Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Also, transhumanism thread Y/N?

I guess Y, because I feel VERY strongly about this, and it's reasonably related.

I gave you all a transhumanism thread last time, and we all remember how that ended.

[Lagslayer]

Oh, wait, now I remember that. Or am I thinking of a different thread? Did I even post in your thread? The one I'm thinking of feels like it was a couple years ago.

[Descan]

... Sputtering out?

Anyway, I don't see why genetic material matters all that much. Sure, keep a record of the human genome for historical purposes, but I don't see why it's important to keep it functional. It's just instructions to make a human. To me, the brain is much more important, especially since the brain can figure out how to make another human with technology, or a non-human, either AI or uplifted animals, or whole-cloth "alien". Eventually.

"Do the ends justify the means?" usually is asked for things like genocide to create a racial utopia, or killing a few people to save thousands, or things of that nature. Going mechano-human and discarding un-needed bodies... I don't see how that needs justification.

[Knit tie]

I for one, believe the method of achieving immortality is as important as the immortality itself. Why not just increase the longevity of the biological tissue instead of replacing it completely? I hold the biological (especially genetic) integrity of the human species very highly. I feel that to consciously manipulate the individual genes is crossing the line, and that it is different from natural evolution, in a cultural sense (which is also important).

Do the ends really justify the means?

Also, transhumanism thread Y/N?

I guess Y, because I feel VERY strongly about this, and it's reasonably related.

Natural evolution has stopped affecting humans ever since our reproductive fitness stopped being dependent on our genetic makeup. Besides, what is it to consciously manipulate an individual gene when you are simply replacing it with a gene from another human in order to treat a disease?

What is it to be human? What defines humans on a fundamental level?

Why is being human preferable to being another species of a sentient being? What evidence do we have that states that being a human is inherently better than being something other than human, assuming that that something is capable of conscious thought?

Ohh, the fires of our discourse shall eclipse the heavens.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

... Sputtering out?

No. It was locked temporally by me and then permanently by Toady following the very counter-productive actions of an individual or individuals who shall remain unnamed for the sake of civility alone. I'm still somewhat peeved by the whole thing, as it was a good thread otherwise.

Nonetheless, my advice is against a new transhumanism thread, as Bay 12 has a tendency to make the same thread mistakes over and over again.

[Knit tie]

... Sputtering out?

No. It was locked temporally by me and then permanently by Toady following the very counter-productive actions of an individual or individuals who shall remain unnamed for the sake of civility alone. I'm still somewhat peeved by the whole thing, as it was a good thread otherwise.

Yeah, that's not pleasant in the slightest.

But we can always try again. Trial and error, eh? 

[Descan]

Maybe we can make a sort of two-fer thread. "Transhumanism and Ukraine!"

Cut down on the work Toady has to do when it inevitably falls to the gutter and explodes.

[Putnam]

Ukraine went bad multiple times, Tranhumanism went bad the one time for the one reason which isn't really an intrinsic part of the topic.

[Lagslayer]

... Sputtering out?

Anyway, I don't see why genetic material matters all that much. Sure, keep a record of the human genome for historical purposes, but I don't see why it's important to keep it functional. It's just instructions to make a human. To me, the brain is much more important, especially since the brain can figure out how to make another human with technology, or a non-human, either AI or uplifted animals, or whole-cloth "alien". Eventually.

Natural evolution has stopped affecting humans ever since our reproductive fitness stopped being dependent on our genetic makeup. Besides, what is it to consciously manipulate an individual gene when you are simply replacing it with a gene from another human in order to treat a disease?

What is it to be human? What defines humans on a fundamental level?

Why is being human preferable to being another species of a sentient being? What evidence do we have that states that being a human is inherently better than being something other than human, assuming that that something is capable of conscious thought?

Ohh, the fires of our discourse shall eclipse the heavens.

Why the brain? Why draw the arbitrary line there? Certainly, alien species have already conceived all of our ideas and technology.

It's not a question of logic; that has already played out. Logic is how the information is processed. This is a question of emotion; this is what we wish to accomplish with the knowledge that we have accumulated. I feel that our genetic integrity is worth protecting. That it is the end all, most basic thing that defines a human.

What do you feel is worth protecting? Why?

I'm not saying being human is necessarily better, but it is distinct. It is what I was born as. It is what I identify with. Before you were anything else, before you had your first thoughts, you were a zygote with human DNA. It is the thing from which your entire physical being grew. Your were also shaped by human culture. I choose because a line has to be drawn somewhere; a line which must not be crossed. And this feels like a good place to draw that line.


I'll try to keep this civil.

[Putnam]

How do you draw the line between something that was born human and something that was created identical to experience, think and feel identically to one, even if it has none of the biological components associated with one?

[Lagslayer]

How do you draw the line between something that was born human and something that was created identical to experience, think and feel identically to one, even if it has none of the biological components associated with one?

Then it is not human, in my opinion. Like, at all. If it acts like a cat, thinks like a cat, and associates itself with cats, but is very clearly a dog, then it is a dog.

[Descan]

... Why are you bringing aliens into this?

We have never even seen non-Earth-based microbial life, let alone intelligent life. And even if it existed, it's almost certainly nowhere near us and would have little impact on us beyond the philosophical. I highly doubt we'd even be able to communicate with them, let alone figure out what technologies they know and don't know.

Anyway, brain is special because it's unique among the animals (don't give me the whole "Ravens and octopods and dolphins, oh my!" They're smart, but not technology-using, so we're still unique) and, more importantly (because any immortality technology would HAVE to be, as a moral and ethical concern, a deeply personal choice therefore it is the person who matters in this question and not the species), the brain is the center of our personality.  It is all that matters to our personality, it's not like you suddenly turn into another person if you lose a limb or something. Whereas our DNA mutates all the time and has little-to-no affect on us personally, outside of cancer, and a) that's not exactly a good thing, and b) only brain-tumors are likely to affect the personality and identity.

DNA just... doesn't matter, outside of reproduction, for the singular human. The brain does.

Edit: What does that mean? "Not human", okay, we can agree on that, it's not literally human, but what does that -mean-? It's sentient, sapient, has feelings. Does it not being human mean that it doesn't deserve "human" rights, even if it shares all the things that makes humans human? Or does it not being human not enter into that, in which case why even bother with the whole "Is it human or isn't it?" outside the academic?

[Lagslayer]

Aliens were for context. A reference point.

I'm all for preserving the brain. It's the culmination of both what and who we are, carrying our genetic material and our thought patterns simultaneously. For this reason, I believe is is the single most important part of us. This is also why I believe it's biological integrity must also be preserved, and not the thoughts approximately translated into another medium. If nothing else can be preserved, this is the final, FINAL thing that must be kept.

Or were you not for moving our brains into computers? I'm losing track of everyone's individual statements.

[Descan]

Neural replacement :v

[MaximumZero]

How do you draw the line between something that was born human and something that was created identical to experience, think and feel identically to one, even if it has none of the biological components associated with one?

You don't. Should we find sentient alliums, or better yet, enhance ourselves, what makes the "others" better/worse/different from us?