; any free society is found on the ideal of "natural rights", or rights inherently guaranteed due to one's humanity. However, now we will have transhumans walking around, throwing that concept for a loop.

SimpJee

I guess in my world where this happens, capitalism is king still. Companies that make this technology want to make tons of money, so why would you only sell to the rich? I mean, comapanies target products at the rich or early adopters all the time, it's where we get the trickle down effect. Why would this be different? Also, if we modify ourselves to we can fight those terminators :P That's why I mentioned it's the only way we'll be able to compete with computers. If we combine part of ourselves with technology.

Have you ever seen Ghost in the Shell? That is what my dream is, to not only be a cyborg, but to be completely free of the body and enter the internet. I'm such a horrible nerd, and ever since I became an atheist now it all seems possible as it's based on science. Not the free of body part, that kind of combines religion with science somewhat.

This is radical technology; only the rich will be able to afford the best, and the most quality enhancements. Sure, the lower classes would be able to get it (eventually) but it would not be near the quality that the richer have; it would simply be another divide.

This is radical technology; only the rich will be able to afford the best, and the most quality enhancements. Sure, the lower classes would be able to get it (eventually) but it would not be near the quality that the richer have; it would simply be another divide.

STWELCH

That's the way a capitalist society works stwelch. However, with this new technology I think even the trickle down product would be an amazing improvement for the lives of the poor today. Also, there would still be a government that has these upgrades probably way beyond the public sector to enforce laws and compliance with the companies producing this stuff.

By the way, thank you very much. You've found my favorite topic ever :D

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

This is radical technology; only the rich will be able to afford the best, and the most quality enhancements. Sure, the lower classes would be able to get it (eventually) but it would not be near the quality that the richer have; it would simply be another divide.

SimpJee

That's the way a capitalist society works stwelch. However, with this new technology I think even the trickle down product would be an amazing improvement for the lives of the poor today. Also, there would still be a government that has these upgrades probably way beyond the public sector to enforce laws and compliance with the companies producing this stuff.

By the way, thank you very much. You've found my favorite topic ever :D

Well, as a socialist, it does factor in with my criticism of capitalism; this would just add to the divide.

Well, as a socialist, it does factor in with my criticism of capitalism; this would just add to the divide.

STWELCH

As an objectivist, socialism really is not my thing. I think it is important to make sure the divide is not huge however, as that just creates bad situations all around but I do not think this would heighten the divide more than say when a person buys a ferrari versus a 92' Honda Civic. If you read any science fiction books, specifically the cyberpunk genre you'll find that from what these people can dream up even the cheap models help humans in ways which we cannot imagine.

Do you like reading sci-fi by any chance? If so I have a few recommendations and it'd be great to talk to you about what they mean ethically. The book I think we'd get the most out of is called: Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan.

It's a noirish detective story, but deals with issues such as religion in a time where if you don't want to die ...you don't have to.

[QUOTE="STWELCH"]

Well, as a socialist, it does factor in with my criticism of capitalism; this would just add to the divide.

SimpJee

As an objectivist, socialism really is not my thing. I think it is important to make sure the divide is not huge however, as that just creates bad situations all around but I do not think this would heighten the divide more than say when a person buys a ferrari versus a 92' Honda Civic. If you read any science fiction books, specifically the cyberpunk genre you'll find that from what these people can dream up even the cheap models help humans in ways which we cannot imagine.

Do you like reading sci-fi by any chance? If so I have a few recommendations and it'd be great to talk to you about what they mean ethically. The book I think we'd get the most out of is called: Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan.

It's a noirish detective story, but deals with issues such as religion in a time where if you don't want to die ...you don't have to.

I'll read anything that is thought provoking, and that novel does sound so.