URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Future Human - A Transhumanist Manifesto
  HTML https://newhuman.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Books, Book Reviews and Online Resources
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 15--------------------------------------------------
       (essay) What does it mean to be human?
       By: DepletedSoul Date: August 19, 2017, 5:19 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       An interesting essay I found while doing my daily Transhuman
       Google sessions.
  HTML http://blogs.cui.edu/core/2015/04/27/what-does-it-mean-to-be-transhuman/
  HTML http://blogs.cui.edu/core/2015/04/27/what-does-it-mean-to-be-transhuman/
       [quote]This is the first post of a two-part essay on
       transhumanism and Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
       Many of our universities are currently stuck in an internal
       debate about online course offerings, attempting to determine
       whether the potential gains of Internet-based instruction
       outweigh the costs. On one side of the ledger, the online
       student is afforded new levels of individualized education that
       no longer restricts them to the institution-centric forms of
       physical, in-class environments. On the other side, many
       educators caution whether this technologically-mediated
       methodology undercuts the nature of the learning enterprise,
       treating students as disembodied entities rather than as
       physical men and women. The center of the proverbial storm is
       the body. Does physical presence matter—not just in the
       university environment—but as a touchstone to understand
       community more broadly? Or, put more succinctly, is physical
       embodiment a necessary feature of the 21st century person?
       The contemporary world is in the throes of a digital revolution,
       precipitated by the invention of the microprocessor and every
       bit as transformational as the Industrial Revolution of the
       eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Futurists tells us that,
       due to exponential pace in which computers are processing
       commands, we will soon be entering into an era of human-computer
       parity, perhaps ushering in an age in which technological change
       outpaces the human ability to understand their world. Yet this
       technological expansion is not accomplished in a vacuum; men and
       women (at least until machines have the capacity themselves)
       drive the progress. Humanity yearns to explore, to discover, to
       drive past the speed limits laid forth by a finite natural world
       and its own finite condition within it. Just as the Gagarin and
       Shepard once broke through the boundaries of Earth’s
       gravitational pull, humanity consistently seeks other venues by
       which to challenge its inherent limitations.
       Today, the human body looks to be ripe for conquest for those
       who would seek a world without physical boundary. This two-part
       essay explores the tension between the reality of the human
       condition as a function of its bodily limitation and the current
       drive toward the technological Singularity, where some believe
       that in the very transcending of physical limitation lies a type
       of salvific eternal life.
       The term “Singularity” was originally coined by John von Neumann
       in 1958 to describe a future condition in which computers exceed
       human intelligence and thus bring about a change in society so
       dramatic, so total, that predicting future conditions of life
       becomes essentially impossible.
       More recently, author/futurists, such as Ray Kurzweil, have, to
       varying degrees, lauded the coming of the Singularity by
       suggesting that technological advancements will afford humanity
       the opportunity to eradicate formerly unsolvable problems, such
       as famine and disease. This optimistic view of the human-machine
       relationship is often called “The Theory of Abundance.”
       The resulting effect of these theoretical advances culminates in
       transhumanism, a state-of-being that promises three particular
       ways of human flourishing: Super-longevity, Super-intelligence,
       and Super-wellbeing. In short, super-longevity seeks to
       transform the way humanity thinks about physical death, from an
       inevitable natural process to an individual decision. The goal
       of super-intelligence is to provide each human brain immediate
       internal access to the world’s repository of information at the
       speed of thought. Or, alternately conceived, super-intelligence
       refers to a state in which computers exceed the intelligence of
       the combined intellectual force of humanity, leading people into
       a golden age of knowledge. Finally, super-wellbeing refers to
       the transhumanist promise that, by “editing our genes,” we can
       eliminate human suffering (and the suffering of other sentient
       beings) altogether.
       Philosopher David Pearce calls this the “hedonistic imperative,”
       the moral obligation we have as humans to eliminate all forms of
       suffering and accentuate, via drugs and/or gene therapy, all
       forms of pleasure.
       My particular interest in the Singularity and the transhumanist
       movement has less to do with predicting the nature of society or
       technology-human interactions than it does exploring one of the
       characteristics of futurist thinking on the matter: The body
       contributes quite little to what makes humans, human. In one
       sense, this conclusion might be somewhat unsettling; conceiving
       oneself without the body becomes a challenging feat, indeed! The
       body acts as the initial point of contact when a person has a
       face-to-face conversation. It is the control center for the
       information gathering of the senses, and often shapes the
       identity of the person and his/her vocation. The athlete, for
       example, is known as such only when his/her body contains a
       certain amount of natural athletic skill.
       In another sense, however, we intuitively recognize the body’s
       waning influence in matters of social interaction. The ubiquity
       of online social networks has demonstrated the ease in which the
       contemporary person feels connected to their contacts without
       necessarily associating their physicality with such connection.
       Apart from using actual fingers to punch keystrokes, the body is
       no longer necessary for one’s participation in social settings.
       Community, as a term, is under similar pressures, as each wave
       of social technologies seems to be promising greater levels of
       social bonding. Whether you consider the body’s dwindling role
       in identity-formation as a cause for anxiety, or if you believe
       this turn to be of neutral or even positive value, one must be
       willing to probe the meanings of “humanity” and “community”
       before offering a position of substance.
       One particularly influential view of “what it means to be human”
       emerged in Enlightenment thought: man was analogous to a
       machine.
       If one simply breaks down the human form to small enough parts,
       it could be reduced, quantified, and understood as an intricate,
       yet predictable, mechanical device. Some modern scholars have
       suggested that the machine-like-ness of the body uniquely
       positions the human to be a “natural-born cyborg,” in the
       language of Andy Clark.  If the body is machine, then it is no
       stretch to see how thoughts and consciousness itself can be
       conceived as a series of inputs, outputs, zeroes and ones.
       Ray Kurzweil, perhaps the most recognizable of the current
       futurists, openly acknowledges his eager anticipation of the
       Singularity, for it will open the door for humans to “upload”
       their consciousness into an eternal “human cloud.” The body
       dies, but Ray the person may live on for an indefinite amount of
       time. In this case, the human “machine” has actually melded with
       machines.
       The salvific undertones of Kurzweil’s work are unmistakable.
       Since human existence is limited by its body, technology offers
       a particular brand of transcendence—it is a way to jettison that
       which is flesh so that the mind, or perhaps, soul,  might
       experience a dramatic ascent into everlasting life. Or, at
       least, a delay of death until the person wills it to be. Each of
       the above prongs of transhumanist study (i.e., super-longevity,
       super-intelligence, and super-well-being) seeks to overcome a
       physical limitation inherent in the physiological system,
       whether it’s the size of human brains or the cellular breakdown
       that comes with age. Consider how transhumanist terminology
       echoes classic religious thought about the afterlife: a place
       that is eternal, where one understands all things, and sadness
       is no more.
       Joel Oesch is Assistant Professor of Theology at Concordia
       University Irvine[/quote]
       *****************************************************