There is truth in the world. There is a way in the world. As Sting said, “There is a deeper way than this.” And it is expressed in stillness.
Would transhumanists be opponents to genetically modified food? They would be opposed to genetically modified food. Part of the concern is that genetically modified food would somehow infect those who eat it.
And alter us as well? Yes. Epigenetic shifting was occurring well before we even gained the ability to chemically alter DNA. Nature does it to us against our will, viral infection, even bacterial infestation. Transhumanists have been labeled neo-Gnostics, because they value information over physical condition, consciousness over biological form.
I think natural evolution is the humanist view? Well, humanists feel that human beings would be doing well enough to accomplish social reform, and that alterations to human consciousness would compromise that, and you can’t alter human biology without altering human consciousness, so …
So, this feels like determinism to me. Determinism? Well, if my daddy did something in his youth that causes something to happen in me… That feels like determinism. Oh, I see. It places physical condition over everything else, which is popular in mainstream science.
To sum up transhumanism, if simplistically, they believe that human is as human does, not as human looks or is chemically composed.
It is an interesting debate to determine how humanity can reach its full potential. Actually, one of the criticisms is that they offer no absolute truths. The response from transhumanism is that it does offer a hopeful vision of humanities future, as seems counter indicated by many other schools of thought.
I think both your state of consciousness and your state of physical health have equal parts in determining your direction. They do indeed, and a transhumanist would seek to improve both, with your consent.
We need all the “hope” we can get. Positive apocalypse. Yes, it does have a tangential relationship to what people are criticising as singularitarianism. The idea that scientific progress will reach a point that it transcends the sole direction of humanity.
The Singularity! 2030? Computers will be as “smart” as humans. Computers will be as smart as humans, and in fact, may play host to human consciousness alongside the artificial intelligences the advance system would spawn.
But when computers hit the singularity and become smarter than us, will they have souls? Depends on what you define as a soul I guess. If you define it as a causal morphic imprint, then yes, they would.
Or will we always have the advantage of being spirits in material form, while they are confined to just this material reality?
It can be argued that artificial intelligence would be the emerging of soul?
What matter can we use that we are the genuine originators of? In old metaphysical thought, matter exists as its own form of life, and all these advancements would do is serve the evolution of elemental life. The earth that we make computers out of can be argued to already have its own supposedly crude awareness.
We did emerge from configurations of matter ourselves so we already emerged from a singularity that occurred in the past. Exactly, so if anything it would be an act of respect, even reverence for the same unified existence we all share.
So sentient machines could be seen as the pinnacle of elemental life, like rock and metal, whereas we are the pinnacle of squishy life. Indeed.
I ponder myself as pinnacle of squishy life. Well, with the emergence of potential neosapiens, that may become a debatable point as well, as well as the possible incidence of making first contact with extra-terrestrial intelligence.
I am the god of goo! I am the nirvana of yogurt?
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.