#USTE: All immortal? (Transhumanism and philosophy)

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 253

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by chatelot16 » 25/05/18, 13:15

if someone invents a way to make us all immortal it must be euthanized

if everyone is immortal it will be hell!
0 x

Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11188
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1922

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Ahmed » 25/05/18, 13:22

The underlying idea is not immortality for all, but for the "upper" class. Those who are already dabbling in liquid nitrogen have already subscribed to this illusion, for hard cash!
More generally, the project aims to materialize social difference through physiological benefits.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 17122
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2481

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Janic » 25/05/18, 13:56

Ahmed, hello
What you say is true, Janic, only if one refers to the means *, but not with regard to the finality:
Your reflection is, as usual, full of common sense, but (because there is a but, oh, yes!)
When man invents the wheel, he has no idea what concept will become in the ensuing centuries (he would have had to be awfully Balaize to say it) hence the comparison with the hammer, but if neither the hammer nor the door had existed, its finality would have existed no more than killing the neighbor. But the hammers, the doors and the neighbors are there and so must be done with.
from this last point of view (and which is the most important), transhumanism marks a decisive break.
Transhumanism, if I understood it correctly (which is not a reference in itself), is only an extension of it with all the SI [*] that accompany it: an artificial heart, plus one artificial liver, plus an artificial brain connected, etc ... and this gives the man increased (in theory only!)
I recall that the current general purpose is to restore previous functions diminished or suppressed, which is hardly blameworthy.
Not only is it not blameworthy (I wear many glasses to increase my sight deficient) but it is of great use. However, I could have, too, avoid too long readings in the semi-dark, do visual exercises (even now despite my age, that's what is said!), Eat more carrots (ah, ah, ah!) and I would not, perhaps, not need these artifices ???
Same thing for crutches for those who have trouble walking, then mechanized artificial legs, grafted hands and all the rest. But the increased man, is ultimately only this process extended even to the absurd because eventually he becomes only a machine ... which no longer needs his humanity ... and long live the mechanistic evolution!

[*] the human being is only an eternal child who wants to prolong his dreams, or his fantasies, into adulthood and transhumanism is only Marvel implemented (if they get there! what is it, and not who, would prevent them because in our productivist societies it is to produce that which counts and which only shows the positive aspect of this process, the disadvantages will be discovered only later, or even too late ?)
It is this kind of utilitarian mechanism, apparently, that has favored, then developed, the vaccine system creating an illusion that thanks to this little miracle the disease, even death, would be overcome (for a little while) and that no is actually going from Charybdis to Scylla,
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6834
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 720

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by sen-no-sen » 25/05/18, 14:25

It is interesting to study transhumanism from the point of view of sociology.
This doctrine is currently carried by what some call the "upper class" or (dominant class) Californian.
They are very educated people, very wealthy of not much and who owe their success to the technology sector.
When one possesses almost all that one wants, it does not remain then whereas pushed back further the limits to maintain indefinitely its domination.
It is also important to emphasize that this ideology is proliferating mainly among people from Protestant or Jewish families.
This last point is significant since the defenders of this doctrine is presented as being atheist and therefore do not conceive the possibility of a life after death ... without wanting to give it up.
However one does not erase its cultural origins. Naturally, therefore, there are religious conceptions within transhumanism, not through the promise of another world, but through the modification of this world via technology.
So we have an ideology that perfectly reflects the current economic system: an irrational doctrine driven by technological rationality, historically it gave several dystopias.
1 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11188
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1922

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Ahmed » 25/05/18, 19:50

I bounce on your last sentence: the unlimited nature of the accumulation of wealth (though perfectly illusory) goes hand in hand with the desire for eternal life. Death (which is the condition of life) is a contradiction to this accumulation.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."

Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 72663
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 8087

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Christophe » 11/08/21, 19:34

The health pass is only the 1st step?

0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum - Support the forum doing Useful shopping
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4779
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 440

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Exnihiloest » 11/08/21, 21:38

Christophe wrote:The health pass is only the 1st step?



It will surely go slower than he says. But it will be the people who ask, not everyone is afraid of technology. If the implanted chip provides services, it will be adopted, it will surely be more useful than a piercing or a tattoo, practices however already widely accepted, of attack on its physical integrity.
You're late, completely "pick up" like you said about me. You are at the wrong time!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 72663
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 8087

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Christophe » 11/08/21, 21:41

If it happens, it's already started!

A subcutaneous chip will be needed to ... fight against the undesirable effects (desirable for some) of the Ninth dose of the RNA vaccine! Mouahahah! : Cheesy: : Cheesy: : Cheesy: : Cheesy:

So indeed it will be the people who will ask ... otherwise they will die!

Come on, I calm down! : Mrgreen:
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum - Support the forum doing Useful shopping
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4779
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 440

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Exnihiloest » 11/08/21, 21:50

Ahmed wrote:I bounce on your last sentence: the unlimited nature of the accumulation of wealth (though perfectly illusory) goes hand in hand with the desire for eternal life. Death (which is the condition of life) is a contradiction to this accumulation.

I also bounce on your last sentence, even if it's 3 years later. Death is not the condition of life, it is its negation. Or we should no longer bother us with species that disappear, which amounts to the death of a species.
The death of the individual is only an incident of certain forms of life for the perpetuation of the species, a principle no more necessary for the individual than it is necessary for the species. And even if immortality is not attainable, living 500 years instead of 80 would not bother anyone, especially if everyone can say at some point "I'm fed up, I'm quitting". In matters of life, man will be much less stressed when he can say "death is if I want". : Lol:
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 17122
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 2481

Re: #USTE: All immortals? (transhumanism and philosophy)




by Janic » 12/08/21, 10:08

incoherent
The death of the individual is only an incident of certain forms of life for the perpetuation of the species, a principle no more necessary for the individual than it is necessary for the species. And even if immortality is not attainable, living 500 years instead of 80 would not bother anyone, especially if everyone can say at some point "I'm fed up, I'm quitting". In matters of life, man will be much less stressed when he can say "death is if I want".
the fantasy wide awake! There are already a number of daily problems that should be resolved before. Overpopulation ,, the lack of food, the overproduction of inherent waste, the galloping birth rate, and the endless multiplication of hospitals and other places of care to keep all these redundant bedridden patients alive.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré


Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 56 guests