It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Prometheus: The Bioengineering and Transhumanism Debate

page: 2
17
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


Or there would be a whole lot of death. My IQ is very high. How does the old saying go? "Ignorance is bliss." My forte is analysis coupled with an obscene amount of college credits (kind of hilarious actually). When I look out into the world, I see a whole lot of things going very, very wrong and it's almost consuming. The potential outcomes of all that I see are dark and, on a daily basis, I desperately try to look for those glimmers of hope. I have always been this way and in that sense, my personality has developed in such a manner that I can survive looking at dark probabilities. Now take someone who has been blissfully unaware of a variety of things and bump up their IQ and ability to absorb information. What would they see for perhaps the first time ever? A dying world in the midst of climatic change, whether by temperature, movement of the poles or the perturbation of the jet stream, where our oceans appear to be dying and the world's food belts may not be getting the precipitation they need? And that's just one probability that I see and I have trained myself to keep hope.

However, that's assuming that what they intend on making to increase intellectual capacity actually can duplicate the neural network of someone with a high iq. One of the things that is suggested is augmenting memory. High IQ, while frequently associated with a prodigious memory, is not based solely on the ability to memorize information. What goes on in a gifted brain is different than what goes on in a normal brain. These researchers used fMRI to document the difference in neural activity between the mathematically gifted and the norm with pictorial results on page 3, Mathematically gifted male adolescents activate a unique brain network during mental rotation

Perhaps this could explain that strange duality in thinking that Tetra brought up. If they are simply augmenting memory but advertising it as making a person smarter, then it's not really going to replicate the neural network of a gifted or better brain. Already, there's a kind of attitude out in the world that is rather dismissive of the highly intelligent. Everybody thinks that they are pretty smart. Give them an enhancement that is advertised as making them smarter through boosting that memory, it'll only get worse. Garbage in, garbage out. Would such a thing improve logic and critical thought? Would they be able to discern between the b.s. and the factual? Would they be able to combine all that information into something meaningful? If whatever cognitive enhancer is made doesn't do those things, then they will be no better than a computer as a computer, when processing information, cannot discern the difference between whether the information provided is correct or not. Garbage in, garbage out.




posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 


I imagine most of these concepts would apply to new borns and children and not regular adults. In fact the more i think about it the more i begin to realize that the likelihood of us upping the intelligence of the average man with just a shot is a bit out there even where this topic is concerned for many of the reasons you offered and a few dozen more. In a way it reminds me a bit of "Phenomenon" that movie where John Travolta begins to evolve and quickly dies because of the physical and mental strain it places on his body.

I do wonder if this particular concept of Bio engineering could be directed towards specific parts of the brain or if it would simply affect the entire brain.

For example could your Creative Intelligence be boosted instead of your Rational Intelligence?
Would that push people towards enlightenment or insanity?

Obviously, and tragically, the extension of a human's lifespan would probably be one of the most detrimental affects of this research. God, just thinking about billions of people living into their 200's gives me the willies. That would just suck....



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


Actually, my peer group is largely the gifted or better and the interesting thing is that many of them become chronically ill (myself included) by the time they reach adulthood. I'm quite the freak show actually as the strain that I experience psychologically has a somatic effect. I suffer from hematidrosis. I bleed from all my pores and when I sweat in that state, I sweat blood. While it would seem that I've managed to keep my sanity, it still doesn't change the fact that my body is being damaged from the strain. I was born this way. I wouldn't in a million years want any child to experience what it feels like to be a freak. It's horrible.

Newborns, especially, have very little choice about how they are born. They cannot chose what deficits or advantages they may have or who they are even born to. If there is no pre-existing autonomy or choice for a newborn, then I could see it being easily rationalized that such decisions could be made to create a more advantageous birth. However, after watching that video, it should pose yet another question as these scientists are doing things that would've once been held as deeply reprehensible. Are they capable of engaging in such activities because the creation of that life form was solely by their own doing? That the fact that the life form exists solely by their own deliberate hand and could not be replicated in nature somehow deprives the creature of their autonomy or any possible sentience? How far would our thinking go along those lines if we determine that the naturally born are "human" and the modified are "less than human" because they were manufactured in a lab? If we go so far as to strip autonomy from an animal for whom we know they have some form of sentience or intelligence, would we stop at doing so with humans? If such types of research in regards to the stripping of autonomy in people existed in MK-ULTRA, then what makes you think that, in the name of national security, that they wouldn't divert the offense by manufacture?

I chose not to view the world through rose-colored glasses. Idealism is ever the thing that skews perception from recognizing that abomination can take place and be excused through nationally imposed justification. What is going on within the fields of bioengineering holds tremendous risk. On the most minimal side, the creation of new food forms reminds me of the creation of hydrogenated fats, which the body is unable to break down and turn directly into fat among many other negatives. In the worst case scenario? A world where the government can manufacture a human being to do their bidding and a child can get a remote control living puppy. Have you ever watched a child with a rc car? They tend to run it into things.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 


If i told you that i think you should be spanked for implying that you are a freak would you hold it against me?


You mentioned that High Intelligence is in some ways related to Chronic Illness, and even referenced your own condition. Now if they could fix that through the process of bio engineering would you take advantage of it?



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


lol, I have seen enough of a response from general society when I should happen to sweat and bleed that I have a pretty darn good idea as to how I'm viewed when it occurs. Hard to ignore stares though my favorite are the comparisons to Jesus as I'm an atheist. I imagine that particular combination is a bit of a mind burner. An atheist that sweats blood like Jesus, lol.

For many of the ailments that a lot of my peers suffer from, yes, they could be corrected. Stem cell transplants to correct aberrant immune responses would essentially reboot their immunity back to a newborn status. As yet, there has been, however, no overt connection between stress and auto-immune disorder. Just anecdotal evidence from patients who report flare ups of disease activity during periods of stress. In a way, a stem cell transplant could be construed as a form of bioengineering as it replaces the existing immune system with one with a clean slate.

As far as my hematodrosis goes, however, there is no physiological ailment yet associated with the phenomena. My doctors, including a hematologist, could never isolate a physiological cause even during extreme events where I looked like I was literally sprayed with a fine mist of blood. According to the NIH, "acute fear and intense mental contemplation are the most frequent causes" for hematodrosis and they postulate on a variety of compounding factors that could create the scenario in a physiological sense but, overall, it's all just hypothesis and stress is the only thing they know for sure is related. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... So, in order to fix me if it is, in fact, stress related, they would have to find some way to counter my fight or flight response, negating it so that I wouldn't begin to bleed. Basically, it would be altering the natural response of the body to stress and removing it. Or, alternatively, would they just take away my ability for deep mental contemplation? The former could pose a danger to me in a situation where fight or flight is necessary and the latter would be mind control. As much as I joke about how nice a lobotomy would actually be, I really don't mean it.

Pass. I would absolutely not allow them to "fix" me, especially with their current level of knowledge.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Transhumanism is inevitable, just as perhaps trans single cellular organisms was.



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   

ImaFungi
Transhumanism is inevitable, just as perhaps trans single cellular organisms was.


Evolution is a process of nature. Comparing it to the unnatural manipulation of the genome is not entirely appropriate and not inevitable as that scientific transhumanism should ethically require consent. When it depends on the yay or nay of society in general, that essentially removes the absolute inevitability of it, does it not?


edit on 8/11/13 by WhiteAlice because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 


Unless a means was developed to effectively halt the evolutionary process. Sure, such a technique is not public knowledge, but if it were any kind of knowledge at all, can you imagine who might be willing to invest in the long-term applications of such a trick?

Let that sink in for a moment.

...Okay. So if we introduce such a development, then the next step would be obvious. Halt evolution, and use the growing gap to insert our own modifications. Imagine a self-generating line of code being frozen long enough to inject a predesignated code that had already been tested in countless simulations and is believed to be compatible with what already exists. Boom. We've proven that transhumanism is a viable goal. We've basically hijacked the evolutionary process in order to become our own gods.

Is this far-fetched? Absolutely. Impossible? Not necessarily. Tempting? Oh, you better believe it. If...and let me reiterate - if...such an opportunity were to arise, do you really think pharmaceutical companies, military agencies, and various corporations whose work is heavily impacted and supported by the genome and all affiliated organic constructs would be willing to question the moral implications? To seriously consider any drawbacks that are not relevant to legal blowback or financial risk? If they could get away with it...would they try?

Think about it.
edit on 8-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Thorneblood
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Oh come on. That might happen sure, but if you consider the tract record of things like nuclear power then it's just as likely that we will have some sort of "incident" and mutate or be genetically spliced with animals and what not.

This is the stuff super heroes are made of, and who doesn't want to be a hero?


So you'd want to be RatMan or Cockroach Lad?



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 




Oh come on. That might happen sure, but if you consider the tract record of things like nuclear power then it's just as likely that we will have some sort of "incident" and mutate or be genetically spliced with animals and what not.

This is the stuff super heroes are made of, and who doesn't want to be a hero?


....hahaha. Oh my. You know that isn't what makes a superhero "super", right?



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 


Memes have already turned a non-trivial percentage of humans monstrous; and that flew under the radar too. In fact various insanity memeplexes play a large role in under the radar transhumanism efforts.

Humans tend to run HumanOS 0.1 beta we are sorely in need of an improved OS before we think we have the wisdom to do hardware refreshes.

KPB



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by KellyPrettyBear
 



Memes have already turned a non-trivial percentage of humans monstrous; and that flew under the radar too. In fact various insanity memeplexes play a large role in under the radar transhumanism efforts.


Actually, memes have restored a modicum of emotion to digital communication. Furthermore, memes have helped to concretely established sympathetic bonds where mere text fails to impart true feeling. Memes are that step forward which gives personality to the virtual world, enabling us to reach a balance between machine and spirit. Or at least work on it.



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Consciously using a tool is a different scenario entirely. So im agreeing with you in principle



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 


Humans are also a process of nature, what humans choose to do is a process of nature. I can see that the crux of your problem is authoritarian force to become transhuman, I of course dont think that should be done, I was merely saying humans evolving beyond humans, i.e. mixing with more 'artificial' forms of technology and tampering with biology, is inevitable. Natural evolution has yielded from the simple and semi meaningless, to complex animals, the human and all that comes along with it. Why is it exectable to let accident decide our fate, when we can use intelligence? And by we I mean those future humans, 20 years, 50 years, 100 years, 1000 years, who choose to become nature and evolution themselves and decide their fate?

When a child is born, the parents usually prod that child and teach it and pressure it to learn and be successful and teach it skills etc. So it is acceptable to mold this piece of nature out of the womb, but if one (science) were capable of understanding the meaning and programming language of DNA, and could prevent negative qualities and illnesses and traits in their child would it be unethical for those parents to Desiree to do so? I can feel you thinking it may be wicked by perceiving this as making experiments out of life, if in the future we know the programing of DNA so well instead of computer programming and app designing the hot business is designing humans,and there are no limits but the imagination, then those creations may be seen as unethical as they have to deal with circumstances unnatural and not chosen by them or something along those lines? Well consider that that is pretty much the situation we have already, consider the fact that you are nature, and that there is nothing that is not nature and natural. All the machines that are in your body, that are your body, your brain, your organs, bones, the thousands of types of cells, these are all complex systems and machines that were made by 'not intelligence', why would you trust and praise accidents and uncontrollable fate, when you, we, us, as intelligence can create better, or at least what we want?



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Transhumanism is the "religion" if you will of the NWO. They knew it was coming and there would be an evolutionary split if you will dividing society in to distinct classes much more than we understand them to be today. Technology requires a dependence which in turn drives centralization. Once the technology becomes part of our social or economic fabric it must be maintained at all costs. It is but one of the reasons we are waging wars overseas to secure strategic minerals. The more tech the higher the complexity and this becomes a self-sustaining loop.

We are already witnessing the effects: when was the last time you saw one of the elites die of cancer? (Steve Jobs aside). It isn't the air in D.C. keeping them alive well in to their 90's. They have a cure for cancer and are already regenerating organs to keep the elites alive. If they were to admit this they would of course be asked to share and we can't have that, it would be too expensive. We are expendable, they are not.

If anyone is to become a recipient of super powers it will be the elites themselves. They would never trust mere servants with such power. No, all the wonders of modern technology are there for their benefit, to keep them alive longer and enrich their lives. Their ultimate goal is to make all of us expendables interconnected through wireless technology, to be commanded or killed at the push of a button. The complete elimination of free will, free thought and free action.



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


The thing is if that is true it will not be able to be maintained forever. If what you say is true, the elites are using human brain power to create these things, surely not all these objective scientists are evil elites? Things like genome projects and cloning and artificial medical advances are very much discussed in the public. The situation is just getting more complex and out of control though as progression continues, because there are horizons that exist that not only can we not see, but we certainly cannot imagine beyond them. Think of truly advanced tech that allows people to live much longer, get energy easily and cheap, food as well etc. the population has already been exponentially increasing, due to nothing more then scientific progression, which the main purposes are living longer, healthier and more comfortable. Out of that drive, since spears and fire have set the dominoes in motion to where we are today. Unless we are to imagine we have reached the pinnacle of scientific progression, that right now the way the world is, is how it will remain and continue for milenia to come, then we are to imagine that it will progress in intricacy, intelligence, scientific capability, knowledge, and medical advances to the human body that will prolong life.

Eh it is a very difficult topic. The problem is there needs to be a force of control and order, the elite are the default bad guys and trust me, noone more then me hates to say that force and control is a necessary evil, but it is. Exactly and only because of what the future beholds. The brave new world in year 2354 where 13 year olds can build nukes with supplies at the market, and in their free time develop monstrous fire breathing creatures for fun. The ease into the future begins today, it began yesterday, it began 100 years ago. Without order there is chaos, and in that future chaos will not be 'good'.

The problem appears to be the elite are not the most capable or intelligent amongst us. There is no communication, there is no team effort, or discussion about what is right and why, where we are heading as a species and why and for what. There are no plans. There is no trusted wise council of elders, or league of geniuses.

edit on 8-11-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Every time someone decides who they want to marry and have children with, they're weighing the advantages and disadvantages of their potential mates. This has been going on forever. We all try to select healthy mates. Women select men based on strength and the ability to provide for a family (which can include intelligence). Women are selected by men because they have physical characteristics (such as ample breasts or wide hips) that would make them good baby makers. For many thousands of years, and even to this day, marriages are arranged between men and women to maximize their potential for producing strong, smart, productive offspring. That's usually the goal. Taller, stronger, smarter, better looking. Like breeding dogs.

As we get better at manipulating DNA, we just won't have to wait 15-20 years for every new generation to improve mankind incrementally. We'll be able to make big changes from one generation to the next.



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


But then who decides what qualifies as 'better'?



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
We will be discussing this awesome thread on ATS Live tonight.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
17
<< 1   >>

log in

join