 Greetings, ladies and gentlemen. We are live today on November 18th 2017 for the United States Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Art and Transhumanism. And my name is Janati Stolier of the second. I will be joined today by Emmanuel Iral, who is the Director of Visual Art for the United States Transhumanist Party. And thank you for joining us, Emmanuel. He will be moderating a large portion of our discussion, but I am here to observe and to introduce our esteemed panelists. We have intentionally assembled a wide range of artists and artistic styles, individuals with diverse perspectives who will offer us insights on how art can help improve the human condition, can help inspire people to support developments in science and technology, can convey either a more hopeful vision of the future or a cautionary vision of futures we wouldn't want to see. So with that being said, our esteemed panelists are Rachel Lynn Edler. Rachel is an accomplished graphic designer with over 20 years of creative experience. Rachel comes from a diverse background of product development, packaging, and web design. In her free time, she volunteers for several scientific and secular organizations, including Planetary Society, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, and the Secular Coalition for America. So welcome, Rachel. Thank you. Good to be here. Certainly. Then we have John Marlow. John was educated in film theory and trained in film production at UC Berkeley. His outlook on film as a vehicle for social messaging has been largely influenced by his lifelong struggle with a genetic inborn error of metabolism, a type of disease that until recently was beyond the scope of medicine. Consequently, John feels it is his onus to emphasize the artist's responsibility in shaping the conversation regarding medical research to create a society more amenable to scientific progress rather than one fearful of change. Welcome, John. Thank you. Thank you, Janet. Then certainly. And then we have our Nicholas Starr or Ryan Starr, who is an audio engineer and multimedia artist whose work focuses on Earth's dystopias of past, present, and future. Also a biohacker, researcher, and theorist, he immerses himself in the subjects surrounding these worlds and has published several nonfiction articles and interviews with an education in electronic signals intelligence from the United States Air Force and 15 years of digital art and audio production in the U.S. and abroad. He has become a unique voice for science fiction, the U.S. transhumanist movement, and American policy. So welcome, Ryan. Hello. Excellent. Definitely, we can cure you. And then we have Lea Montalto. Lea is a painter based in New York City and has maintained a successfully operating painting studio in New York for the past 12 years. Her paintings have been exhibited at the National Academy Museum of Fine Art in New York and have been reviewed in the New York Times and the Providence Journal. Lea's paintings have received awards, including the National Academy Museum of Fine Arts Hallgarden Prize in painting and the NYC Cultural Commission Arts Grant. Lea is a former professor at Sarah Lawrence College and has an MFA in painting from the Rhode Island School of Design. Lea is not affiliated with the transhumanist party, but her paintings explore related themes. Welcome, Lea. Hi. Thank you. Excellent. So then we have Yekaterinia Vladinakova, who is an accomplished digital painter and professional freelance illustrator. Vladinakova specializes in fantasy and science fiction work, but is also interested in editorial illustration. Vladinakova spends most of the day painting in Photoshop, creating scenes related to fantasy or science fiction, as well as brushing up older works. Vladinakova's paintings have been featured by the U.S. Transhumanist Party, including the City of New Antida, which I encourage all viewers to take a look at. It is a vision of the future, which was commissioned for my recent 30th birthday. Welcome, Yekaterinia. And then we have Kim Bowden Hammer Smith, who is a single mother of two boys living in Chattanooga, Tennessee. She is a founding member of Southside Abbey, a lay missioner in the Episcopal Church, and an outdoor wear business owner of Chili Heads. She is a Kaver Unicycler and an aviation enthusiast and creator of the Helly Church. She has a BFA in metals and has also studied graphic design and political science. She tells me she also has many Tesla tales to tell and is a self-described social media manipulator, which is different from a troll, and we can discuss the differences at some point in the panel. Perhaps welcome, Kim. And then we have Dr. Laura Catherine Weston, who is from England and has studied fine art before going on to studying medicine. She is a trained pathologist with a specialism in medical biochemistry and inflammation-related disease. She has used her medical knowledge and professional painting career to support Lifespan.io, one of the biggest life extension research and advocacy charities. Laura is also a vocalist for the Symphonic Metal Band Cyclocosmia, a music act that will be trying to raise awareness of transhumanist and human mortality issues in their next upcoming album. So welcome, Laura. Thank you for joining us today. Looks like we have quite a full and diverse and wide-ranging panel, and I am excited to hear all of your insights. So let us start with you, Rachel. What insights can you offer regarding the central topic of the panel, which is how art can inspire people to support developments in science and technology and improve the human condition? Yeah, well, I think graphic designers and other artists have a unique opportunity to enhance communication and visual perception of the world, and I think science and technology needs a diverse range of skills to improve and enhance humanity. So it's not just scientists, but also communicators of science to spread the message of transhumanism and how we can help humanity evolve. So it's an important thing for us creative people to deal with. Yes, indeed. Yes, indeed. And I think the role of creativity and formulating a vision of the future is often underrated, especially in scientific and technological circles. There are, of course, a lot of the technical work has to be done, but also in order to do the technical work, one has to have goals to strive toward, and I think that's where the artist can formulate the vision. So, John, what are your thoughts on this question? Well, thanks for having me. I just want to thank you again. So I think that right now as it stands, there is a lot of, you could call it technophobia and popular art. And I don't think in and of itself, this is a bad thing. But what I think the problem is, is that there's no counterpoint. You know, I don't know if many of you are familiar with William Blake, but he had these poems called Contrasts, or he would discuss or rather evaluate this as the same subject, but from two entirely different perspectives. Right now, we have essentially just one perspective. It's how technology can be misused. You know, like specifically with AI, we see a lot of, you know, I mean, not exclusively, but there's a lot of it where it tries to make us afraid of that, you know, it's going to take us over and make us into like slaves or something. Medical science fiction goes, you know, I mean, there's not a lot of it, but you know, it could harken back to Gattaca. And in Gattaca, which is, you know, I think it's a great film. It emphasizes the importance of, you know, just goodwill and humanity, all those things. But it creates this sort of image of a society where there's no upward mobility, where, you know, there's genetic stratification and, you know, there's no way to modify adults so that they can, you know, those born with certain defects can't become just as good as someone who might have been tinkered with as an embryo, you know. So, I mean, that's kind of my shtick. It's essentially whenever there's some sort of technophobic film coming out, a cautionary might be a better word for it. I think that it's artists should jump to the challenge of making a film that champions some of the positive aspects of it. Well, maybe acknowledging these issues that might come about. So, that's my stance. Yes. Thank you, John. And you're correct. There is a preponderance of dystopian art regarding the future, both in terms of films and written fiction and visual media. And one of the challenges that we have is offer a vision that counterbalances that. So, Ryan, what are your thoughts on this question? Well, as you said before, I kind of like my dystopias. But as John said, it is important to have that point and counterpoint. The way I kind of approach the topic of art and transhumanism is that art tends to inspire us to, you know, take those next steps. The breakthrough ideas often come from art first. And then the scientist then goes on to develop it. And this goes back all the way to ancient Greece. So, it's a, it's been a lot of time researching, you know, finding those links of, you know, where did automation start and how we brought it into present day? Yes, indeed. Yes, indeed. And Leia, what are your thoughts on this main question? So, I was brought up and probably most people living with a concept or idea or a myth that art is, because art is non-utilitarian, it's just a luxury item that doesn't have any real effect. And there's new scientific research coming out that, well, first of all, there are new scientific tools coming out that could actually track exactly where people's eyes move across the composition of a painting. So, we know where people are looking and what's triggering them to look where. And there's also research now showing which regions of people's brains get activated when they look at a certain type of painting versus another type of painting. And I just went to a conference on Sunday and Monday where I saw some of the research and they spoke specifically about a representational painting versus an abstract painting. So, representational would be something like a still life or a landscape where you have all the information is handed to you on a silver platter and you see exactly what the object is supposed to be versus abstract, where it's not clear. And the abstract paintings were actually causing the regions and people's brains that are associated with intelligence and creativity to be activated and the representational ones were not. And I've been making abstract paintings for about 20 years and so this topic is interesting to me. They explore some of the themes that people have already been talking about. They're more on the positive utopian side of the exploration. They're sort of an abstract representation of the ideas in Eric Drexler's engines of creation. Yes, indeed. And the U.S. Transhumanist Party has featured your series, The Singularity is Here. The digital images of the paintings are available on our website for those who would like to see them. But yes, they definitely look hopeful and inspiring. They're very multi-colored landscapes. You can look at them from many different perspectives. And I think perhaps you mentioned the abstract art triggering more areas of the brain. This may be because individuals have a task of interpretation as well as just taking in the visual image. Would you concur with that? I'm not qualified to make a judgment about that, but I'm just repeating the science that I learned and that would be true. That the abstract painting, if it's done properly, it's a distillation of something that's concrete, that's something representational, but it leaves enough, it has something substantial and referential, but it leaves something available for the imagination to try to solve. And that's a separate tangent, but I don't personally think that all abstract paintings could do that if they're just like a blob of chaos. I don't know if they do, but that hypothetically, that's what the science is showing is that when it's not, when there's less something to mystery, it engages the creative and intelligent parts of people's minds. That when it's a straightforward illustration, it doesn't. I don't want to be controversial because my favorite painters in history are representational painters, so I'm not trying to a battle of abstraction versus representation. I just wanted to bring this particular concept into the discussion. Certainly, and this is an interesting concept to explore that we can delve into later on as well. Yucatinia, what thoughts do you have on the main question of the panel? I don't think my thoughts are that different than the other people who are making work that shows a positive and optimistic vision of a future where if we have a blend of very advanced technology but also very advanced philosophy and social policy, it's a projection of what that might look like. All right, so next I would like to hear from Yucatinia Vladinacola regarding the main question of the panel. Sure, I'll go ahead. One of the great things about art is that it allows us to see what the scientists see in a certain sense. There's a famous artist by the name of Kazu Sano. He unfortunately passed away from cancer some years ago. He did some very stunning works regarding dinosaurs. He was doing his works for national geographies and when they published his works as a cover for the magazines as well as illustrations for the magazines, they got a lot more attention and that attracted a lot more people to be interested into the sciences of dinosaurs. So I think art is very powerful as a means of advertisement as well as communicating in the light, communicating an idea for those to see it. I also see art as a way for us to express our vision for the future. For example, if you want to, for example, warn people about the down the risks of certain technologies, you could, of course, put a movie about your warning. The main issue with a lot of these science fiction movies is they tend to veer too far on the side of pessimism. I mean, I get that there is, of course, risk, but almost all these movies, at least as far as I can see are generally pretty pessimistic when they discuss about the future and I would like to see a bit more of a counterbalance for sure. So I see art as a very powerful communication tool as far as advertisement and expressing a message about either something that happened long ago or our visions for the future. Yes, indeed. Thank you. And you're entirely correct. Looking at art that has a scientific connection or illustrates a scientific concept can get people interested in the science or looking at paintings that illustrate a certain vision of the future can help people be interested in actually bringing that vision about and implementing it. So you create a lot of futuristic city scapes as well as planet scapes and looking at those, I think, when gets inspired to, for instance, support space colonization or to support innovative new methods of construction or to support a society that has the technological know how and the prosperity to bring those visions into being. So I can definitely agree with that characterization. Kim, what are your thoughts on the main question of the panel? So it's interesting that he brought up dinosaurs because in caving, cave art, primal art is one of the things that really first started to get me into alignment with culture and humanity as us as a human race evolving on the planet, which is also tied into my studies, church art, which push such huge social movement and agendas in our culture. And I studied design overall. And I guess what I've gotten into most recently as far as art is the art of Elon Musk and changing the way that we mobilize ourselves around this planet and get around the planet and asking some of the future questions. I mean, I see cars as art, you know, when you really get into Porsches and Bugatties and, you know, fine luxury vehicles that are made one part at a time. This is art. And this is how we have evolved from horse and buggy to, you know, driving around and glorified golf carts that cost $250,000, you know, and new models just been released. And that is art. If you go and look and see how he has changed the retail buying process of a vehicle, it's changing the game. So I want to be a part of pushing these social agendas. And art is a very powerful tool to do it. It's propaganda. It is what it is. But it's how we operate and communicate. And it's far more valuable than any words that can come out of our mouth. You know, one image, thousand words. And it's the way it is. And especially when we can communicate via technology with social media being what it is, it's crazy what we have at our fingertips to do in the next, you know, 100 years, if not 1000 years. And then putting that into a political sense and tying it into our social process. That's exciting to me. So that's why I'm here to contribute with love and peace. And I happen to really do it from a spiritual viewpoint. I think that's something that we're missing in our human experience. So I think it goes pretty well with social agenda and and doing something positive that's not red and blue, but something in between for all of us. So yeah, this is exciting. Thank you for inviting me to the naughty. Absolutely. Thank you very much for your remarks, Kim. And while it's not visible in this frame, I actually have a large collection of miniature cars throughout the house. And although I cannot afford a $250,000 vehicle, I can afford a Dicast model of a $250,000 vehicle. So I have quite a few of those, including Teslas, by the way. So he has one to ride in our Tesla. Yes. Tesla tail. Yes. That was neat. That was really smooth ride with semi-autonomous features. So I definitely appreciate that. And maybe someday I will have one of my own. We will see. But anyway, Laura, what are your thoughts regarding the main subject of the panel? Hello. First of all, can you hear me all right? Yes. Excellent. I fear I may be elaborating on things that people have already mentioned. But I think it's going to be a very important tool for a subject that some people can find either very jargony or intimidating or quite frankly frightening. Because of, again, what a lot of people have said about the negativities associated with a lot of the philosophies and technologies surrounding transhumanism. So what I try to do personally with my art, also coming from a medical background, is if you do work in a scientific and medical background, your brain gets oversaturated with logic every single day and it drives you mad. So by getting that out of the system, it also allows you to sort of perceive ideas in a completely different way. And you can then share that with people. You can also allow people to engage with ideas, not just your ideas that you're trying to get across, or maybe your beliefs and philosophies that you're trying to get across, but you can sort of through art allow them to challenge their own thoughts on things. Particularly when it's sort of in an abstract sense, people can make their own interpretations, they can come to their own conclusions, which I think is far more important than bombarding them with, no, this is the right way of thinking, because that's just not good in any way. So I also use a lot of my own art personally to raise money for various charities and things like that. And again, raise awareness for either diseases or topics within the medical and scientific fields that are maybe not as recognized as they should be. So yeah, that's essentially all I've got to say, I know. Yes. Thank you for your comments, Laura. And I now own four of your prints, arising from the Mouse Age fundraiser. And they are unique prints. I will have them framed and displayed in a prominent location around the house soon. But they are in a wide range of styles, and they definitely convey a wide range of moods. And they do leave bit open to individual interpretation related to what Lea was talking about with regard to abstract art. Some of them are abstract, some of them are representational, but they're quite interesting and engaging. So thank you for your work. Yes. So now that we've heard from everybody, I would like to take a look at the audience comments that have been submitted thus far. Transhumanity now states music's influence on the mind is elusive and not easily quantified. How can music and musicians best advance transhumanism? And I think this is a good opportunity for me to make a few remarks because I am a composer. I predominantly compose in a classical or one might say neoclassical style with some modern influences. I have composed a few pieces that were explicitly transhumanist in their subject matter. One is men struggle against death, which actually tries to portray the sequential overcoming of each of the main types of age-related damage that Aubrey de Grey identified as part of his sense program. So there's a single theme, but it has seven variations and the variations proceed from essentially this fairly gloomy struggle against seemingly insurmountable opponent to something that becomes increasingly resolute and then very cheerful and radiant. And at the end of that set of seven variations, there's just a small segment that is intended to convey the words of John Dunn's poem, death be not proud, the final words and death shall be no more, death thou shalt die. So that's an example of a very direct conveyance of the transhumanist vision. I also have the transhumanist march, which I composed in 2014, which is an attempt to illustrate not just a bright flourishing vision of a future society, but also it's a piece that no human being could possibly play on the piano. It was composed digitally and maybe a transhuman being might be able to play it, but if you listen to it, there's no way that some of the chord progressions could be played by a human hand, or just the sequence of notes is so rapid. And again, it's an illustration that technology can create something that the unaided human being wouldn't be able to. And indeed, the only reason why I'm able to compose them this way is because of all of the technology that exists to enable me to do that. So those are some examples of how music can advance the transhumanist vision, but for others of you who are involved in music, if you could share some thoughts, I would appreciate that. Well, yeah, sure. I think there are two separate sides to how music can inspire others to do things or create a certain mood or emotion. And, you know, you have your pop culture side, which helps, you know, portray a specific message to a large amount of people. But you also have the cinematic side, if you will, where, you know, the music helps set the mood for the rest of the environment. It's a purely emotional thing. So, you know, as people often say in the film industry, your picture can be a little off, but if the audio is off, the whole experience into the world is gone. It's been ruined. So maybe people take it a bit for granted, you know, because we just we take all that audio information in and it just kind of gets processed in the back of your mind, I guess. So music can be a tricky thing, especially when there aren't lyrics involved or other sorts of pictures. But I think by and large, it gets processed in a meaningful way that's just a little behind the scenes. That's certainly the case, for instance, with film scores and with some film music. You hear it very prominently, like the opening theme or the closing theme to, say, a Star Wars film or a Star Trek film, those are quite memorable. But then you have incidental music that accompanies some events that the viewer is focusing on. And that's definitely a bit more in the background, but it has an impact. So thank you for those thoughts, Ryan. And now anyone else who wishes to comment on the subject of music? I'm happy to say a little bit, because I am a professional musician. I mean, for Cyclocosmia, we try to, I mean, the reason why we work with symphonic metal is that we are using classical music and metal music, which is, you know, it is not modern, but it is far more modern than classical, and sort of smashing it together to sort of create a contrast between new and old world. And a lot of, like the subjects we tackle directly with lyrics are things like diseases. So we literally wrote a song about losing people we love to Alzheimer's and things like that. You know, things that lots of people can relate with, because the last thing we want to do is again, is force transhumanist philosophy down people's throats. We simply want to, you know, raise an awareness of it and allow people to explore it within themselves. The next album we are going to be focusing a lot on immortality. And there is a sort of sturdy progression as albums come out of sort of leading people along this pathway of various subjects through both actual lyrics, which are very obvious, and strange chord progressions that will hopefully invoke mental imagery. This again allows people to explore a thinner or sort of more specific way. Because both myself and James, my musical partner, we both have seen us easier. So we literally process music as colors and imagery. So we are trying to project that imagery and share it with other people. Again, in the hope that it will just make it more accessible. Because the scary thing is that these things are all around us. And it is, and there's lots of change coming. And I think that there isn't enough positive light shed on these things, even these really dark subjects. So it's just to sort of allow people to explore it. But again, music is a tricky one because it is so personal. And it's hard to make everyone happy or do, you know, people won't understand what you're trying to convey, things like that. Because yeah, there is the very personal side of music, which you don't often get as much, I would say, visual arts. And I think you make a good point with combining different historical periods of music into each other with, you know, the symphonic side and the metal side. I do the same thing with my music. It spans from medieval instruments to, you know, symphonic composition to metal and industrial. And, you know, when I was going through my whole thought process about how I justify playing a rouse pipe with synthesizers, you know, it makes, you kind of have to, you justify it by building a world, building a character. And I think each listener kind of does that as well. When you combine two things that historically have never gone together until that moment, it forces people to think about the progression of technology that allowed it to happen in the first place. Yes, indeed. And Laura, I would be highly intrigued to listen to your future albums on immortality and also to kind of see the product, the synesthesia that you and James have. I do not have that particular faculty, but it must be fascinating to experience that and to have that connection between the visual and the musical. Definitely keep you posted as time goes on. I can put some links in chat for anybody that wants to see already existing works. And yeah, we also have an art project alongside that's going to come out with it, but it is all in the works at the moment. That sounds excellent. Now, any further thoughts on the connections between music, visual art, transhumanism, inspiration for the future from anybody? Hearing none, I am going to turn over the subsequent course of the questions to Emmanuel. And Emmanuel, you also have some experience in music yourself. So if you do want to share some thoughts of your own, feel free to do so. Or if you want to take this discussion in another direction, feel free to do that as well. In terms of music, you know, like being a musician myself, you know, starting out, you know, a basic instrument as a child is a guitar, you know, you get a guitar, you get a piano. It's the two most simple, essential instruments that, you know, that segway, that open up into the world of, you know, like that merge into technology. Like now I produce electronic music. And over the years, I've learned how like, you know, there is like the sounds that you can accomplish that we can no longer accomplish with organic things, you know, like guitars and pianos with our own fingers, you know, because the advancements in sound design, sound engineering, like one of my favorite electronic producers is Skrillex. So many more. And he went from a heavy metal post on the core genre to electronic music. And what's really funny about him is that he essentially, most of his music is strictly all done on his laptop. And his music is very, very loud. It's very, like, you know, sort of like, produce like, or I'm trying to say that like artists now like, have like this freedom, it's beautiful freedom of being able to create like a very unique sound that it's not, it can never be here that has never been heard before. That's, that's something I strive for as an artist myself to create that unique sound. And you can only think technology for that. And technology like allows you to like, further evolve, further merge, organic with the synthetic. So if I could ask you a question, maybe have a different opinion on this. How it has synthetic, synthetic sided music brought technology, do you think, to the greater masses? Like, you know, EDM is a huge, huge scene. Yeah, I see it a lot in the film, you know, like, you get like, great example of Tron Legacy, you get a movie that was composed by that, a very iconic electronic music duo. And like, you have other movies like shows, one of my favorite shows is Mr. Robot and their score is very electronic. And you start to see like this further development of like, you know, a lot of other shows and movies, you know, experimenting with these, with these synths and these sounds, Han Simmer is a very big composer. He uses a lot of synths and his large orchestra ensembles and his, I'm pretty sure we've all heard like his movies, Blade Runner, Beautiful, like, and people are starting to like get that feel for, you know, like, this is the future of the future, these beautiful sounds that don't necessarily have to come from your basic guitar, your basic clarinet, you know, like the sounding balls and it gets bigger and bigger. It really sets its own, especially in Blade Runner. Blade Runner was beautiful, cinematography and the music. I have something to say, also. I think technology now allows us to share our music too, so it's small composers can share something across the world and that's pretty amazing. Even artwork too, we can share it with someone in another country instantly. So that's something that couldn't happen until recently. That's awesome. And the beauty of it all too is that with technology, we can like merge everything together, I'm pretty sure, like, all, watch them, discuss right now, so far that we're all working on, you know, its music, visual, like that. It's so easy with these programs that we have, like the Adobe Creative Suite, Cinema 4D, our digital audio workstations, you know, like combine all these resources to create massive productions. We don't need, like, a full tech studio or an army of, like, bunch of tech guys, you know, we can essentially, it's starting to, like, dwindle down to, like, single personal components, you know, like, we do a lot of editing now on our phones. We can record, you know, some people literally make songs off their phones on top of us. Yeah, you can do video editing too on your phone. You guys, wait till you can drive around in your Tesla and do all of this stuff right there in front of you while your car drives you to your place. Right. The maximizing our time that we can use doing other things more productively as technology steps in and does some of the dummy work for us, it will be amazing. The consistency that will flow into our lives and the easier it will become and how it integrates into your life to give you the news you want to hear, the music you want to, you know, see the people you want to engage with over social media. And I mean, just this conversation we're having right here is a perfect example of how all these things can come into one and we can sit here, you know, in different parts of the country and have this conversation. Exactly. And like, you know, for my music in particular, I do almost everything on my iPad sitting in a parking lot, you know, in my car somewhere, because I spend a lot of time just out and about. The inspiration is you can take your technology and start creating that's something that has been historically very difficult to do. Yes, that's that is the Helly Church. Correct, Kim? Yes, hashtag Helly Church. Yes, wonderful. And you have some great imagery of just the views that you took while flying in a helicopter of just these magnificent expansive landscapes that I would say are art in and of themselves. And it changes your perspective on people and that all these lives are going on underneath you. Same importance as yours. But it's definitely a meditation time because it's also, you know, trust within your partner and your pilot and, you know, all other kinds of things are going into that moving happening art. And I'm also into art happenings. I ride a unicycle in a cave. And the pictures that come out of that are, you know, the actual art, especially when I'm naked doing it. But the event is those people get to experience it with me right there underground. And that's my real sanctuary is underground and in the cave. And that's primal and that's within us all. And, you know, we've been doing art for hundreds of thousands of years since first, you know, creatures creeped out with fingers. And it's crazy. So, yeah, this is exciting. How do you think that the primal aspect can help merge with the technological aspect of things? So I think I kind of have a message. I think my art kind of does that. It talks about, you know, feminism, humanity, all these things kind of wrapped into one. But like I said, I think we're kind of spiritually bankrupt country right now, like really. And that comes about because of the red and the blue taking sides. It's not an us. It's a us and them. So I think this is one of those kind of opportunities to start a political movement to change the conversation. You know, and there's lots of things that are really exciting about medicine. But, you know, it's only available to those, you know, certain you. I don't know. This opens up the conversation about it. And people like Zoltan go Zoltan, you know, are brave enough to come out and say, hey, let's change the conversation. Do it differently. Like do it like Elon, you know, do it differently. How can we make this industry different? A couple months ago, I interviewed Russ Fox, who is, you know, he's a biohacker. He's a body artist. But he also does, you know, he's very focused on the technology stuff. He also does this very primal suspension stuff. And me and him have talked about how the primal and the technology can merge together into one body, literally and figuratively, one body of art. And that's, I think something that the transhumanist party can really use to help start to the conversation of morphological freedom and, you know, do to your body what you will kind of mentality. Yes, indeed. Yeah, I think the human body is interesting. And also, well, definitely the possibilities for, let's say, transforming the human being in an artistic manner are greatly amplified by technology to a very rudimentary extent. The clothing we wear is a form of artistic compression. The colors we choose, the patterns we choose, the cut, the style, the fact that I'm wearing this pin right now that says supporter of indefinite life extension, although the camera image isn't sufficiently distinct to show that. But nonetheless, one can make an artistic statement with oneself and transhumanist technology broadens the range of possibilities of doing that. So, let's see. John, do you have any thoughts on what has been discussed so far? Well, someone mentioned a Blade Runner, actually, and that's a film that I absolutely love. I do have some comments regarding that and Ex Machina, which I'd like to compare it to. Sometimes people describe Blade Runner as dystopian. However, you know, I would actually disagree with that. I've heard some critics actually describe it as heterotopian. And I think that that's actually a more fitting term for it, specifically because, you know, although the world is really in a dismal state in some areas, there are some people that are, you know, clearly benefiting from the technology. And as for its take on replicants or androids, right, you know, and Blade Runner, you know, they're initially characterized as extremely violent. You know, as you proceed to the film through little clues like more human than human and ultimately the climax, we see that, you know, these androids actually can be human. You know, they can actually be more human than us by virtue of their intelligence, right? You know, the Roy Batty, of course, spares Deckard in spite of Deckard having killed his, the love of his life, right? Just moments before, and that's just an extraordinary gesture. Now, looking at Ex Machina, for instance, which I do think is a good film, as far as craftsmanship is concerned, and, you know, it's shaped very nicely and there's definitely a lot of competence in that film. However, you know, and this is just my personal opinion, at the end, I think it's extremely technophobic. So throughout the film, they're discussing whether or not these androids could have compassion or, you know, they might have some sort of human component, right? The, that was at the Sergei Bren character, forgive me, I forgot his name, reassures the protagonist that are, you know, reminds him constantly that this, this, this, this automata, this automaton is just purely a set of algorithms, right? It'll do whatever it needs to escape and there's nothing beyond that, right? And so that actually turns out to be true. And so I think the difference between them as far as like artificial intelligence goes is that, you know, Blade Runner, it reminds us that we can't abuse them. And they actually have the potential to be very human, right? They can be just like us. Whereas Ex Machina says, well, we can't trust them because they're going to murder us and there's nothing to them beyond their programming, right? So I mean, I thought that's what my thoughts were when someone mentioned Blade Runner. It's a very, I'm very passionate about it. And I think that it's a prime example of how we can, we can address some of the pitfalls of technology, which Blade Runner does, it shows us how things can go wrong, but also some of the benefits and some of the wonders of it. So I like to conclude by saying that, you know, you don't have to make a utopian film. You could make a heterotopian film, which acknowledges both the pitfalls and some of the wonders, you know? Well, has there ever been a truly utopian, like, you know, futuristic film? I know there are books like Francis Bacon's New Atlantis, which actually can provide quite a bit of a inspiration for transhumanism, because it's, you know, specifically a science run government in that book. But like you said, I don't think I can, you know, remember one either. There's always some kind of sinister element to it if there's a utopia society, like some things going on that's not good. Yeah, well, maybe that's just because it's good storytelling. You know, people need that drama, that tension to get through a story. And perhaps that's why we only see dystopias in art and public media. It may also be because ultimately, we are imperfect creatures. So how could, you know, a perfect system, even one that has been designed to be perfect, ever be truly perfect and utopian? It's all a reflection of us, you know, what we see of our inner fears, and we project it onto everything, you know? That's the power of art, you know, like people are able to, you know, like portray their emotions, but sometimes these emotions are filled with fear, doubt, paranoia. That's how you get movies like Blade Runner and Ximaki, you know, to, you know, give you those undertones, you know, like technology, something you don't want to mess with, but like, at the end of the day, we're the ones who created this, this technology. We created this in a new life. It is a new life, no matter the material, no matter the carbon base. It's all the same. It's all emotion. It's essentially a reflection of, it's just a pattern, a pattern that keeps repeating itself. I feel like we have the power to shift away from that negative future, you know, that some people are seeing these days, you know, like the still being future, especially with what's going on in politics and government, but it's just so many complicated things, you know, because there's only so much very few people can do when the majority of people still conform, still don't see this vision that we do in this vision of the future. Instead, they either stay in the past or retract it, stay in the present and retract to the past. So, which is a good thing for art to explore. We can push that conversation. Push that, exactly. Art pushes our folks at the plush room. Art puts it there, you know, like art cannot be escaped. Art is the propaganda. Art, so speaking of artist propaganda, I think this is a good place for me to ask this question. Kim, if you're on, what is the difference between a social media manipulator and a troll? I don't know if you heard that, Kim, but I'll come back to that question when you return. So, but a lot of interesting things were said. I like this concept of heterotopian art or fiction because it's correct. One needs to have some sort of conflict, some sort of dramatic tension in telling a story. It's hard to do that if everything is ideal. So, in some ways, having more utopian elements to art is more challenging because then one has to find a creative way to express that conflict. And perhaps one reason why dystopias are as common as they are is because, especially for a lot of films that are aimed at a mainstream audience, perhaps the creators don't have the inclination to be as imaginative as perhaps they should be, but rather they take the shortcut of throwing out something that is as shocking as possible, as immediately affecting as possible, and then also subtly along the way comfort the audience by saying, well, the future may be bleak, but at least you're not in that future yet. You're sitting in the comfort of your movie theater. Maybe that's the best things can ever possibly be. So, enjoy your life and give us money. That seems to be the dystopia. We make it to the future that can be, but you can change the world to prevent that future. Yes. Yes, indeed. And Lea, you have something to say about that as well. Oh, yes. Thank you. I believe you guys accidentally forgot about Star Trek, which is the one example of a piece of art that actually has a utopian future, even though they don't say how they managed to get the left and the right to cooperate, but they do. And I believe that it is radically more difficult to create art that's optimistic than it is dystopian, which is not a negative comment about it if it's dystopian because there is a lot of amazing art that's dystopian, but it's much harder to create art that's positive and optimistic because it doesn't, like, it's common knowledge that that's like when you watch the news and they show horrible things happening that hooks people to watch the news. So it's like an instantaneous hook to get people to watch something if it's horrific and depressing and dark and it's more difficult to do it if it's optimistic and utopian. It's much more difficult. So I just wanted to add that. I think you're right about Star Trek. I think the whole point of Star Trek was to be like, look at humanity like we can do and there's, you know, there's no more horror in the world. So in the future, we're just going around in space and, you know. Even in Star Trek, the quote unquote bad guys aren't, you know, truly bad guys. They're just, you know, they're a different culture with different points of view. So you have your Klingons, you have your, you know, everything else and it's that there's a tension created by different mindsets coming together, but it's still mostly diplomatic and positive outcomes. Right. And the core value is, can you guys hear me? Yeah. So the core value is synergy, which is having two opposing sides or three opposing sides or whatever and merging their values together to create an outcome that's more beneficial than each of the opposing views. And again, the Borg, it takes that idea in a completely different direction. And I guess that's probably the most disliked faction within the whole Star Trek world, but they take that to the extreme where everything is brought together and they say assimilated. You know, it's kind of funny about the Borg. It's kind of like social media. Like they're all connected all the time and I don't know. Decades before we got to this point. Yeah. Yes. I've heard transhumanists being accused of wanting to turn humanity into the Borg. And I've actually had to counter that allegation because of course the Borg subsumed their individuality. They cease to exist as individuals and if the kinds of connections that are perhaps, let's say, indicated by the abilities of social media, except that would be significantly amplified in the future, are established, that wouldn't necessarily obviate individuality. At least I hope not. It might enable people to appreciate one another's individuality a bit more. Right now what we see essentially are fragments of other people. What other people choose to present about themselves or what we encounter in terms of day-to-day interactions. But I have wondered, do we really understand any other person except our individual selves right now? Or do we just form mental models of other people based on essentially the inferences that we make from empirical evidence? And if we get a lot more empirical evidence, a lot more data, of course, shared voluntarily, even say the ability to look at another person's thoughts through the neural impulses in their brain. How much more would we actually be able to understand? How many misunderstandings could be rectified by that? Well, Jenedy, are you saying like there would be some kind of technology where you could like literally experience another person's thoughts and feelings and then you would be able to empathize with them for real? Is that what you're saying? Yes. So the potential for that does exist and very rudimentary forms of sensory communication at a distance have been achieved. So Steve Mann, who is a kind of proto-cyborg, he has added certain implants to himself and he performed certain experiments, for instance, where he was able to move his arm and across several countries his wife was able to experience the exact sensation of him moving his arm or vice versa. So these kinds of technologies can enable people to experience what other people are experiencing and you continue in the chat says such a technology would certainly help us understand how to communicate our messages more effectively. Yes, what another person finds receptive versus not receptive. But again, I think there needs to be a policy framework and an ethical framework surrounding the use of that technology because it is a great value to preserve our individuality and to make sure everything that is done is done with consent so that we don't have people hacking into other people's brains or other people's sensory capabilities. We don't have governments trying to control how people can express themselves as individuals. So yes, there's one thing. I mean, yeah, you might have access to this information about what a person is feeling, but there's a critical aspect that, you know, is missing from the equation. That's the analytical side. Can the other person correctly analyze the data they're receiving via this technology? Or are they going to misinterpret it? And, you know, we're kind of back to where we started again, where we don't really know what's going on with other people. I think that's a very good point because ultimately, even the way our memories and our perceptions are formed are completely different networks. You know, every person has a unique neural network when it comes to even simpler motions. So it's sort of where would we even put that baseline to begin with? Yes, and it is interesting, certainly, and the perceptions of individuals differ. I think art can help bridge some of those gaps when I look at a painting that another artist has created. It's not exactly what I would have been able to envision on my own, say, a space scape, like the ones that Yekaterina paints. I wouldn't be able, even if I saw an image taken by NASA of another planet, to quite conceive of the same arrangement or emphasize the same elements. But it does help me look into the mind of the artist, so to speak, and see how the artist might perceive the world. Or if I listen to music created by someone who has synesthesia, maybe I can get some understanding of that experience, though not a complete one. I wonder if the analytical barrier is something that perhaps has always existed to some extent. So we are a lot more connected than we have been before with social media. On the other hand, there are certain obstacles to how people interpret the messages that they see, and those obstacles lead to the formation of social media echo chambers, or bubbles, or flame wars, or certain kinds of tribal dynamics. Hello, Kim, welcome back. So we've been discussing essentially technologies that might help people become more connected, how art can reinforce connections across human minds and how future technologies might enable people to perhaps overcome barriers of understanding, which is something you mentioned as well in your prior comments. But I wanted to ask you, before you get disconnected, to talk more about what is a social media manipulator in your view and how that is distinguished from a troll? Well, so I think it's in corporate America, they call them Digivangelists. And so it's not just pertaining to religion when saying evangelists, but there are people who can move social agendas and bring up conversation and topic or push angles, just how the media does, but doing it on behalf of a product, person, business idea. I happen to do it with religion and spirituality, but also with grassroots community building efforts locally where I live in Chattanooga, and also I guess across East Tennessee. But we also do it in the Caving community for geopoliticking is what we call it, but it's to preserve and protect the Caves. So that's where I first kind of learned to do it and in an in constructive way. Sometimes, you know, it's going up against a local contractor. There's one here called Green Tech Combs that likes to, you know, not worry about water runoff or things like that. And it's attacking those agendas and ideas and doing it in a constructive way. Or, I mean, Donald Trump is a perfect example of a digital media social evangelist, you know, he can move his agenda with a tweet, he can get the media to do whatever he wants within a tweet. And in our day and age, I mean, Obama started it, you know, having that Blackberry. And here we go, it's created a Trump for us all now. So yeah, I think there's massive power in social media and the way we connect with each other. And I love that for the good or the bad. Yes, for the good or the bad. And that's important to recognize as well. That ability to connect more people, it can be used to spread valid insights, rationality, ideas based on empirical evidence that can also be used to spread misinformation. It can be used to reinforce prejudices and hatreds. And that's unfortunate, but it relates to this idea that there could still be analytical barriers to understanding. There could be temperamental barriers to understanding, even in a future where we are more connected. And I think you're exactly right. It's the analytical side that helps, you know, the quote unquote fake news, you know, propagate itself. No one is stopping to think, you know, it's being critically about what they're reading. They're just taking it for its face value and assuming it's already fact when, you know, all data requires further analysis. So how can we bridge those barriers? And how can art help? Given that with the advance of technology, we have many possible futures, some are better than others. How can art bring us to the better types of these futures where there is more understanding, less acrimony, more constructive work that happens as people become more connected? I think we have to expand the art scene really. I mean, anyone can go into a gallery and see something. But it's, we need to expand the range that art can reach out and touch, get it back into the classroom. And not just, you know, talk about, you know, how to put paint to paper, but explain how you can use it to convey thoughts. I think there's that second step that we're missing a lot in a, you know, we either see, you know, the very beginning or the end products. There's no, no one's seen the process of development where all the thought goes into it, I think. I think Zoltan did an amazing job of this with the immortality bus using an art car, putting it out, you know, across the country, starting the conversation. I mean, only through conversation can we actually get to know each other and see where each other's coming from and join courses to make things happen, because not just one person can make anything happen. But I think the art car was an extreme use of this idea of, you know, getting it out in our communities and joining people up of like mind and, you know, move a social agenda or idea through our country. It's important. Rachel, you designed the immortality bus, so tell us about that. I did. That was an amazing opportunity to design something like that. But Zoltan actually lives pretty close to me. So I went over and we worked on the design, sketched it out, and actually did a mock-up of it. And it looked exactly like my design when we painted it and everything. So it was very cool. And it was very cool to see it travel around the country and inspire people to, you know, be more interested in technology and science and that we can stop aging or at least help people. It was great. It was really cool. I have a question. I have a question. How well was the immortality bus received? Like when people come and visit, were they like, oh, this is so cool. Or were they the bus stop? It was kind of both. People were kind of shocked by it and people were also inspired by it. So it was kind of both. People were like, why did you build a big coffin to travel around the country? So yeah, it got a lot of interesting media coverage all over. So that was really interesting to see and read people's reactions to it. Yeah, I think it has a lot to do with like that. It's very confronting, like you see this big coffin and that it reminds people of the impending faith that they may possibly have given that they accept this chance in this way. I feel like art used to be a bit more, not a bit more, very confronting. Like I said before, we impose our fears into the things, you know, into the things around us, to our environment, you know, it's only human. But art needs to be that force against that in which it confronts us so that it becomes like I think you muted yourself Emmanuel. I think art is to be, you know, like our psychologists in a way where like it's to start talking about these things in which we avoid, you know, like the stoping futures and like what are the things that can lead up to the stoping future that we are ignoring, like in terms, so it goes back to like politics, government, you know, like violations, all these things that point your fingers, you know, trying to blame it on the other person, but art needs to be the voice that, you know, this is what we are, all of us, but this is, this could be the future, and we all work together, you know, like as a species, not just as an individual, because I've been reading a lot of each lately, getting a lot of nihilism along with a few people, know that shows well where, you know, like I'm starting to adopt this form of optimistic nihilism in which so as an individual, but as just an entity of will of action, you know, like I'm action, everyone is action, and I feel like we need to like remove art, can help us remove, get us out of our heads where we don't see ourselves statistically as an individual anymore, but like something that can generate momentum towards greater momentum, which would be, you know, like developing technology to get us to Mars, to get us over to these all these kinds of things. So I feel like in that way art, as artists, you know, like we need to be radicals, you know, we need to be these radical agents, you know, just like how there are extremists in other countries, we are those extremists for the longevity of our species, you know. Yes, but it's interesting too that while the extremists and revolutionaries of other persuasions tend to go out into the streets with placards or even weapons, we perpetrate our revolutionary extremism through art and through conversation, and this shows just how different we are, I think. This shows how we're trying to overcome, as you've said, Kim, these age-old polarizing dynamics and we're trying to find something new and something better and reach toward it collaboratively. We also do both at the same time, if you look at the cyberpunk genre, it really is art about revolutionaries coming into the street, you know, to fight the evil technology of the corporation or the government or whatever. Yeah. Yes, so Nietzsche is very interesting, of course, and I would say in some respects he is a proto-transhumanist with, thus spoke Zarathustra, for instance, the idea of us being in a kind of transitional stage between the human and the superhuman and the transhumanist vision tries to bring these superhuman attributes to everybody. So Nietzsche talked about, I think, individuals coming to acquire those attributes, but through science and technology these wouldn't be just a few persons. A lot of people are afraid of transhumanism leading to some social gulf between a few who have the technologies and the many who presumably wouldn't, but this is not actually how the trajectory of technological development unfolds. And the goal is to empower as many people as possible. So what action, as you've said, Emmanuel, but also preserving what is good about each of us as individuals and enabling us to experience that better world and to experience those capabilities as ourselves, as better versions of ourselves, perhaps. So with that, let's see, in the comments, Adil Khan says, we need a platform for helping individuals connect and based on their mental models, which would entail that the mental models have to be measured quantitatively. And he poses as a question, Neuralink. So I suppose the Neuralinking technology is what he anticipates could be used to connect people and or measure in some way the connections quantitatively. Of course, we're just kind of in the infancy of that at present. And there's a lot that still has to be known about the human brain before we can make reliable measurements. Now, Emmanuel, what direction would you like to take this conversation in given everything that has been said? I can think of many possible threads we can follow. In terms of direction, well, maybe we can start further discussing how we can alleviate those fears that many people, like the company we buy up nowadays in technology, body horror, and biohacking, all those kinds of things. Because I love biohacking, but today he's given technology, biohacking is still in that very early stage. So there's very protest modifications that I've seen, especially like the lights that people have implanted on. Yeah, those are to me like those are cool, but like those are way too thick, way they protrude out of the hands in a way. The North Star was a prototype from Greenhouse Wetwear. So they weren't exactly looking for a functional model. There was a proof of concept, I think. People are also using genetic modification on themselves now too. So that's another thing. Are we going to regulate that or just let people do whatever they want? CRISPR is the battleground for that. I guess we'll see in the coming years. Someone just put out a DIY CRISPR kit where you can go and modify your own genetics. Rich Lee was talking about a project yesterday or the day before about myotosin or something. I feel like with that we can go also we can delve a little bit more into like topics of like ethics and because you know like with things such like as CRISPR, you know like people or parents will start being able to decide you know what how they would want their children to look like. You know like a lot of people you know have those ethical concerns you know like we're playing God and stuff like that. I feel like art in a way is that that immoral entity that gets to go on a tangent over you know what's good and bad because it's art. Art is subjective. Art is essentially separate from us because art is art. So I guess I don't know. I think sort of sorry. Oh yeah go on. Sorry to sort of take it off on another tangent I think that the only way to alleviate fear is realistically with education. Art can help with that process but because something that surprises me in my profession is how little people actually know about the inner workings of their bodies, let alone before they start changing things themselves and the reality is is that you know we don't know everything. So something like a DIY CRISPR kit I find utterly terrifying because for all the good you can do with that the amount of things that could go wrong is just terrible and I think that until people are better educated about themselves and the mortal bodies that we're in you know any fear of that won't be alleviated. Yes and it's interesting Lea when the DIY CRISPR kits were mentioned you put in our internal chat oh joy and that seems a little bit sarcastic. So what thoughts do you have on this? I'm not sure if I have anything articulate to say other than read Margaret Atwood Oryx and Craig if you haven't already read that book because that's a dystopian book about what would happen if people had endless access to genetic modification. It's actually a very fascinating book. Very interesting and yes I think we will try to put up a link to that in the description after the panel concludes or if you want to put it in the chat feel free to do that. Now I have a kind of multi-layered perspective on this and I'll start from my personal standpoint. I am extremely conservative with regard to my own organism in the sense that I only want to do things that I'm pretty confident are going to have certain reliable predictable outcomes and so I am very careful other than with my dessert consumption about what I do with my body and so I wouldn't be the kind to implant a chip in myself yet I wouldn't be the kind to modify my genome at home yet and not until this technology has been through maybe three or four iterations and millions of people have used it and there are very safe established protocols where I know if I do X, Y will happen and Z will not happen and Z is a bad thing. So that's my personal perspective. Now from a political standpoint and from what the US transhumanist party seeks to achieve we know that we can't get to that point of safe and ubiquitously available emerging technologies unless we have some people experimenting on them and collecting data and understanding even some of the unintended consequences. So this is why for instance transhumanists support the pro-actionary principle rather than the precautionary principle. The precautionary principle says don't do anything unless you can be certain that you're avoiding all of the risks or at least have a very high degree of confidence and that may be a good thing to try to pursue in one's personal life but in terms of the larger world we actually want people who take more of these risks on themselves especially if they do look into the science and they try to be informed and they try to take certain precautions. Some experiments will not work out just as in clinical trials for medicines some patients have adverse side effects but in terms of what benefits the state of human knowledge and what benefits our ability in the future to have safer treatments, to have effective body modifications where we know what they're going to achieve I think that experimentation is beneficial. So in a certain sense my own view on the politics should be yes we should allow people to experiment on themselves we should allow a very open entry to clinical trials or even the marketing of these treatments but culturally people should be taught to be very careful and they should be taught to try to understand the science and they should be taught perhaps personal precautionary techniques or let's say presumptions when faced with a given emerging technology so that we don't have a lot of adverse side effects. So any thoughts from anybody on that kind of distinction between the personal and cultural and the political? Well I think the DIY science aspect is it's kind of like a foundation pillar to a lot of what we're doing from an artistic point of view the DIY scene you know can span everything and when we start you know viewing the science as you know on ourselves as you know whether it's performance art or biological art um Stelarc is probably a good example of merging the two where you know he's done the research he's done a lot of the research he's and then he's gone on to modify himself to you know in an artistic way to bring that conversation out to the world. Yes indeed yes indeed and John you said in our internal chat proactiveness is definitely important and I would say different individuals have different degrees or areas of emphasis in their proactiveness in terms of what technologies they're more willing to experiment with. Absolutely yeah based on how informed you are you know and there's different gradient your difference in the slider is different depending on you know what you know and you know what your needs are and all of that and I just want to say I fully agree with everything that you've said actually you know that you know there's um the right to to hack yourself should be there but of course we should stress caution because you know these downstream effects with crisper unintended edits and all those things I mean people could really hurt themselves so I think only people that are very well informed have experience with it and are willing to take the risks and the consequences should be the ones doing it um but you know I think another reason why this is really important is um right now our culture doesn't really emphasize the importance of medical research so you know it's been left in the hands of a lot of individuals to really push this and try and solicit donations and get funding for whatever their various causes are whether it's lifespan IO or whether it's one of the thousands of rare disease groups that are out there um you know getting the budget up for the National Institutes of Health has been a nightmare for the past 10 years and even a lot of the officials there have told me like it's been totally stagnant and these are the people that you know fund a lot of the research that's led to the human genome project you know even crisper had some root in NIH funding um metabolomics stem cell medicine all of these have been funded by the NIH and so because of this lack of this culture where we don't prioritize probably the most important area of science research the area of science that will allow us to live long enough to see many other areas of science fully develop uh a lot of us have to take it upon ourselves to to do this ourselves to become the test subjects ourselves and so yeah again i just like to agree with jennedy and point out and agree with some of the other panelists that caution is very important but the people that are doing this in for the sake of science people that are very educated that are doing this are doing this all favor um that's that's my point yeah you make a couple of really good points there but the only thing i am going to bring up is the gray area which is the fact that yes some people may be doing it sort of with you know being informed but again sadly some people may be doing it because the current systems in place don't actually allow for any other option to happen um so it's sort of how do we go about regulating that to make sure people are safe and at the moment can't that there are people who are at end stages of certain diseases that have no choice but to go into the experimental and the self-medicating routes and you know currently there isn't a great deal that um you know that can be done to sort of make that safer so you know with you know i am of the opinion that you know people should be able to weigh up the risks themselves and do whatever they like even if in the end it is going to be detrimental because people need to have that freedom oh i certainly agree with that i'm here in america we do have a problem at which terminally ill people cannot have access to experimental drugs i think that's a huge problem thankfully there is a movement to get that issue addressed it's a movement called the right to try and you're talking about terminally ill people's right to try these experimental drugs as a last last stage effort to extend your life or save themselves even yes and the u.s transhumanist party strongly supports right to try legislation it's essentially the least we can do if a person's outcome is already going to be bleak then there doesn't seem to be that much of a downside to allowing that individual to participate in experimental treatments especially because that could result in data that could be used to cure these conditions or ameliorate these conditions in others speaking by the way of funding for the national institutes of health the u.s transhumanist party just recently concluded its platform vote number six and uh we are going to have a plank in our platform that will support increased funding for the nih we will be releasing the text of that plank within the next week excellent i'm very happy thank you janity my pleasure and of course this was achieved by our members so this is an example of if you would like to have an issue that you think the u.s transhumanist party should take a position on recommend it as a potential platform plank and we will get it exposed to the public get the input of our other members on it and then it will be voted on electronically in a transparent fashion and we'll see what our members decide so with that we have some further comments ideal con mentions incidentally on the subject of experimental procedures apparently a head transplant was conducted during the past 20 years or so and transhumanity now says it was done on a cadaver supposedly now i'm not a certain of any details of that but it does seem to be an example of very radical experimentation raises some philosophical questions as well but i wanted to put that new item out there so in terms of the remainder of the discussion i wanted to ask with regard to the impact that art has on its viewer or a perceiver because it could be through auditory means or other means uh to what extent is shock value helpful versus detrimental or is there a kind of balance because uh immanuel you mentioned that some art by shocking its audience or really putting certain ideas out there in a very direct manner uh can motivate people to action and uh rachel the immortality bus was one example of that giant coffin shaped bus being driven across the country led people to ask questions certainly increase the media exposure for the ideas of transhumanism and life extension on the other hand we have these let's say canned techniques for generating shock value that we often see in dystopian films or other more mainstream fair that seem to shock for the sake of shocking and laura you mentioned as well that sometimes it may be counterproductive to uh let's say put an idea out there too directly uh and instead you think it's more constructive to have people kind of bring their own interpretations to art including art with transhumanist themes so that would call for perhaps a more subtle approach uh less so than in your face type of presentation uh more of one that leaves more elements open to the audience so uh with those kinds of perspectives uh where can we uh perhaps establish a balance or how can we understand the role uh of directness or shock value uh or subtlety within art i feel like it has to be done in a way where we presented where the shock has to be in the form of like our our reality you know like the human reality like the shock that we are going to die that we can be obliterated at any moment given a sudden rise in the sun's temperature or anything like that that those type of shock values where like we're like it's something that it's real to us and something that we can all relate you know i feel like that's that that is the difference that that motive that creates the positive motivation that would be needed in order to like push more movements to to keep on going because you know that's the thing with other other outlets you know like the media entertainment where they present that other extreme you know you know like X Machina and Blade Runner other movies you know like so many of them like you know like Booper uh right now i can't name them all but like there's just so many movies that that go for that shock value just just for the money making you know like it's very hard to find you know like a good star trip where like they're literally going out there the shock value isn't the unknown the unknown of exploring the country these other civilizations and cultures you know i feel like that's that's the shock value that we need to really capitalize on because it's it's shock but then it follows all you know shock and all you know like this is the future that it's beautiful it's scary because it's we're putting ourselves out there you know like more risk it's a it's a scary beautiful place nature that's i feel like that's the shock that we need to emphasize shock and awe or perhaps shock and then awe uh it's intriguing an intriguing formulation and i definitely see how Star Trek does that so uh with Star Trek there is this heterotopian aspect the underlying world the society of the federation tends to have a lot of stable and well functioning elements but then on the edges the crew of the enterprise or other vessels encounters these unusual phenomena that can be quite shocking and at the end there's some sort of greater understanding of greater resolution uh on the other hand same with ex machina which has been mentioned several times the shock comes at the end and it comes from i think the recognition that in that world the direst of predictions about how the ai's with function ended up being correct that they ended up being completely devoid of compassion and the movie posed an irreconcilable conflict between humans and artificial intelligences which is why that kind of shock i think would lead people to be turned off of the pursuit of technological progress so i think perhaps one area to explore is what effect does a given instance of shock have on people does it just stop there with the shock or does it lead people to think in greater depth and then what does it lead them to think about does it lead them to think in more constructive direction or in the direction of oh the future is bad we're all doomed we should fear technology so i i would welcome thoughts on that um i can speak a little bit on that um i would argue that shock uh trauma is essentially a technique to induce what i would call kind of a microtrauma right so the audience is shocked and as an artist following this shock this little trauma you have an opportunity to frame how they should deal with it in the future right at this point there's an infinite number of ways you could you could do this so um and ex machina the the film frames you know as you said frames the audience to be afraid of of AI to be the urge caution right um and uh they know what i would say is that ideally if you're really trying to make part that is that is transhuman uh you'd want to give them maybe sure you want to give them a sort of prophylactic um kind of uh you know impulse instinct you want to cement that in but you'd also want to emphasize the hopeful aspects so that there's this kind of dialectic in their mind you know between responsibility and hope you know and uh i think that would be that would be ideal as a transhuman artist to go for yes indeed yes indeed uh for further thoughts on this uh yes uh leah you wanted to speak okay i'll just speak very personally i don't know if this is gonna apply to anybody else um it might be because i've been looking at art in new york city for about 15 years but i don't recall having felt shocked by anything uh in about 15 years including like the most grotesque uh art or anything that i could possibly imagine so my receptors for feeling shocked when i see art are just burned out um to the point where i can't it's hard to even process information um with any like if i see something i just feel jaded by it right away and i don't even want to i don't even want to process it and uh i think that um if i see a piece of art that has some type of harmony to it or i hear music that has harmony to it then it restructures my uh neuronal patterns or something so that i can think clearly so that would have a i don't know if the people would spend money on that but it would have a positive influence on people's minds and then that would have a positive influence on the long-term outcome i do agree with you leah i think perhaps in this era one of the most uh let's say avant garde and unconventional and rebellious and shocking things you can do is emphasize harmony order beauty uh a kind of well a certain utopian aspects of but aspirational aesthetics yes yes because that is less common now even though the ability to do that certainly exists and a lot of people of great artistic talent are able to do that uh like yourself like uh you continue like uh warah and like rachel i think we are able to convey a vision that kind of shocks people out of the jaded state of mind would you agree with that yeah i would agree with that um what i think with the mortality in mortality best is an example it shocks people into thinking like everyone just knows they're gonna die and that is accepted maybe it doesn't have to be people made people think maybe we don't have to die maybe we don't have to suffer like this so i think there's two types of shock value art there's shock value for the sake of shock shock value and then there's shock value that makes people think about how they can make things better in the world and i think that's sometimes an important thing to convey to people yes indeed yes indeed and uh perhaps we could be shocked into a better world shocked into a world with a lot more beauty and longevity and prosperity uh through art that is surprising because certainly this kind of art uh compared say uh leah to the things you've witnessed in the new york city art seen over the past 50 years would be unusual and people would pay attention to it so in any event uh in terms of our viewer comments me cap 22 says john has the right idea people need to know how technology can be positive we need tv shows like black mirror except it explores the positive aspect star trek used to be like that and i wonder how we can bring more of uh that positive exploration of technology into the mainstream uh not just for those of us who are interested in uh science and technology or have a certain uh philosophical vision uh with which we come to that but the general public people who i think are open to being persuaded uh but may have seen uh a bit too much of just the shocking dystopias without really having pondered over uh some of the beneficial implications of technology they open this to anyone i feel like um we would have to focus like on literally the aesthetics and simplicity that technology brings to our daily lives you know like that's what people want you know that's where everybody relates whatever everybody relates to is beauty you know things that are beautiful into the eye to the senses and facilitation you know like making things making life easier so like i feel like you know like a perfect example is apple apple makes very beautiful technology the iphone i don't have the latest iphone sadly but iphone 10 you know it's simple it has finally removed virtually all the buttons it's one screen and that's it you know we're working as a very elegant piece of design you know and that's that's something that you know like you see lines lines of people waiting you know like sometimes for like blocks just just to get this piece of beautiful technology you know that's what gets people going you know that's sort of thinking you know like literally aesthetics you know like we live in we're humans we live in a world of appearances and we need to make appearances suiting you know beautiful you know like a lot of the shock value that we see is in the the growth test the cloud monkey you know like technology screens in your face you know like everybody buries down you know but like like sure we're all hooked to our devices but that's not only that's that's us like connecting you know like we're all trying to it's literally a journey to unification like we're all trying to connect with one another through means of technology so and the fact that it's so accessible you know like handheld you can take it anywhere it's portable portable wi-fi you know like that simplicity of ease is what makes people you know responsive to technology in a positive way yes and certainly the creative tools that our disposal enable each of us to at least have a greater potential of communicating the hopeful vision of technology to the general public what you mentioned about the design of technology conveying a hopeful vision is very interesting as well and it relates to what kin said earlier about the design of Tesla's or other vehicles and Elon Musk's aesthetic as well we see it with SpaceX also how he tries or with the Hyperloop how he tries to create a certain aesthetic of the future not just the technologies absolutely absolutely and then in the chat Yucatidinha suggests perhaps a story involving the use of technology to solve a crisis and that's a very good idea during the golden age of science fiction in the mid 20th century there were a lot of such stories say by Isaac Asimov or Arthur C. Clark or Robert Heinlein that did exactly that but if you'd like to comment on that further and what kinds of stories you think might be effective I think that's worth exploring yes I will comment on that well there's a few ideas for one example could be you know pathogenic diseases for example is a very serious risk of antibiotic resistant bacteria and you know before we had antibiotics if you could cut under certain circumstances the entire and one of the fears is that we may be moving in that direction because more and more of our drugs just aren't working as well anymore so I guess one possible story could be the use of some future type of medicine to combat these antibiotic resistant bacteria it could be use of medical nanotechnology or it could be a form of biotechnology that is of course it should be grounded in science yes indeed and I think perhaps even a collaboration among scientists who are aware of the cutting research in certain disciplines and authors who might be able to leave a story around that or portray some of the applications of the science in a way that is compelling to lay persons and also accurate and also inspires them to explore these subjects to a greater extent I think one person who does that very well today and he's by no means a utopian but he's very thoughtful is David Bryd and he comes in kind of in the middle in terms of the let's say contrast between the transhumanists and the techno Luddites but he often acknowledges the positive transformative potential of technology and the panels where I have seen him discourse essentially have him present a very nuanced and thoughtful point of view that I think gets a lot of people just intrigued in this particular realm and not considerate to all just the gloom and doom but yes the creation of fiction that kind of contracts the visceral or simplistic dystopias would be a very productive and an endeavor that I would highly encourage so with that I will say one more thing about Elon Musk based on a comment from a deal con he writes Elon looks at a tough problem and provides a design that offers a much better alternative and it just grows so the idea here is the design itself could be part of the solution it's not just a way of marketing it's not just a way of getting people interested it could be an integral component of technology and maybe art and technology aren't as distinct as some people might think so that I think is a good subject for all of you to comment upon before we go into our closing statements any thoughts on art and technology and how they interact and kind of blend into one another um how that's in reality like I was really watching a couple of videos of like this graffiti video game where literally that's that's one of my biggest dreams you know like being able to to merge those two realms you know creating the art and then being inside technology you know like augmented reality where now we can create these virtual pieces in the real world in real time but in this virtual space you know it's just merging everything you know like that or shadowing that singularity that that's to come you know like yeah that's beautiful you know like it's a more of that that's the way you know like develop more of those kinds of things like yes so this virtual and augmented reality become more widely available it would be fascinating to see the artistic creations that individuals are able to make in those realms even in terms of more rudimentary technologies virtual worlds like Minecraft for instance that have a certain set of tools allow people to create works of art or imagery or structures that can be navigated three-dimensionally that one wouldn't be able to readily create using more traditional methods or technologies or media so this this is an expansion of yes go ahead it's Kim um so I uh just saw a grotto presentation which is our caving club um and I actually didn't see it but I know what it's about it's about cartography and mapping of underground caves and how technology has allowed us to make three-dimensional worlds of these places that no people will ever go or only a few people might go um and that's a major advancement in our sport at least and you know from from mountaineering you can easily um map the topographic but what's underneath that what you can't see you know there's a whole other world down there too so they're not just make believe realities that we're creating you know you can actually map around worlds that we can't get to so yes indeed yes quite interesting and maybe with these virtual maps I might get to visit some of the caves that you do visit in person uh or uh visits parts of the caves that nobody can visit or visit surfaces of other planets because we have had lenders on mars and on the moon we've had uh essentially spacecraft that have taken pictures of the surfaces of Jupiter and Pluto and wouldn't it be nice to have a way to kind of navigate those in virtual reality uh I completely agree that's uh a dramatic way in which our ability to explore actual remote worlds can be extended any further thoughts on art and technology let's see all right I can go on sure um yes I think that a big part about a big part about having a good life is to be able to explore and I certainly agree that art offers not just the artist but the average person's capacity to really explore their senses and emerge in virtual reality whether it's fully immersive or not will allow people to certainly explore the visions of each other for example what's my concept of an ideal world or a world that I think is a reflection of my identity versus your world and that's when I think the virtual reality will be about I also think this technology will potentially get people more interested in you know things like life extension of technology because in VR you VR itself is a very potentially advanced technology that will allow people to explore and you know play and communicate hang out with and that's one of the things about that's great about technology is that allows us to express ourselves and share ideas so that's my thoughts on what art will offer us in the future especially with becoming virtual reality I have something to add for the present I would like to say that you know a lot of people actually receive their well kind of a science education from art because you know just in general science education really needs a lot of work so a lot of the the new developments are communicated to people through art and I think I don't know if you really call a documentary an art form I mean I'll let you know if people talk about that later but assuming that it is there's this one called first inhuman I don't know if any of you guys have heard of it but it it means like first use of a medicine inhuman it takes place at building 10 at the NIH and it shows it follows four different patients with otherwise terminal diseases and it kind of takes us you know three episodes of the NIH using this investigational therapy on each of them and I feel like that's a very transhumanist kind of documentary because you know that's the kind of thing that I think we need more of because it educates and it also provides that sense of hope that the transhumanist party is all about so anyway that's my point yes indeed and I would agree that documentaries can definitely be a form of art although they portray non-fictional subjects or events there are certain decisions about what to present how to frame it even decisions in terms of the filming of the documentary that would definitely be open to the judgment of the creator and the artistic skill set and of course a lot of graphic design goes into that as well so definitely so yeah with that given that we are at our two hour mark I would like to ask each of you for your closing statements which can relate to anything that has been said thus far and essentially encapsulate what you thought were some of the key insights of the discussion or where you think it can be extended in the future I will let you start Rachel since you also began with the opening comments I was muted there sorry no it's been a really interesting discussion I think we talked about some really good points about how art influences people to make decisions about the future I think we need to have more positive representations of the future and movies and books and everything else and so hopefully that's part of our job as creative people to do that so I think that's great yes indeed thank you Rachel and then let's see you continue what closing thoughts would you have for our panel oh yes um my closing thoughts will be that I think that when people think of art they generally just think of like a painting and oh this is really this is just this really cool luxury item but what they don't realize is that as many of you guys have drawn up aren't just a lot more than just some pretty luxury item it's it's designed for example as well if you have brought up the hyperloop design that's that design is a piece of art it's to send a message of that this is a beautiful vision of the future the tesla cars are another example of an art that's also a tool for transport and so yes I think art is everywhere it's in the design of buildings it's in the design of vehicles it's also advertisement because you know it is a way to shock people to I mean it is a way to get people's attention to a certain topic whether that may be dinosaurs of the past or technology of the future so that will be my closing statement as far as art is concerned yes indeed thank you and I think you illustrate the interconnections between art and functional technology very well in your remarks so with that Laura do you have closing statements for our panel um I do I would just like to start with by saying that I think as artists we are very lucky to have such a vast array of tools to be able to get people's connect with each other and that ultimately you know until our mortality issues are sorted out you know or even if they will be sorted out art is pretty much the closest thing to any degree of immortality that we are going to get so we need to use that to you know highlight the issues that we want tackling as a race absolutely and actually relating to that when I'm in a virtual world and I agree with Emmanuel's comment in our internal chat that that was a beautiful statement but I'm in a virtual world like playing a computer game or creating something and that virtual world doesn't have the same constraint physical fragility or mortality or pain and suffering that the human body experiences that that feels like a form of immortality if one identifies a lot with one's character or one's avatar in a game and that character or avatar might be mortal according to the game's rules but typically those rules are a lot more forgiving than real life I think conveys a vision of what might be possible I mean why can't we be like Minecraft characters in creative mode who are not able to be destroyed by the elements fly around and build things I would like to have those capabilities but yes in creating something in producing something for the external world to see that that is a form of transcending mortality certainly one that artists have pursued throughout the ages and then Leia you said looks like someone likes flying in second life well I I haven't played much of second life but I can imagine that it would be quite fascinating to observe all of the creations that people have put into that world but speaking of that Leia do you have a closing statement for our panel oh yes so um joking aside I actually think it's a worthy topic to consider uh just very straightforwardly and simply on a day-to-day basis how art and music and media is affecting the quality of our attention and the quality of our thoughts and the quality of our emotions um and how it's affecting others and then how that's affecting everybody's decision-making process and the political process and the cultural environment and then how that is shaping the outcome of what happens yes indeed and those impacts can be quite considerable and I think we are in a position to channel those impacts into more beneficial direction so thank you for those remarks Leia now Kim I would like to hear your closing statements for today's panel well thank you Geanotti for organizing this and inviting us all thank you panelists nice to meet you um and yeah this is the transhumanist party in the sense of branding and messaging in our advertising world that we live in and I think getting that package designed and intentionally designed is super important um so from logos to um you know a PSA campaign that tells stories personal stories to personalize and humanize um these new radical political agendas are important and I I think that um you've got a good base of professionals to pull from so I'm here in Tennessee signing out please yes well wonderful and thank you Kim and I agree I am extremely pleased with the community that has formed around transhumanist ideas and the transhumanist party is one of the focal points for that community precisely because we want to draw on the capabilities of all individuals who are interested in creating a better future and that's going to be a wide range of people and a wide range of abilities and skill sets but we're going to need all of that because the world is so multifaceted as are its problems and to overcome that we need to combine our creative efforts and see what sort of new era we can build now John in terms of your closing statements what would you like to say well I'd just like to thank everyone for the interesting discussion thank you Genedy for inviting me um I just wanted to emphasize that you know it's it's disease that you know or the potential to get disease that really unites all of us and I think that you know um due to the kind of the dismal state not just of transhumanist science fiction but just also just films that cover diseases like Alzheimer's or autoimmune diseases a lot of messaging is kind of irresponsible and it puts all of us in society into kind of a non-vigilant state well we're not taking it on because um this is the I would say health and and treating disease is one of the foundational aspects of the transhumanist party so we need to be proactive and kind of calling out films that are irresponsible and also encouraging artists to come up with things that motivate us to want to come up with solutions where there were none before that's my clinic statement yes indeed using arts to help come back disease to help extend human life spans to help raise public awareness that these are pressing issues for all of us all of that would be quite important now Emmanuel since you are the director of visual art for the US transhumanist party I'd be interested in your closing statements in terms of what you think we can take away from this discussion and apply in our future endeavors and our future messaging and how we approach art more generally and present it to the public I feel like the only way to go about it is just to always strive to not seek truth but just seek knowledge you know like knowledge of everything of and having a healthy pride in and our ability to to seek and obtain knowledge as a human being I feel like as a species we are very arrogant and you know like we have a lot of thoughts but that's that's our nature you know like we can turn that arrogance around and put it into good use we can have this like the same way as as America has this nationalistic pride you know we can have this nationalistic pride class as a species you know and I feel like this is this where I took from from this from this panel discussion that transhumanism this party you know like this ideal is that beacon you know it's because it's not just about you know like becoming a cyborg and becoming a mentality but like it's finally like setting aside nations that we all know we have in order to to progress together you know like so that everyone can be fruitful be happy you know like if no one is suffering then everyone's happy then that's it you know like we made it it's heaven on earth there's that's it just beautiful forever that that's I feel like it's something that's so easy and people make it out to be so hard it's it's not hard it's not it's not something that that's it's not a it's not an ideal that that that can that can never be reached or something that's possible with our grasp because as a human being we can make it happen yes and it's it's an obviously good set of goals I think just because of the technical challenges and the limitations of knowledge throughout history a lot of human culture has become defeatist in that people have resigning themselves to the inevitability of suffering disease mortality but it doesn't have to be that way and science and technology we can overcome these age old problems through art we can inspire and motivate people to overcome those problems and also give people better experiences of the future make more of human kind make more of ourselves as individuals so thank you everyone for your remarks my name is Janati Stolier of the second it has been my pleasure today to moderate this discussion panel on art and transhumanism we hope to have many more discussion panels of the future and with that ladies and gentlemen in the audience I hope you have a wonderful remainder of the day