Sign In
Register
Help
A false tooth, is that augmentation too?
Transhumanism
#31 Posted 03 September 2011 - 11:19 PM
MultiQuote
#32 Posted 04 September 2011 - 12:37 AM
shampo0o, on 04 September 2011 - 12:19 AM, said:
A false tooth, is that augmentation too?
trolololol.
But seriously, if you're improving the human condition and mine was already predetermined to have bad eyesight, that doesn't count?
Unless the human condition encompasses every human and it's not individual.
#35 Posted 04 September 2011 - 02:32 PM
Well if you actually want a serious discussion, then no, you are not transhuman.
You may be a transhumanist, as Berrie said
Let's talk semantics:
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
You may be a transhumanist, as Berrie said
Quote
That's mostly because a transhumanist is some who upholds the transhumanist ideals, rather than a person who surpassed his base capabilities as to be more/different from a human.
Let's talk semantics:
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
A Vvaardenfell sunset
#36 Posted 04 September 2011 - 02:49 PM
Brumisator, on 04 September 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:
Well if you actually want a serious discussion, then no, you are not transhuman.
You may be a transhumanist, as Berrie said
Let's talk semantics:
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
You may be a transhumanist, as Berrie said
Let's talk semantics:
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
By definition, transhumanism is improving the human condition, not repairing it. So bolts or screws or whatever added to bones to repair them from being broken/shattered due to an accident shouldn't count. Depending on the ability of the robotic prosthetic, it might not have the same functions as a normal human appendage or be just as good as one. For a robotic prosthetic to improve the human condition it would have to have something like 360 degree rotation of the wrist for example (I've actually seen a video of some british guy with a robotic wrist that does that).
#37 Posted 04 September 2011 - 03:21 PM
Well unless all humans have the same upgrade, you can't talk about the human condition in general.
Having something repaired on one human improves his condition. He had one arm, now he has two.
But I agree with you pointing out the difference between restoring a missing function as opposed to improving or building a new function.
Having something repaired on one human improves his condition. He had one arm, now he has two.
But I agree with you pointing out the difference between restoring a missing function as opposed to improving or building a new function.
A Vvaardenfell sunset
#38 Posted 04 September 2011 - 09:38 PM
Brumisator, on 04 September 2011 - 04:32 PM, said:
Let's talk semantics:
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
You didn't add something to your body, you changed something in your body.
Just like wearing a splint over a broken leg, it changes how the broken bone reforms, then you take the splint away.
You do not have exogenic materials added to your body in order to modify how it is. You cannot remove your laser eye surgery, you can't undo it. Someone with a robotic eye would be able totake the eye away, and he'd be in the same state as he was before he'd started using it.
Now, by my definition, people with titanium bolts in their legs, or full-on prosthetic robotic arms are transhuman
So it's pretty much a line drawn in the sand, but you fall way on the not transhuman side.
Being transhuman amounts to more than cybernetics. It encompases eugenics as well and perhaps somethings that would require neither of those.
A transhuman person is someone who through neo-evolutionairy means is so improved from what a normal human is as to be considered transcendent from us. Someone who's world we would consider strange or alien.
Cake21, on 04 September 2011 - 04:49 PM, said:
By definition, transhumanism is improving the human condition, not repairing it. So bolts or screws or whatever added to bones to repair them from being broken/shattered due to an accident shouldn't count. Depending on the ability of the robotic prosthetic, it might not have the same functions as a normal human appendage or be just as good as one. For a robotic prosthetic to improve the human condition it would have to have something like 360 degree rotation of the wrist for example (I've actually seen a video of some british guy with a robotic wrist that does that).
Transhumanism is about allowing the neo-evolution technologies to be available to everyone, whether you live in the United States or Nigeria. To not allow these things to be only for the rich and/or the rich countries. I also think they'd be on the forefront of transhuman rights and rights for Synthetic Intelligence.
It can be considered an offshoot of humanism.
#39 Posted 04 September 2011 - 10:04 PM
as I see it, mechanical augmentations are futureless, while they may enhance human abilities, they are often more frail than the real counterparts, subject to wear and manufacturing irregularities, either getting contaminated or breaking down much sooner, leaving the patient vulnerable, sicker and even causing death.
The body is not meant to accept foreign objects, its whole defense system is built upon rejecting and attacking non compatible agents.
As I see it, bioengineering DNA & cells is the true path, triggering the body to regenerate lost tissue, augmentation capabilities through increased interconnectivity, even enhance metal processes will lead to the true next evolution.
Sure, we could still connect to advance vision systems, but its likely that we will engineer the brain to have pathways suitable for data transfers without physical contact (light communication is faster than electron, we would need much more complex systems to handle the high rate capacities)
The body is not meant to accept foreign objects, its whole defense system is built upon rejecting and attacking non compatible agents.
As I see it, bioengineering DNA & cells is the true path, triggering the body to regenerate lost tissue, augmentation capabilities through increased interconnectivity, even enhance metal processes will lead to the true next evolution.
Sure, we could still connect to advance vision systems, but its likely that we will engineer the brain to have pathways suitable for data transfers without physical contact (light communication is faster than electron, we would need much more complex systems to handle the high rate capacities)
#40 Posted 05 September 2011 - 07:23 PM
Transhumanism is just a term to describe a new chapter in the human evolution. First we only knew how to handle our body, then we learned how to use objects in our favor, then we learned how to use proper tools. Transhumanism is just a way of putting the tools into our body; a pretty logical step in our evolution.
Clothing, which most seem to accept, is a tool which we wear on our skin and most times we never really think about it, but clothing is actually the closest we get to being one with the tool in our everyday life. I guess the circle is closed when we've got manmaking machines; man creates the machine and the machine changes man.
Glad to hear you're satisfied with your eye-augmentation Cake, I'm thinking about doing the same operation sometime in a not to distant future. But what happens if your sight gets worse again, do you have to do the same operation again after a few years?
Clothing, which most seem to accept, is a tool which we wear on our skin and most times we never really think about it, but clothing is actually the closest we get to being one with the tool in our everyday life. I guess the circle is closed when we've got manmaking machines; man creates the machine and the machine changes man.
Glad to hear you're satisfied with your eye-augmentation Cake, I'm thinking about doing the same operation sometime in a not to distant future. But what happens if your sight gets worse again, do you have to do the same operation again after a few years?
#41 Posted 05 September 2011 - 09:09 PM
Sleeping Mind, on 05 September 2011 - 08:23 PM, said:
Transhumanism is just a term to describe a new chapter in the human evolution. First we only knew how to handle our body, then we learned how to use objects in our favor, then we learned how to use proper tools. Transhumanism is just a way of putting the tools into our body; a pretty logical step in our evolution.
Clothing, which most seem to accept, is a tool which we wear on our skin and most times we never really think about it, but clothing is actually the closest we get to being one with the tool in our everyday life. I guess the circle is closed when we've got manmaking machines; man creates the machine and the machine changes man.
Glad to hear you're satisfied with your eye-augmentation Cake, I'm thinking about doing the same operation sometime in a not to distant future. But what happens if your sight gets worse again, do you have to do the same operation again after a few years?
Clothing, which most seem to accept, is a tool which we wear on our skin and most times we never really think about it, but clothing is actually the closest we get to being one with the tool in our everyday life. I guess the circle is closed when we've got manmaking machines; man creates the machine and the machine changes man.
Glad to hear you're satisfied with your eye-augmentation Cake, I'm thinking about doing the same operation sometime in a not to distant future. But what happens if your sight gets worse again, do you have to do the same operation again after a few years?
I'm not sure where you live, but I had mine done at the Mann Eye Institute. Depending on your own body and genetics, your eyesight will get worse at a predetermined rate. Laser eye surgery resets it to zero so that you can see 20/20 (or better) but if your eye sight was already degrading at a fast rate, you'll know beforehand if you'll need to do it again soon. Talk to your optometrist (or local lasik institute) about how much your vision worsens every year and they can tell you if you'd need to get it done again anytime soon. They tell me the rate at which it degrades also slows down when you get older so if you wait a bit, you'll have less of a chance of actually needing to go back for a re-adjustment.
Anyways, the place I got it done at, if I go to all of my outpatient visits, they'll correct my vision for free up to 2 years.
And since nanotechnology is (to my knowledge) not even conceivable right now, while robotic prosthesis are, I wonder if there is anyone willing to get something like this willingly if they don't need it.
#42 Posted 05 September 2011 - 09:21 PM
srpinting legs are good for...sprinting. Real human legs are very versatile. Those prosthetics are completely useless in normal life.
But if you like that, check these videos out (they'z gotz a hawt chick in them)
http://www.ted.com/t...aesthetics.html
http://www.ted.com/t..._adversity.html
But if you like that, check these videos out (they'z gotz a hawt chick in them)
http://www.ted.com/t...aesthetics.html
http://www.ted.com/t..._adversity.html
A Vvaardenfell sunset
#43 Posted 05 September 2011 - 09:45 PM
Brumisator, on 05 September 2011 - 10:21 PM, said:
srpinting legs are good for...sprinting. Real human legs are very versatile. Those prosthetics are completely useless in normal life.
But if you like that, check these videos out (they'z gotz a hawt chick in them)
http://www.ted.com/t...aesthetics.html
http://www.ted.com/t..._adversity.html
But if you like that, check these videos out (they'z gotz a hawt chick in them)
http://www.ted.com/t...aesthetics.html
http://www.ted.com/t..._adversity.html
I find it amazing that she has 5 different height variables.
and this
#44 Posted 05 September 2011 - 10:22 PM
I saw that TED talk and I have to agree with the one of the posters that she is not doing anybody a favour, she is essentially accessorizing prosthetic limbs and essentially creating another barrier for woman who cannot meet her level of beauty and thus shattering any prospect of raising self confidence after loosing an arm or leg, or eye.
#45 Posted 05 September 2011 - 10:45 PM
suicide_mission, on 06 September 2011 - 01:22 AM, said:
I saw that TED talk and I have to agree with the one of the posters that she is not doing anybody a favour, she is essentially accessorizing prosthetic limbs and essentially creating another barrier for woman who cannot meet her level of beauty and thus shattering any prospect of raising self confidence after loosing an arm or leg, or eye.
I'm pretty sure her experience could help others with missing limbs see life in a new way.
But yes, she's an exeptionally fortunate individual.
A Vvaardenfell sunset