11 replies to this topic

[imminstmorals]

Apart from nano bot war

http://www.cbsnews.c...ain571160.shtml


http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/

Well, we have to fix this eventaully =D
build a planetary defense system lol

[Bruce Klein]

Nice.. thanks for the info imminstmorals. And welcome.

[nefastor]

Well it WOULD seem rather cliché, but it's proved so true over the past millenia :

I'd say the only threat to mankind is mankind itself.

Because you might find a way around every other threat... but we can't stop being humans... and humans don't have good credentials...

Jean

[MichaelAnissimov]

We *can* stop being humans, that is the whole point of transhumanism, which overlaps strongly with immortalism. A truly immortalist society will only happen when either 1) absolutely nobody is interested in killing or harming anybody else, or 2) when it becomes physically impossible to kill or harm anyone else. I'd prefer 1, but we might need to settle for 2 for awhile.

[nefastor]

You're right...

Your first proposition is harder to reach, I agree with you. For one, there would always be psychopaths (or people with genetic problems inducing behavior problems) that would kill people. I don't know if and how we could ever solve the problem, or even if becoming "something else" other than human would solve the problem.

I admit the possibility that the very fact of being self-aware may imply there's a part of us that likes, and may desire, evil. And that this part may emerge no matter what we become, as long as we are self-aware beings with unique personalities.

I have a theory that the one and only reason mankind cannot live peacefully is the limited ressources on Earth, for which we must compete. My theory implies that if we "harvest" the limitless energetic and material ressources of space, then we'll be 99% closer to making your first proposition possible.

The sad thing is, it would be possible even today, since we can already send robots and probes on planets and planetoids even beyond Pluto's orbit ! Why we don't do it is a big debate, possibly beyond the scope of this thread, but it all ammounts to this :

We lack the will to solve our problems even when we have the means to solve them. We'd rather go the easiest way even if it means hurting our own kind.

That is why I wrote the only true threat to mankind is mankind itself.

It is my biggest hope that I'll live long enough (possibly forever) to see this change, or to change it myself (when you want something done, you better do it yourself, right ?).

Jean

Edited by Mind, 31 October 2003 - 03:19 PM.

[MichaelAnissimov]

There needn't always be psychopaths, because there needn't always be minds built by genetics. We can reach a world where violence simply doesn't exist, but it would require moving to an entirely posthuman psychology. We can see why violence would be adaptive in the ancestral environment, but we have no reason to suppose that these tendencies would hold for minds in general. We can engineer new minds, we can do so relatively soon, and we can create a world where no one is ever killed again (this could also be achieved by a sufficiently fast response system, which throws up a barrier whenever someone is being assaulted, for example.)

I highly recommend taking a look at this:

http://www.singinst....FAI/anthro.html

You might also be interested in this:

http://www.accelerat...ntelligence.htm

[bacopa]

I agree with you Michael there is no reason why violence should persist in a society that seems to care more about the well being of its people than in the past. and increasingly better psychological drugs. There are many wonderful things about being around in this era of time and I know I try to surround myself with good people. But the real challenge is to get people to start seeing the advantages of a posthuman future which is hopefully what we can get done very soon. Also I think people could try alot harder to be better people despite our imperfect genetics. I don't see why it should be so hard to just live well. Actually I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't admit to the former point. It can be difficult to maintain a healthy outlook with so much "crap" in the world cluttering up our minds.

Edited by dfowler, 31 October 2003 - 02:51 PM.

[bacopa]

Also it is sad to see so many people miss out on their potential due to apathy, fear, and insecurity. I've only recently seen the folly of my ways. I've been lazy...for too long and succumbed to depression... and my epiphany is that one need not get all consumed with anger and cynicism. I could have logically seen that before, only now am I able to apply it to myself.

It is frustrating to realize how difficult it can be to "right" ourselves once we are down. And it seems logical to me that Transhumanism can and should make it easier for people to see their potential and not get deterred due to fear, anger or whatever negative emotion gets in the way. Perhaps a "better human" will have the forsight to not succumb to peer pressure and unintelligent behavior. Hopefully being able to see "further ahead" might help people to think clearer and make better decisions. But it seems still having that basic drive to get out of bed in the morning is so important to maintain self control and happiness which people so desparately want.

Just to digress, maybe one day college will be less about beer and more about interest in quality of life. Sorry to go off on a tangent but I have too many friends who are obsessed with drinking, something that inevitably leads to destructive behavior and moronic human fights. NO more I say...anyway back to the topic. If people could learn to try harder in some ways and see the forest for the trees wouldn't life improve dramatically? The very fact that too many people are so fickle and unable to think for themselves is something that just annoys me. I'd like to see a society where people stop being cruel to one another and start becoming truly "bettter humans."

As for psychotic behavior, apart from the drugs and transhumanist points, I think people should stop watching violence on television. Television in general is the opiate for the masses. It's filled with bad ideas that cause bad reactions. It just so happens that many rap videos epitomize the worst kind of behaviors in society and it's not helping to create intelligent behavior. Also some of the drugs meant to "cure depression" are often very harmful and fog up one's thinking. a fogginess of thought also contributes to bad decisions that could spiral anyone into a depressed state. This is my thinking for today on bad human behavior

Edited by Mind, 31 October 2003 - 03:19 PM.

[bacopa]

Michael or anyone else interested, what is your view on the pleasure principle? As human beings we seem to obviously seek out pleasure much of the time. If we take pleasure in our work we tend to see this as a "good thing." But when our work becomes uninteresting suddenly we stop wanting to do it and will finish it out of obligation. Some people try to like their jobs despite that it may not be very fun ... I was curious about your thoughts on balancing out pleasure and the other variables in life like responsiblities and if combining these two is a natural thing to do. I guess I've always been troubled by the methods by which people go about doing things in life. For instance my father seems to simply do what he loves and loves what he does. Others have a more "work ethic" determination to them. And still others feel obligated to do things "just so" according to some fundemental belief system they have. Some people spend their lives trying to fit everything they do into a cookie cutter mold.

Edited by dfowler, 31 October 2003 - 06:26 PM.

[nefastor]

I'll tell you this : you only have one life, and the best way to live it is to enjoy it. So you should ALWAYS seek what pleases you most. It may be beer, sex and rock'n'roll, I don't care as long as it's what YOU like.

When we're all immortal and time doesn't matter anymore, you can think about doing stuff you don't like doing. But as long as it seems our life span is limited, it would be the height of folly not to enjoy it.

I (and many others here, I think) enjoy thinking and seeking to extend our life span. That doesn't mean we're the only people who are right. Always remember everything we judge we judge according to our own standards, because we can't be in someone else's shoes... for now.

I don't think violence on TV is a problem. I think uneducated TV spectators are the problem. Any movie-goer interested in movie making knows there is zero reality in movie violence. No blood, no harm, no death, no nothing. As for showing victims of wars on TV... what different from seeing them for real, like most people did during the World Wars, and throughout the ages ?

I think blinding yourself to violence is not something good, it's ignoring a major, essential part of humanity. Violence must be understood, and mastered, not demonized.

Of course I should mention I'm the grandson of armenian immigrants. My grandparents were survivors from the 1915 genocide in Anatolia and were orphans. My grand-dad even had to burry the corpse of his own father under the threat of turkish guns before becoming a farm slave... and he was barely 10 years old.

He came to France, and fought WWII. Since then, every male in my family has been in the army (me included) and we've been involved in every war of 20th century involving France. So I know a lot about violence, humans, and how both should not be dissociated.

DFlower, when you say it's hard to stand up when you have given up to lazyness, it's true. But here is a comforting thought, if you need any : at least you have the BALLS, you have what it takes to reclaim your pride and show people what your brain is here for. You haven't given up thinking, you haven't choosen the easy way, and that's commendable.

Michael, I'd really want to share your belief that transhumanism could be the end of psychopathy (if that's the correct word - pardon my french). But my reasonning is that when there are limited ressources to share (like Earth's) then people will always play dirty to get more than the others.

You americans have I saying (I think) about "people with too much time on their hands". That's what we'll have once we become immortal... and it could lead us to boredom... and probably to criminality, if we don't find something to do in this vast universe that will occupy us until said universe attains thermal death.

I promise I'll look into how you could "iron out" evil from the human mind... but I must tell you : there's a part of evil, or beast, in me, and I don't want to give it up. It may be necessary to my balance. To everyone's balance, maybe.

Jean

[bacopa]

nefastor, I agree with you that one should always do what one likes. That was a philosophicaly weird question. But I do see alot of people who don't live by the pleasure principal so it makes me wonder, also I have a tendency to obsess.

I think Michael is saying that one day Transhumanism, the movement, will be able to iron out humanitys weaknesess.

We're not trying to have an Orwellian society just simply a better quality of life. Of course I say we in the sense that most of us agree with this vision, but not all I'm sure.

As for the boredom issue that has been debated here and people figured out ways around it so you should check out some of the other posts. Most of these guys don't have much time on their hands, I do right now but not for long. nice to have you on board

[outlawpoet]

dfowler, I think your confusion as to "the pleasure principle' is simply one of complexity. The real question is not whether people only do things they find pleasurable, but why people do things? It's obvious that humans don't have a single, well integrated indicator for pleasure, which they follow above all else, otherwise our activities would quickly converge on things that best activated this, and we'd all be doing roughly equivalent things. This obviously is not true, with folk designing rocket engines for fun, whilst others play racketball.

True, people do converge a great deal on certain things, drugs, like alcohol and more complex things are near universal across culture. Sex remains popular, even when stripped of it's reproductive mission. Competitive sports exist nearly across culture, with some qualified exceptions. A good question is whether this has something to say about us as people, or something to say about us as social groups. I tend to think it has more to say about us than our cultures, but that is a debatable point.

On the other hand, people voluntarily do some pretty bizarre activities, things that are far from human universal, things that can't fall even under a very complex 'pleasure motivation'. Things like light themselves on fire for a political statement, or starve themselves. Volunteering for charity even rarely hits any traditional human pleasure buttons. What about open-source programmers, donating their time? What an incomprehensible activity that is, when viewed throught the pleasure principle lens.

Humans are complexly motivated by a complex set of inbuilt factors, and learned factors. And the intersection of those two groups of motivations might be called pleasure, or goals, but it would be a mistake to project the characteristics of either word upon them entirely.

Micheal's point, i think, is that when people's desires can be expressed fully, their motivations will reflect either explicit goals, or aesthetic pleasures, which leave less room for sociopathic tendencies, as a rule. Unless, of course, you hold either as a design goal, which seems relatively unlikely enough to be a significant improval on the present system, statistically speaking.

I think that most sociopathic tendencies as a rule, can be characterized by conflicting or broken motivations. having a cleaner or more robust goal system will help eliminate these tendencies, even if it's not an explicit design goal. Of course, one would hope that it would be anyway.

Another point is that as we all gain in capability, the projected costs to actually victimize someone will also expontially grow, until beating someone up will be a major undertaking, if it's possible at all. So random acts of opportunity will seemingly slow.

but the asteroids don't care, and they'll keep on coming, so we'd best get on that, if we want a good garden to chill in.