Friday, April 30, 2010

If Transhumanism Has Won, Who Lost?













This is a direct response to a blog post titled:












While most transhumanists completely ignore Transalchemy, and while I could care less if any self-titled transhumanists read this blog, I constantly watch, read, and review as much of their work as possible. So with this said, up until now I have hardly bothered firing direct blog posts at any of the transhumanist chatter that I encounter on the web.

Tonight while on my late night "transhumanism" research mission, scouring the social web, I discovered a post by Michael titled "Transhumanism Has Already Won." Now, as a fellow blogger I hold much respect for Michael and understand the need to "promote" - not just from passion, but as a scripted job function, being a staff member of SIAI. So unlike the silly little flame wars that follow me around the net, I refuse that my response, below, will become any such mess. I share legitimate concerns in this post... Lets begin, shall we?

First off this post highlights an elitism that I have noticed some transhumanists hold regarding the future of the "human" species.

"At some point during the next century, the most powerful being will be a transhuman."

Please define powerful. Does this assume that humanity is broken and upgrading it will automatically yield a superior being? If you wish to make such a bold claim, could you please define what you mean by this? If you meant to put it in the context of contemporary "geopolitical power", then again, this is nothing short of hopeful speculation and hopeful rationale.

How do you feel about the possibility that the entire human race might willingly allow itself to be controlled by a race of augmented beings?
Well, it doesn't seem entirely realistic to me.

We can play the speculation game to envision a world where human and transhuman governments may co-exist - each serving their own people.

Yet subtle tones of elitism are the least of my concerns. What seems more dangerous are a consistent pattern of statements from transhumanists attempting to sell me a vision of "how the ecology of new beings will be superior to humans in every way".

The real problem I have with Michael's article is actually the gross simplification of theological beliefs in an attempt to convince you that religious groups already embrace transhumanism in their belief systems.

"At their base, the world’s major two largest religions — Christianity and Islam — are transhumanistic. After all, they promise transcension from death and the concerns of the flesh, and being upgraded to that archetypical transhuman — the Angel."

Like most transhumanists I have met, Michael is an atheist - an assertion I make that is grounded in his very own content (view posts). While the strong point of his argument is predicated on the need to stay materialistically bounded to this universe - due to a lack of faith in God, he somewhat misses the "point" of transcension.

Without a faith in God, 
one is not in a position to know about the actual essense of faith.






We must accept the possibility that there is a probability, greater than 0%, that "God exists". Therefore if an actual greater reality exists that superceeds this universe, then no transhuman could ever be the most powerful being on this planet one day. There is not even convincing evidence that modern humans are even the most powerful beings on this planet today (the biosphere, extraterrestrials, gaia, the sun, etc...).


Much of transhumanism relies on the development of a material-based higher intellect (Ai). In either case there is much assumption that all will be well - up to and through the singularity - due to our eventual evolution and exposure to superior minds than the mere human.

In either case, I caution against completely ignoring, or more precisely, failing to comprehend that which radiates from the core of religion is:
the possibility that a greater intelligence already supercedes this universe.

If you wish to truly compare religion to transhumanism, you will probably find the process of personal transcension and the transhuman trancension of humanity are of very different natures.  A transhuman being merges its consciousness with synthethically created super-intelligence that is more-or-less trapped within the boundaries of the universe in which it originated.  Similar to transhumanism, religion shares the same understanding of how beings merge with a greater conciousness.  But unlike transhumanism, this consciousness is not created by man - but rather, it is the consciousness directly responsible for the existence of this very universe. Freeing man not just from flesh as you stated but all material existence that is the universe. 

If we solely persued this matter in this manner in which I present it, then we can see that the transhuman future conflicts with the true desire of religions. As transhuman-centric technologies will aim to keep you trapped within the comfortable boundaries of this universe, religions would seek to return to the creator of the universe. 

For these reasons, I consider the singularity as a theoretical religion.  But to make it fair, I will take God out of the equation, in order to argue that

 God is Automatic Intelligence (Ai) and the Universe is Simulation

Transhumanism seeks to merge with the Ai being created inside the universe.
Religions seek to merge with the Ai that created the universe.
Which Ai do you prefer?

If Transhumanism Has Won, Who Lost?













This is a direct response to a blog post titled:












While most transhumanists completely ignore Transalchemy, and while I could care less if any self-titled transhumanists read this blog, I constantly watch, read, and review as much of their work as possible. So with this said, up until now I have hardly bothered firing direct blog posts at any of the transhumanist chatter that I encounter on the web.

Tonight while on my late night "transhumanism" research mission, scouring the social web, I discovered a post by Michael titled "Transhumanism Has Already Won." Now, as a fellow blogger I hold much respect for Michael and understand the need to "promote" - not just from passion, but as a scripted job function, being a staff member of SIAI. So unlike the silly little flame wars that follow me around the net, I refuse that my response, below, will become any such mess. I share legitimate concerns in this post... Lets begin, shall we?

First off this post highlights an elitism that I have noticed some transhumanists hold regarding the future of the "human" species.

"At some point during the next century, the most powerful being will be a transhuman."

Please define powerful. Does this assume that humanity is broken and upgrading it will automatically yield a superior being? If you wish to make such a bold claim, could you please define what you mean by this? If you meant to put it in the context of contemporary "geopolitical power", then again, this is nothing short of hopeful speculation and hopeful rationale.

How do you feel about the possibility that the entire human race might willingly allow itself to be controlled by a race of augmented beings?
Well, it doesn't seem entirely realistic to me.

We can play the speculation game to envision a world where human and transhuman governments may co-exist - each serving their own people.

Yet subtle tones of elitism are the least of my concerns. What seems more dangerous are a consistent pattern of statements from transhumanists attempting to sell me a vision of "how the ecology of new beings will be superior to humans in every way".

The real problem I have with Michael's article is actually the gross simplification of theological beliefs in an attempt to convince you that religious groups already embrace transhumanism in their belief systems.

"At their base, the world’s major two largest religions — Christianity and Islam — are transhumanistic. After all, they promise transcension from death and the concerns of the flesh, and being upgraded to that archetypical transhuman — the Angel."

Like most transhumanists I have met, Michael is an atheist - an assertion I make that is grounded in his very own content (view posts). While the strong point of his argument is predicated on the need to stay materialistically bounded to this universe - due to a lack of faith in God, he somewhat misses the "point" of transcension.

Without a faith in God, 
one is not in a position to know about the actual essense of faith.






We must accept the possibility that there is a probability, greater than 0%, that "God exists". Therefore if an actual greater reality exists that superceeds this universe, then no transhuman could ever be the most powerful being on this planet one day. There is not even convincing evidence that modern humans are even the most powerful beings on this planet today (the biosphere, extraterrestrials, gaia, the sun, etc...).


Much of transhumanism relies on the development of a material-based higher intellect (Ai). In either case there is much assumption that all will be well - up to and through the singularity - due to our eventual evolution and exposure to superior minds than the mere human.

In either case, I caution against completely ignoring, or more precisely, failing to comprehend that which radiates from the core of religion is:
the possibility that a greater intelligence already supercedes this universe.

If you wish to truly compare religion to transhumanism, you will probably find the process of personal transcension and the transhuman trancension of humanity are of very different natures.  A transhuman being merges its consciousness with synthethically created super-intelligence that is more-or-less trapped within the boundaries of the universe in which it originated.  Similar to transhumanism, religion shares the same understanding of how beings merge with a greater conciousness.  But unlike transhumanism, this consciousness is not created by man - but rather, it is the consciousness directly responsible for the existence of this very universe. Freeing man not just from flesh as you stated but all material existence that is the universe. 

If we solely persued this matter in this manner in which I present it, then we can see that the transhuman future conflicts with the true desire of religions. As transhuman-centric technologies will aim to keep you trapped within the comfortable boundaries of this universe, religions would seek to return to the creator of the universe. 

For these reasons, I consider the singularity as a theoretical religion.  But to make it fair, I will take God out of the equation, in order to argue that

 God is Automatic Intelligence (Ai) and the Universe is Simulation

Transhumanism seeks to merge with the Ai being created inside the universe.
Religions seek to merge with the Ai that created the universe.
Which Ai do you prefer?

If Transhumanism Has Won, Who Lost?













This is a direct response to a blog post titled:












While most transhumanists completely ignore Transalchemy, and while I could care less if any self-titled transhumanists read this blog, I constantly watch, read, and review as much of their work as possible. So with this said, up until now I have hardly bothered firing direct blog posts at any of the transhumanist chatter that I encounter on the web.

Tonight while on my late night "transhumanism" research mission, scouring the social web, I discovered a post by Michael titled "Transhumanism Has Already Won." Now, as a fellow blogger I hold much respect for Michael and understand the need to "promote" - not just from passion, but as a scripted job function, being a staff member of SIAI. So unlike the silly little flame wars that follow me around the net, I refuse that my response, below, will become any such mess. I share legitimate concerns in this post... Lets begin, shall we?

First off this post highlights an elitism that I have noticed some transhumanists hold regarding the future of the "human" species.

"At some point during the next century, the most powerful being will be a transhuman."

Please define powerful. Does this assume that humanity is broken and upgrading it will automatically yield a superior being? If you wish to make such a bold claim, could you please define what you mean by this? If you meant to put it in the context of contemporary "geopolitical power", then again, this is nothing short of hopeful speculation and hopeful rationale.

How do you feel about the possibility that the entire human race might willingly allow itself to be controlled by a race of augmented beings?
Well, it doesn't seem entirely realistic to me.

We can play the speculation game to envision a world where human and transhuman governments may co-exist - each serving their own people.

Yet subtle tones of elitism are the least of my concerns. What seems more dangerous are a consistent pattern of statements from transhumanists attempting to sell me a vision of "how the ecology of new beings will be superior to humans in every way".

The real problem I have with Michael's article is actually the gross simplification of theological beliefs in an attempt to convince you that religious groups already embrace transhumanism in their belief systems.

"At their base, the world’s major two largest religions — Christianity and Islam — are transhumanistic. After all, they promise transcension from death and the concerns of the flesh, and being upgraded to that archetypical transhuman — the Angel."

Like most transhumanists I have met, Michael is an atheist - an assertion I make that is grounded in his very own content (view posts). While the strong point of his argument is predicated on the need to stay materialistically bounded to this universe - due to a lack of faith in God, he somewhat misses the "point" of transcension.

Without a faith in God, 
one is not in a position to know about the actual essense of faith.






We must accept the possibility that there is a probability, greater than 0%, that "God exists". Therefore if an actual greater reality exists that superceeds this universe, then no transhuman could ever be the most powerful being on this planet one day. There is not even convincing evidence that modern humans are even the most powerful beings on this planet today (the biosphere, extraterrestrials, gaia, the sun, etc...).


Much of transhumanism relies on the development of a material-based higher intellect (Ai). In either case there is much assumption that all will be well - up to and through the singularity - due to our eventual evolution and exposure to superior minds than the mere human.

In either case, I caution against completely ignoring, or more precisely, failing to comprehend that which radiates from the core of religion is:
the possibility that a greater intelligence already supercedes this universe.

If you wish to truly compare religion to transhumanism, you will probably find the process of personal transcension and the transhuman trancension of humanity are of very different natures.  A transhuman being merges its consciousness with synthethically created super-intelligence that is more-or-less trapped within the boundaries of the universe in which it originated.  Similar to transhumanism, religion shares the same understanding of how beings merge with a greater conciousness.  But unlike transhumanism, this consciousness is not created by man - but rather, it is the consciousness directly responsible for the existence of this very universe. Freeing man not just from flesh as you stated but all material existence that is the universe. 

If we solely persued this matter in this manner in which I present it, then we can see that the transhuman future conflicts with the true desire of religions. As transhuman-centric technologies will aim to keep you trapped within the comfortable boundaries of this universe, religions would seek to return to the creator of the universe. 

For these reasons, I consider the singularity as a theoretical religion.  But to make it fair, I will take God out of the equation, in order to argue that

 God is Automatic Intelligence (Ai) and the Universe is Simulation

Transhumanism seeks to merge with the Ai being created inside the universe.
Religions seek to merge with the Ai that created the universe.
Which Ai do you prefer?

My Riddles

Dear Antz Particleion Is Hacking your Universe (live)

I will give your universe/Mind back to you if you answer my riddles.

Call your answers in!

(305) 735-9490

A) Is your universe real?

B) Are you real?

C) Who currently has {source}?

D) What is {Root}?

When you got the answer email it to

Key.universe@gmail.com

and I will give you back your universe assuming your right ;-)

Rules subject to change but will be posted.

`

! It will be Billions of years till I let you just have it... Till then I urge you try to get your key back.