Why Transhumanism Would Result in Stultifying Sameness
Dove
This ad has been around awhile, but I think it punctures the transhumanists' naive presumption that the post human future would be wildly individualistic and iconoclastic. I believe the opposite would be true. Just as today we are herded by social pressures and corporate advertisements into a conformist mindset--what my friend Ralph Nader calls "thinking corporate"--so too would we be pushed toward a stultifying sameness if transhumanists "seized control of human evolution." Only rather than being literally skin deep, as is true today with cosmetics and fashion, the sheep-like sameness would be implanted deep within our biological beings. Baaaa.
HT: Mark Pickup
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 11:10 AM
6 Comments
6 Comments:
Wesley,
I've been meaning to ask - where did you get that favourite pejorative quote of yours "seize control" of evolution? Is it a James Hughes quote, perhaps? It's certainly not a turn of phrase I'd use - it sounds like the vocabulary of Marxist revolutionaries...
Simon Young
www.worldtranshumanistsociety.com
Hi, Simon. I think it was Gregory Stock's book *Redesigning Humans.* "We know that Homo sapiens is not the final word in primate evolution, but few have yet grasped that we are on the cusp of profound biological change, poised to transcend our current form and character on a journey to destinations of new imagination... But give these emerging technologies a decade and they will be the cutting edge of human biological change. These developments will write a new page in the history of life, allowing us to seize control of our evolutionary future."
Mr. Smith-- does that sound like the opening to the next X-man movie to you?
Yes. I think that is part of the transhumanist fantasy, actually. Thanks, foxfier, formerly sailorette.
Don't need the whole title.
*embarrassed*
Merging my online personalities.
When you say "sheep-like sameness would be implanted deep within our biological beings" I'm assuming your talking about physical sameness. Which isn't much of an argument coming from someone who has four limbs, one head, two eyes, and is communicating with lifeforms who are 99.9999999% the same as himself. Sameness is already there. Lifestyles and personalities might differ but physical biological factors are at the moment all the same already. We all eat the same food, we all process that food the same, and we all hurt when we bump our head. We eat lots of sugar because our bodies are already "programed" to like sugar, and we all have sex for the same reason. We're already programed in the way that your worried about, and we're already sheep. At no point were we more then sheep. The idea is to be better then a sheep.
Now if you mean there would be man-made "stultifying sameness" built into us, I fail to see how that already doesn't exist. If you could change your skin color, then sure you might group (or be grouped) with people who have the same modification, but that happens already. Bikers wear lots of leather, you don't see a lot wearing dresses, and if they do, then they are excluded. Thats part of our behavioral programing. Which transhumanism suggests can be changed.
The argument that corporations would program us to act or operate in a certain way is no different then nature programing us to act or operate in a certain way. Corporations only take advantage of the programing that already exists in our biological makeup. The only difference is that corporate pressure is a man-made construct that can be unmade. I personally abstain from a high-sugar diet, therefore removing whatever control pepsi or coke might have over me. Shouldn't a logical person want the same choice over nature? Like the ability to replace an arm that was shot off? Or to be able to pursue their work or hobbies more efficiently - like an electrician being able to sense electrical-magnetic fields with nerve implants, or an astronaut being able to remotely operate machinery without assistance?
We preform activities with devices outside our physical bodies. Thats the base for all technological advancement. Fire, paper/pen, screwdrivers, etc.
Wouldn't the next step simply the the integration of those devices and technology with our physical selves? And if not, how far could technology progress when the prime operator (a human) is limited in ability to interact or control the technology. Your computer can already read many thousands of times more words per second then you can. And although it cannot perform the Intelligent jumps that the human brain does, it can process direct information many times faster then you. So your already limited in your interaction with the tool that is coming to rule the planet.
Personally, I'm no fan of the idea of having Google adds being beamed into my brain, or across my eye lenses. But then, I would take that in return for a search engine that could provide me with the ability to read for hours without hurting my neck. The difference is that I made a choice, and now can perform the activity better. And if I don't want Google adds, I can always just build my own search engine, or download the books into my eyes. The corporate empire hasn't got any more control over me in this hypothetical situation.
If you think people shouldn't start plugging themselves in, then what do you purpose people do when they can't keep up with the world they've chosen to create?
Post a Comment
<< Home