Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.
Why are people so ignorant
#31
Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:04 PM
One may wonder why
#32
Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:07 PM
Like Leonard Hayflick
One may wonder why
And Like Leon Kass, President's Council on Bio ethics something or other..
I wonder why! Did Bush tell him we shoulder lower the populatin and save social security money???!
#33
Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:27 PM
We have not seen great strides in (strong) AI in the past five decades, so what is the source of your optimism?
I was thinking along the same lines as you about AI. it seems to be a technology we are just not ready to produce. Lots of promises but no delivery.
Then I found out about Blue Brain. I now believe that we may see an artificial brain with human level abilities within about 20 years. After that, massive acceleration.
sponsored ad
#34
Posted 13 May 2008 - 01:19 AM
Similar things can happen when you speak about immortality to others.They turn it into a laughing matter although they may fear aging themselves.
come on , fear of aging is a fear of death! fear of death is a fear of oblivion . fear of oblivion is a fear of nonexistance.
Fear of aging = fear of nonexistance
MAY WELL BE THAT THEY ALL FEAR AGING, even the fundies. makes me wonder though, don't ya think the vast majority of ppl on earth, who by the way are religious folks, have gotten some secret information over us? Maybe most of the crowd got it, that in fact that we need to accept god or his son in order to have good life after we all die.
Ya think 99.9999% of PEOPLE know something that we don't? Who knows?? maybe that's the only way to eternal life? you know what they say , "there re plenty of mansions in my Father's house " so We can all fit in! they don't run out of room there. "no one comes to my father /heaven but through me" yada yada blah blah blah. the only way, the oNLY Way. . .
i mean who doesn't want to keep on existing? who'd like oblivion and be perished forever? who likes to be thrown into lakes of fire? Maybe they REALLY KNOW the truth . LOL they'll probably be up there laughing down on us poor lost souls trying to do the impossible :(
:(
excuse the lang, but they Know we're fucked , dont they? That may be why the fundies try to convert us , bring the prodigal son back to the father
...I have literally no idea what you're talking about.
Edited by ben, 13 May 2008 - 01:20 AM.
#35
Posted 13 May 2008 - 09:47 AM
I actually feel scared of this man.He is dangerous to humanity....
#36
Posted 13 May 2008 - 04:53 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Kass
I actually feel scared of this man.He is dangerous to humanity....
Yea. This guy needs to retire from every activity that influences people. Since he values death so much, isn't he already old enough to throw the towel?
#37
Posted 14 May 2008 - 03:19 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Kass
I actually feel scared of this man.He is dangerous to humanity....
Yea. This guy needs to retire from every activity that influences people. Since he values death so much, isn't he already old enough to throw the towel?
he scares me too. . . very scared of his views and policies
#38
Posted 14 May 2008 - 08:09 PM
He's right in the sense we can't use technology to solve every problem we have when it comes to human aging and health, but the notion of, say, nanotechnology or life extension methodologies really scares him (there's a certain irony in that this guy is also a bit of an international development ideologue and thinks developing robotics to help humanity extend life is wrong, when international development involves deployment of life-extending generic antiretrovirals as just one example, but I digress).
Other thing: I'll say the media has done a great job at putting people into thinking anything that transcends our biology as bad. Consider movies like The Matrix or The Terminator. Fear is a powerful weapon to use against the public to keep order. If you scare people enough into thinking nanotechnology = grey goo, or cryonics = B.S. quackery, you limit the terms of the debate to very binary positions. On one hand, you have "US" (the normal job-commuting, pill-popping conventional majority) and the "OTHER" (the visionary, possibly insane zealots who talk about transhumanism in the minority). It's really very easy to keep people ignorant of a situation if you make the debate polarized and inflexible. American politics and media does this all the time.
Bottom line: some people are scared of change. Some people think change involves bad things happening. That may be true sometimes, but informing yourself about a topic is the best antidote to reactionary nonsense.
#39
Posted 14 May 2008 - 10:23 PM
#40
Posted 15 May 2008 - 12:38 AM
Did you tell him that in a thousand years, there will be no men and women, just wankers, and that's fine by you?
No but seriously, good post. Fear mongering is an interesting thing. In terms of film it makes perfect sense of course. Who wants to watch a movie where the future is the blissful and we live in harmony with the t-1000?
Not me. But it still obviously has an impact on the public consciousness.
PS. If in fact your screen name has nothing to do with the movie Trainspotting then my opening question to you will make no sense whatsoever.
Edited by ben, 15 May 2008 - 12:40 AM.
#41
Posted 17 May 2008 - 06:46 AM
speaking in neurological terms, rationalization may best be described as the spindle neurons resolving cognitive dissonance... just a thought
-------
when the technologies are in front of their ape faces humans will gobble them up, we just need to get the research done and ensure political support
fuck the stupid masses - if they are so stupid maybe they aren't worth saving
#42
Posted 17 May 2008 - 03:51 PM
#43
Posted 24 May 2008 - 07:46 PM
Why don't you tell your friend to go join the Amish society instead? There, he won't find any technology.
Hey Nihilated,
It's funny, this guy uses MSN, email, web sites, digital recorders and lots of consumer technology very readily. Strangely though, he's very anti-Facebook, anti-social media, anti-online shopping, and obviously anti-transhumanism. I don't know, he's very complicated...
#44
Posted 24 May 2008 - 07:52 PM
Nice one Rents,
Did you tell him that in a thousand years, there will be no men and women, just wankers, and that's fine by you?
No but seriously, good post. Fear mongering is an interesting thing. In terms of film it makes perfect sense of course. Who wants to watch a movie where the future is the blissful and we live in harmony with the t-1000?
Not me. But it still obviously has an impact on the public consciousness.
PS. If in fact your screen name has nothing to do with the movie Trainspotting then my opening question to you will make no sense whatsoever.
Ben,
Oh, my name is all about Trainspotting.
My feeling on this is that once robotics as a consumer technology enters the mainstream (albeit gradually, given how paranoid the average "man-ape" is about anything outside their daily experience), it will start to become easier for people to accept bigger changes in terms of transhumanist tech.
#45
Posted 27 May 2008 - 10:12 PM
Why don't you tell your friend to go join the Amish society instead? There, he won't find any technology.
Hey Nihilated,
It's funny, this guy uses MSN, email, web sites, digital recorders and lots of consumer technology very readily. Strangely though, he's very anti-Facebook, anti-social media, anti-online shopping, and obviously anti-transhumanism. I don't know, he's very complicated...
I have friends like this too. I would call it an identity-crisis.
#46
Posted 28 May 2008 - 02:16 PM
#47
Posted 11 June 2008 - 07:21 PM
#48
Posted 06 October 2008 - 01:53 AM
There is something almost religious about the belief that you can separate a person from their body/brain. That you could extract their being/mind/errrr I dont wanna say it... the S word.... ryhmes with mole. In this way I think the people who are the most apposed to this type of belief are those most grounded in the present, and very probably those most fundamentally apposed to religion.
In addition, the human mind is one of the most complex and least understood things in the universe today. Technological singularity would require a complete 100% understanding of the brain down to the most minute detail. To assume that something like this is a distinct possibility, especially in our lifetimes, to the point where you would ridicule those who don't follow the same train of thought as you, using a word like ignorant, which would imply a lack of knowledge and understanding of reality, when the very thing your defending is only a possibility at best is in most peoples view a wild leap of faith with no grounding in reality.
People always talk about the technological progress we have made in the last 100 years... what do we really have? A slightly better understanding of the universe? a sufficient understand to harness various basic forms of energy like sound, light and electricity? 20 years from now we may just be ending our major use of fossil fuels(in developed countries), 20 years from now we may have some basic bionic linked to the brain emerging, such as bionic limbs that can be clumsily controlled by the brain, maby(but im doubtfull) bionic eyes/ears OR alternativley toward the end of the 20 years start to see wide spread lab grown organs being transplanted into people who loose/detroy body parts, 20 years from now the worlds space programs will come back into swing(revig down atm) and we may see colonies on the moon, or possibley mars.... etc etc These are my opinions, only 20 years time will tell us one way or the other. But I'll bet you a nickel Lets meet back here in 20 years to see(yes we will still have websites in 20 years Im sure of it!)
#49
Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:32 AM
I think most people distrust of this type of idea steps from the train of thought that you can separate a person from his or her body without destroying it/just making a copy.
There is something almost religious about the belief that you can separate a person from their body/brain. That you could extract their being/mind/errrr I dont wanna say it... the S word.... ryhmes with mole. In this way I think the people who are the most apposed to this type of belief are those most grounded in the present, and very probably those most fundamentally apposed to religion.
In addition, the human mind is one of the most complex and least understood things in the universe today. Technological singularity would require a complete 100% understanding of the brain down to the most minute detail. To assume that something like this is a distinct possibility, especially in our lifetimes, to the point where you would ridicule those who don't follow the same train of thought as you, using a word like ignorant, which would imply a lack of knowledge and understanding of reality, when the very thing your defending is only a possibility at best is in most peoples view a wild leap of faith with no grounding in reality.
People always talk about the technological progress we have made in the last 100 years... what do we really have? A slightly better understanding of the universe? a sufficient understand to harness various basic forms of energy like sound, light and electricity? 20 years from now we may just be ending our major use of fossil fuels(in developed countries), 20 years from now we may have some basic bionic linked to the brain emerging, such as bionic limbs that can be clumsily controlled by the brain, maby(but im doubtfull) bionic eyes/ears OR alternativley toward the end of the 20 years start to see wide spread lab grown organs being transplanted into people who loose/detroy body parts, 20 years from now the worlds space programs will come back into swing(revig down atm) and we may see colonies on the moon, or possibley mars.... etc etc These are my opinions, only 20 years time will tell us one way or the other. But I'll bet you a nickel Lets meet back here in 20 years to see(yes we will still have websites in 20 years Im sure of it!)
You may not have studied history very well... you really think that we didn't advance much technologically from 100 ago until now?
My view is completely different from yours. If we advance as much in 100 years as we advanced in the last 100 years, god, that will be an incredible ride.
And that's not even considering the law of accelerating returns -the more we advance, the faster we advance; it is exponential not linear-.
#50
Posted 06 October 2008 - 04:56 AM
#51
Posted 06 October 2008 - 05:06 AM
Do we preach to them our imminst goals and beliefs? Or do we let these knuckleheads find out for themselves? Sometimes I dream of yelling at people listen! There is no God! It's all in your head! I mean isn't it obvious with all the progress we've made in science and understanding of the universe especially pertaining to evolution that there absolutely can't be a God? I mean we share 98% of our DNA with monkeys so we are practically monkeys ourselves. But no self respecting Christian would believe that monkeys go to monkey heaven! Sometimes I get so angry at people's ignorance that I want to scream or take some action. It must be part of our human DNA to become so stubborn and set in our ways like stupid children.
#52
Posted 06 October 2008 - 05:38 AM
You just have to break down the promises of LE and transhumanism into bite sized pieces and people will accept it. Ask them if they would like to live another 15 years, or remain healthy enough to retain their independence until they are near death instead of spending their twilight years hobbling around in an assisted living home. Or a big one: look younger longer. You probably can't sell someone on cyborg bodies or the singularity, but you can give them a little nudge that makes them think about how long they want to live and the quality of life they want to have.
Edited by Healthy Skeptic, 06 October 2008 - 05:43 AM.
#53
Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:46 PM
See this.I think most people distrust of this type of idea steps from the train of thought that you can separate a person from his or her body without destroying it/just making a copy.
that's a very good point.There are a lot of dopes out there. 50% of people have a two-digit IQ.
#54
Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:51 PM
You are a machine alreadyWhenever I try to explain the technological singularity and its possible scenarios to people on other forums, they usually turn it into a laughing matter. Most common responses are:
1. Well, why would I want to become a machine?
2. That's never gonna happen in my lifetime.
3. A computer can't feel emotions.
4. I'm happy with my life as it is.
5. A simulated fantasy? Dream on!
What do you think will happen in the next 2 decades, do you think they will even care? Sometimes it feels lonely to be a transhumanist...
Well I will give you my answers, maybe it will give you some ideas, although I am also perplexed on how to persuade people.
1. Well, why would I want to become a machine?
A: So you don't get killed when you are 80~ and still want to live.
#55
Posted 08 October 2008 - 04:50 AM
In regards to that comment though, I do not see how replacing all the neurons in your brain makes it digital in any way.... artificial yes, but how is it digital? You just have a brain that is not made of biological components(a reasonable proposal though, a good idea for treating very neural dissorters, ranging from brain damage to tumors).
Also to make artificial neurons that could connect up/substitute for the biological neurons they would have to be fundamentally similar to the biological neurons their replacing, ei carbon based, same physical, chemical, and electrical makeup. Therefore wouldn't they have the same inherent problems and break down in a similar faction and require constant replacement? All material breaks down over time, admittedly some more then others.
Back toward the topic tho, I am a believer in technological singularity, and other types of singularities for that matter, I just don't think we are going to get the same things out of it as many here believe(assuming humanity could even survive a singularity growth period), Additionally I don't think the tipping point will be in any of our lifetimes, unless we find some way to expand our life a fair bit first without the assistance of a singularity growth period.
#56
Posted 08 October 2008 - 04:53 AM
POSTED UNDER THE THREAT OF CENSURESHIP!
by six6
#57
Posted 08 October 2008 - 07:12 AM
and so, one key to escaping the typical responses you site, is to go into the discussion by hyping up the substance that is already there in the life extension cause, but not in an informational type, "Im telling you this" tone, but in more of a "ya of course this is all happening, as I assume you know" type of tone. It makes them feel like, you know, its psycological, it will make them feel like maybe they should know about that, and you wont have to fight from a secular person point it out position, youll be able to explain it from a broad foundation that you have just caused them to assume is true position.
I dont know how to explain this exactly, but I think you know what I mean. This kind of technique and a lot of others have been working for me.
#58
Posted 08 October 2008 - 01:27 PM
Well, once you have all that stuff replaced with artificial components, you could stick a wireless reciever in your head and just run everything from a giant remote server somewhere.I was referring more so to uploading and things of that nature, rather then replacing your brain with artificial neurons, which would in no way seperate the body from the mind.
In regards to that comment though, I do not see how replacing all the neurons in your brain makes it digital in any way.... artificial yes, but how is it digital? You just have a brain that is not made of biological components(a reasonable proposal though, a good idea for treating very neural dissorters, ranging from brain damage to tumors).
Also to make artificial neurons that could connect up/substitute for the biological neurons they would have to be fundamentally similar to the biological neurons their replacing, ei carbon based, same physical, chemical, and electrical makeup. Therefore wouldn't they have the same inherent problems and break down in a similar faction and require constant replacement? All material breaks down over time, admittedly some more then others.
I don't know if you have ever used something like SSH, but basically its like opening a command prompt on your home computer from a remote computer. You can use that remote shell to interface with your home operating system, but you can export whatever code you are running to a remote location.
Though I do agree with your basic point that this kind of stuff is too shocking to approach rationally for most people.
See Future Shock Levels.
Edited by Savage, 08 October 2008 - 01:29 PM.
#59
Posted 08 October 2008 - 01:54 PM
we aren't motivated to obtain truth but instead to evolve in order to dominate subjective context
the inherent context is determined almost wholely by our genes
ants have a completely different context and different truths
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users