Comment on this entry
Transhumanist politics, 1700 to the near future
The story of transhumanist politics is part of the broader story of the three hundred year-old fight for the Enlightenment. Transhumanism has pre-Enlightenment roots of course, since our earliest ancestors sought to transcend the limitations of the human body, to delay death, and to achieve wisdom. But those aspirations became transhumanism when people began to use science and technology to achieve them instead of magic and spirituality.
...
Complete entry
COMMENTS
Posted by Paul Warren on 04/11 at 06:09 AM
A major socio-political concern regarding breakdown of a clean transition into an enhanced and more enlightened civilization is firstly of course religious fundamentalism and zealotry. Adherents of pseudo-cult/tradition based religious organizations inculcated with beliefs of apocalyptic redemption and last days scenarios only usher in social stresses and self fulfilling prophesies of destruction, as though the collective consciousness of civilization is unable and ill-equipped to effectively adapt to what is properly deemed an evolutionary point of departure-- the social neuroses resists change and in effort to sublimate death and ultimate decay has sublimated the process into a deity-based ideal. For whatever reasons religion has perpetuated itself ; ultimately for purposes of social and psychological palliatives buffering the burdens and stress of living, the entire faith based system has its own sort of sociological and historical genome which resists change and is hostile to any interference or ideas, however rational which oppose its world-view and system of proliferation and mind-numbing order. I don't know the exact figure, but i believe it is something like 95% of the U.S. if not the world have sytems of belief correlating at least near to this systemitized form of religious indoctrination. Secondly, the leaders of social institutions and governments, for the most part are not scientifically inclined and share more in common with the religious sects and proliferation and maintenance of power structures and are not inclined to make any radical alterations (HDTV?) to facilitate the radical advancements science might provide to ameliorate the human condition. Promoting the science and possibilities not to mention intentions of future technologies is without a doubt going to produce or exacerbate social tensions and stresses which in a worst-case scenario may spell doom on a large global scale?! Given a growing awareness of the threat of science radically altering the sacrosanct ideal of what it means to be human, live and transport to a blissful afterlife, the warmongering of countries, terrorist groups and otherwise-- to what extent do these technologies pose a threat to social stability and harmony? The science will be there long before ideologies are based on solid reason and initiating this technology i believe would spark controversy at least as intense as abortion. Anyway, what's the PR on this going to be like? also, given the ethical questions inevitably arising, won't we have to remodel the capitalist and government systems eventually to accomodate a new breed of being. Timing is everything, just saying, ruffle too many feathers too quickly and the ostrich might attack.
Posted by frank on 04/12 at 01:10 AM
Paul, is there any such thing as religious education, or is it just religious indoctrination?
"For whatever reasons religion has perpetuated itself ; ultimately for purposes of social and psychological palliatives buffering the burdens and stress of living"
How can we take seriously the rest of what you say -- and there is indeed some good stuff in there -- when you resort to such charicatures?
Posted by Hervé Musseau on 04/12 at 09:33 AM
Paul, while people are wary of new technologies and the changes they may bring, they actually adapt quickly to them. Look back ten years ago, and see how we embraced the internet, cell phones, or gps, and how all of these technologies have transformed our way of life, pretty much without a hiccup. Although now people are afraid (or unaware) of it, when radical life extension or molecular manufacturing arrive, they too will become part of our everyday life.
Posted by JTB on 04/14 at 12:20 PM
As a theologian wishing to engage in some constructive dialogue with transhumanism, one of the most important and difficult tasks in this interdisciplinary task, I find, is consistently taking into account how complex H+ is as a movement and refraining from oversimplification and generalization. Articles such as this one are such a help in sorting out the significant differences within the movement, particularly for learners like myself. Thanks!
Posted by frank on 04/14 at 02:42 PM
The article mentions philosopher Max More as a leading advocate of transhumanism. More writes in http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/tl07d.shtml "Those who already think of themselves as anarchists are likely to be most sympathetic to my thesis." I can't quite say that's comforting.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Add your comment here:
|
IEET Blog