I usually try to distance myself from already established philosophical movements, mostly because by attaching yourself, you are also perceived as being attached to arguments you have not necessarily made, and are exposed to counter arguments that may not address the specific points of your contention. That said, I identify with some of the more general themes, such as the extension of functional human lifespan, the healing of debilitation and disease where possible, and the prevention of deleterious changes that impair our ability to lead functional and fulfilled lives. I also think these ideas have the most natural resonance with people. As far as cybernetics or genetic modification to increase human ability beyond its normal capacity, I think it involves a great deal of speculation, and while the speculation is interesting, the specifics of how it will come about remain to be seen, and those specifics will be very important to the ethical debate which will inevitably follow. I think it is most important to remind people that scientific and technological progress can be used for the good of human kind, and throughout its history has helped it far more than it has harmed. We seem too entranced, at times, with bold predictions, benevolent or apocalyptic, and forget that despite daunting challenges in the past, and many wrong-headed decisions, the general trend of technological progress has definitely been to our benefit. The creation of grand apocalyptic predictions are certainly fun, but it should be remembered that they are fictional, and wherever they are cited as evidence against progress, should serve instead as evidence of the barrenness of that position.
I do agree on the dangers of associating with a group ideal since both parties involved are likely to change- so, even if you agree with every single aspect of a philosophy now, you are likely to change, as is it.
I am concerned with Transhumanism making a bad name for the pursuit of expanded functional human life as they openly ignore the consequences of their pursuits. I do understand the value of action, and it is fine to have a portion of the movement dedicated to such things without heeding consequence, but it seems that to blatantly disregard the concerns of those outside of your views is to purposefully grow resentment towards your cause.
So, though I agree with your note that apocalyptic predictions are fictional, it is important to take a step back and understand the frame and the meaning of our actions. True, doing so slows down progress-- but it doesn't have to be you to do it, just encourage reflection in others that understand the field and don't want to be doing the leg work. I do think much of the reason that Transhumanists have been ignoring the repercussions of their actions is the ticking time bomb that is their life and the fact that they can deal with problems after they have expanded their own lives.
I agree, speculation needs to be avoided on both extremes. There are definitely going to be concerns regarding the implementation of this kind of technology, and surest way to keep it going forward is to adequately address them
I usually try to distance myself from already established philosophical movements, mostly because by attaching yourself, you are also perceived as being attached to arguments you have not necessarily made, and are exposed to counter arguments that may not address the specific points of your contention.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I identify with some of the more general themes, such as the extension of functional human lifespan, the healing of debilitation and disease where possible, and the prevention of deleterious changes that impair our ability to lead functional and fulfilled lives. I also think these ideas have the most natural resonance with people.
As far as cybernetics or genetic modification to increase human ability beyond its normal capacity, I think it involves a great deal of speculation, and while the speculation is interesting, the specifics of how it will come about remain to be seen, and those specifics will be very important to the ethical debate which will inevitably follow.
I think it is most important to remind people that scientific and technological progress can be used for the good of human kind, and throughout its history has helped it far more than it has harmed. We seem too entranced, at times, with bold predictions, benevolent or apocalyptic, and forget that despite daunting challenges in the past, and many wrong-headed decisions, the general trend of technological progress has definitely been to our benefit. The creation of grand apocalyptic predictions are certainly fun, but it should be remembered that they are fictional, and wherever they are cited as evidence against progress, should serve instead as evidence of the barrenness of that position.
I do agree on the dangers of associating with a group ideal since both parties involved are likely to change- so, even if you agree with every single aspect of a philosophy now, you are likely to change, as is it.
ReplyDeleteI am concerned with Transhumanism making a bad name for the pursuit of expanded functional human life as they openly ignore the consequences of their pursuits. I do understand the value of action, and it is fine to have a portion of the movement dedicated to such things without heeding consequence, but it seems that to blatantly disregard the concerns of those outside of your views is to purposefully grow resentment towards your cause.
So, though I agree with your note that apocalyptic predictions are fictional, it is important to take a step back and understand the frame and the meaning of our actions. True, doing so slows down progress-- but it doesn't have to be you to do it, just encourage reflection in others that understand the field and don't want to be doing the leg work. I do think much of the reason that Transhumanists have been ignoring the repercussions of their actions is the ticking time bomb that is their life and the fact that they can deal with problems after they have expanded their own lives.
I agree, speculation needs to be avoided on both extremes. There are definitely going to be concerns regarding the implementation of this kind of technology, and surest way to keep it going forward is to adequately address them
ReplyDelete