It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What's your opinion on Transhumanism? [>H]

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 07:33 PM
Transhumanism is how I want the world as we know it to end. I think the world will be a more interesting place when we're not limited by what we're predisposed to think. I think that, given the ordinary circumstances most people live in, and the sheer number of people, that there are people out there who will live and die without ever coming up with an original idea.

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 07:34 PM
reply to post by seb2882

Unless one of the values of that society was to teach (grass roots inside families etc) understanding about enhancements, how to maintain them, and all that jazz. Like in societies where every average joe owns a gun, its not a big deal, and everyone learns how to be responsible with them.

Catch my drift? not sure I've explained it as well as I could.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:07 PM
I beleive in the technological singularity, which is that at some time in the relatively near future, humankind will create a superintelligent AI, and since it would be more intelligent than man, would create an even more complex and intelligent AI, which would also do the same... This would create an intelligence explosion which would mean humanity would no longer be the dominant species on this planet.

I don't think this is a bad thing. If you look at human history, we have a terrible track record of being able to rule ourselves. Warfare is constant, even with all our current technology and power, members of our species still suffer from starvation and homelessness. A more intelligent being is required to govern our species. One that can meet all of our needs in real-time, one that can predict our actions and decisions, and stay one (or many more) steps ahead of any conflict. A being is needed that can end our species' pain.

I beleive that cybernetic technology will precede the development of an AI. We have already made RFID implants that can interface with the human nervous system in experiments, and a comany (Verichip) is making RFID implants that keep track of individuals, but as of yet true cybernetics that allow humans to directly interface with electronics via their nervous system are not being manufactured to my knowledge. However I expect to see technology like this in maybe 10-20 years. (just a rough guess on my part)

Once a large percentage of our populace is using cybernetic technology witch could allow them to link with the internet, and we have an extensive data infrastructure, any AI created in this environment would have access to millions, maybe billions, of people's memories, hopes, dreams. It would allow it govern us much more effectively than any government made up of human individuals. It would know the wants and needs of everyone linked to its datanet.

After the development of AI I imagine nanotechnology would become developed for practical purposes. I don't beleive that humans have the responsibility to control this type of technology. For instance, nanobots that could break down carbon and build more nanobots from it could easily wipe away all life from our planet, not even microorganisms would survive, as they are also carbon-based. It would a destruction more complete than any nuclear war could ever possibly inflict. In human hands, any technology, especially one as powerful as this, will be used in warfare. This kind of technology is best used and controlled by an intelligence greater than ours, one that is more responsible, can think of contigincies and failsafes we couldn't imagine. In the hands of an AI, advanced nanotechnology could turn dirt into food (literally), raise cities the size of NYC from solid bedrock in a day (by reconstructing the atoms of the bedrock into contruction materials, and then moving those materials into place are theoretically possible with nanotech) and turn our planet into a pollution-free developed paradise.

Humankind would not become the enemy of this new species of AI, and we would not be abandoned or even a hindrance. It would coexist with us. The datanet we created would be its living space. It would desire the end of warfare and conflict out of interests of its own survival. Any kind of war would end up destroying the data infrastructure it resides within. Its also doubtful it would want to "replace" us with mindless automated slaves, as they would need constant direction by the AI to perform tasks, and we can creatively and intelligently problem solve and work on our own. Its primary want as an intelligent entity would be to learn and grow, and humankind would be best suited to build more data infrastructure and provide more experiences for it, simply by living our lives. Its also probable that through cybernetics, we could even become synthetic beings ourselves, transferring our conciousness into the same datanet the AI lives in.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:14 PM
Sorry for the gigantic post. I wanted to share my beleif in how transhumanism will come to be, but the tech singularity is really complex, and what I shared is just a summary of one possibility of how it would occur.

Here are some links:

A highly publicised extension to the experiment, in which a simpler array was implanted into Warwick's wife—with the aim of creating a form of telepathy or empathy using the Internet to communicate the signal from afar—was also successful, resulting in the first purely electronic communication experiment between the nervous systems of two humans[25] Finally, the effect of the implant on Warwick's hand function was measured using the University of Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP). It was feared that directly interfacing with the nervous system might cause some form of damage or interference, but no measurable effect was found.

^ This link, also from my sig, tells how we've already made working cybernetic tech, but its not being mass-produced yet.

^ This link is pretty interesting. Its too big to quote, but shows a timeline of how the tech singularity might unfold. I personally think its a little to early though. (but would be cool, because I would probably live to see it)

Again, sorry for the giant posts. I don't usually talk this much, but this is a topic im really interested in. Hope you enjoy the info!

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by peskyhumans

Thanks for the links, I thought that was pretty interesting

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 05:27 PM
I think those nanos will be sweet if they are really all that strong. Can they make us imortal?
Even if not, I want some. As long as they don't cost a million each.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 06:14 PM
If we can improve the quality of our experience we should by all means do so. Transhumanism certainly fits the bill. Only the fearful will try to stop us, but evolution is a force of nature, biological or otherwise.

The future can't come soon enough!

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in