@robin5543 Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with the possibility of transhuman solutions---I mean, it makes sense. Technology has definitely done a lot for us, so why can't it cure human weaknesses, too? It's just that it's easy for us in industrialized cultures to forget that other cultures have had to deal with and address those same weaknesses--and they've been at it much longer than we have. If you're interested, search for "Wade Davis" here on YouTube for more info.
@robin5543 It's widely accepted by most people favouring a technological solution that global warming is anthropogenic---caused by our use of technology. Stone age hunter gatherers would not have created that problem. But I'm not saying we should all become stone age hunter gatherers. If we used more public transit, and ate less beef, global warming would also be reduced without either the need for transhuman tech, or a return to hunter-gatherer lifestyles.
@robin5543 Society is never fully stable. Period. Never was, and never will be. You have to remember that the need for technology is also a cultural value, and I don't see how the instability of society automatically makes technology the only answer.
@robin5543 But the opposite is also true. One of the reasons for widespread warfare is advances in technology. Hunter-gatherers might skirmish, but they can't go to war because they lack the surplus population made possible by agriculture. Technology may solve some problems, but it causes quite a lot of them, too.
@robin5543 Why does humanity itself need to be altered to create a stable and secure society? For example, why is longevity automatically a good thing? Death is only a problem if you see it as one. Other cultures may view it as a feature of a human life, rather than a bug.
@robin5543 Well, it's much easier in small populations, but I agree that no state is perfect or permanent---but that applies to the competitive drive as well. Even if the majority of members of a culture believe are competitive, and technologically driven; as you say, there will always be dissidents, and at some point those dissidents will become the majority. Civilizations happen in cycles. Over a long enough timeline, there's never an unbroken line of technological advancement.
@robin5543 Sure, those needs are undeniable, but there are plenty of solutions besides the technological. The Aborigines, for example, don't stifle those needs, they just address them by working (a lot harder than our culture does) at building good relationships with each other, so people are happier and more secure. Each group intentionally makes itself dependent on its neighbours so no one can go to war, and so they're forced to work things out peacefully.
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
@robin5543 Well, I don't think there's anything wrong with the possibility of transhuman solutions---I mean, it makes sense. Technology has definitely done a lot for us, so why can't it cure human weaknesses, too? It's just that it's easy for us in industrialized cultures to forget that other cultures have had to deal with and address those same weaknesses--and they've been at it much longer than we have. If you're interested, search for "Wade Davis" here on YouTube for more info.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
@robin5543 It's widely accepted by most people favouring a technological solution that global warming is anthropogenic---caused by our use of technology. Stone age hunter gatherers would not have created that problem. But I'm not saying we should all become stone age hunter gatherers. If we used more public transit, and ate less beef, global warming would also be reduced without either the need for transhuman tech, or a return to hunter-gatherer lifestyles.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
@robin5543 Society is never fully stable. Period. Never was, and never will be. You have to remember that the need for technology is also a cultural value, and I don't see how the instability of society automatically makes technology the only answer.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
@robin5543 But the opposite is also true. One of the reasons for widespread warfare is advances in technology. Hunter-gatherers might skirmish, but they can't go to war because they lack the surplus population made possible by agriculture. Technology may solve some problems, but it causes quite a lot of them, too.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
@robin5543 Why does humanity itself need to be altered to create a stable and secure society? For example, why is longevity automatically a good thing? Death is only a problem if you see it as one. Other cultures may view it as a feature of a human life, rather than a bug.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
@robin5543 Well, it's much easier in small populations, but I agree that no state is perfect or permanent---but that applies to the competitive drive as well. Even if the majority of members of a culture believe are competitive, and technologically driven; as you say, there will always be dissidents, and at some point those dissidents will become the majority. Civilizations happen in cycles. Over a long enough timeline, there's never an unbroken line of technological advancement.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
@robin5543 Sure, those needs are undeniable, but there are plenty of solutions besides the technological. The Aborigines, for example, don't stifle those needs, they just address them by working (a lot harder than our culture does) at building good relationships with each other, so people are happier and more secure. Each group intentionally makes itself dependent on its neighbours so no one can go to war, and so they're forced to work things out peacefully.
CathodeRay00 1 week ago
Comment removed
robin5543 1 week ago
i just fucking love it!!! this is future, of course we will one day have the option to become immortal
zoveia 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Deadmansparty2002 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Deadmansparty2002 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Deadmansparty2002 3 weeks ago
Fantastic lecture, one would hope that if we do develop trans-human abilities that Robert J Sawyer will be among those philosophers to be given that opportunity. :)
Deadmansparty2002 3 weeks ago