Why The Lack of Majority Transhuman Future Settings?

CarlManvers2019 said:
Or maybe a better analogy, does a 14th century peasant who probably won’t live even to his 40s, who has to work the majority of the day on a hard and boring job and doesn’t have access to medicines to keep sickness away have a more fulfilling life than a guy who earns enough money to survive and play videogames and have his own waifu-pillow?

Yeah, they both do work to survive, the difference is that the guy from the future has it better off in comparison and will probably live longer
Click to expand...

The man in the past lives in a world of social, civic, and religious certainty, with a family that loves him, a history around him, a Church to guide him, and land to be in tune with and love. Can you at least read something very simply and open to the popular public like James Herriot's stories of being a farm vet in Yorkshire before you condemn that? Your postmodern man lives unloved, without a functional civic support, without bodies to engage in and derive meaning from, without volunteerism to his community, without God to guide him and without patriotism and inspire him, he has no real love, no ambition, no rootedness (racination) in the soil, no context for his existence. He is already dead. Commentary on these matters is why I love Frank Herbert's writing so much.
 
Captain-General said:
The man in the past lives in a world of social, civic, and religious certainty, with a family that loves him, a history around him, a Church to guide him, and land to be in tune with and love. Can you at least read something very simply and open to the popular public like James Herriot's stories of being a farm vet in Yorkshire before you condemn that? Your postmodern man lives unloved, without a functional civic support, without bodies to engage in and derive meaning from, without volunteerism to his community, without God to guide him and without patriotism and inspire him, he has no real love, no ambition, no rootedness (racination) in the soil, no context for his existence. He is already dead. Commentary on these matters is why I love Frank Herbert's writing so much.
Click to expand...

Romanticist. That guy's probably also a borderline religious fanatic by today's standards and married to a girl young enough to be his daughter who doesn't even want in on the marriage itself. Or he may not even be so religious in the first place or have much of a relation with those around him and is a drunk on the side, wishing for baser desires

The man of the future I used as an example has more options in life, he's not necessarily the familyman next door, but he does enjoy his life. Hell, he may even decide to instead of simply being a consumer, decides to be a maker by crafting his own games for his own joy and maybe the joy of others who decide to take a look.

Do people really need to live FOR others to have a fulfilling life? I say no. Is it selfish? Yes. Is it evil? No
 
CarlManvers2019 said:
Romanticist. That guy's probably also a borderline religious fanatic by today's standards and married to a girl young enough to be his daughter who doesn't even want in on the marriage itself.

The man of the future I used as an example has more options in life, he's not necessarily the familyman next door, but he does enjoy his life

Do people really need to live FOR others to have a fulfilling life? I say no. Is it selfish? Yes. Is it evil? No
Click to expand...


I'm a borderline religious fanatic by today's standards, and I don't find anything wrong with it. You're also objectively wrong about medieval marriage customs, people tended to marry older, except amongst the nobility. This is kind of a digression; I do think you need to live for others to have a fulfilling life, and no, it isn't evil to be selfish, but it is a distance from that which is healthy. I mean, there may be a reason fiction writers turn back to the same conceits and tropes again and again -- because these things represent a real longing in the human heart.
 
Captain-General said:
The man in the past lives in a world of social, civic, and religious certainty, with a family that loves him, a history around him, a Church to guide him, and land to be in tune with and love. Can you at least read something very simply and open to the popular public like James Herriot's stories of being a farm vet in Yorkshire before you condemn that? Your postmodern man lives unloved, without a functional civic support, without bodies to engage in and derive meaning from, without volunteerism to his community, without God to guide him and without patriotism and inspire him, he has no real love, no ambition, no rootedness (racination) in the soil, no context for his existence. He is already dead. Commentary on these matters is why I love Frank Herbert's writing so much.
Click to expand...
I think those are completely independent of transhumanism. Those are issues of particular kind of (non)culture, or simply lacking worldbuilding. For comparison, try applying those criteria to an extansive setting with transhumanism, let's take the mentioned 40k.
Does this over 10 millenia old highly cyborgized individual lack social, civic or religious certainity? Does he lack patriotism? Does he lack ambition? Does he lack a community? Does he lack a context for his existence? Does he lack a fulfilling life?
So yeah, what you mention is lazy writing and/or issues of postmodernism itself, rather than issues of transhumanism. It's not a choice between one or another. One, another, both or neither are all very possible options.
 
Marduk said:
Does this over 10 millenia old highly cyborgized individual lack social, civic or religious certainity? Does he lack patriotism? Does he lack ambition? Does he lack a community? Does he lack a context for his existence? Does he lack a fulfilling life?
So yeah, what you mention is lazy writing and/or issues of postmodernism itself, rather than issues of transhumanism. It's not a choice between one or another. One, another, both or neither are all very possible options.
Click to expand...

That over 10 millennia(I think WAY longer than the tech of the Imperium&Mechanicum)old transhumance is definitely having a fulfilling life

He's into a duty that he himself is on of his own choice and has a lot of work to do, work that's not necessarily even approved by his fellows but he does anyway. He has the time and resources to go and just fall into base desires or laziness, but he chooses to make use of that luxury instead of his own choice
 
@Marduk well, Leto II didn't lack these things either...

...But if it is still part of the human condition, is it really transhumanism?
 
Captain-General said:
@Marduk well, Leto II didn't lack these things either...

...But if it is still part of the human condition, is it really transhumanism?
Click to expand...
Depends. If we focus on all the various ideological oddities that some people attach to transhumanism, more or less justified - no. If we focus on the practical, technical core matter of transhumanism, as in making humans more capable, faster, stronger, tougher, smarter, longer lived etc. - yes.
 
Captain-General said:
is it really transhumanism?
Click to expand...

www.youtube.com

Isaac Arthur

This channel focuses on exploring concepts in science with an emphasis on futurism and space exploration, along with a healthy dose of science fiction. While...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com

Transhumanism is less just about psychology and more about tools to better the human body or make the human body a better tool

What you do with your newfound free time and better physical capabilities are your choice and just because you aren't being forced into something by necessity, doesn't mean you can't get around to working on stuff like art or raising a family for its own sake rather than survival

Humans have been on this path of transhumanism since we started wearing clothes and trying out medicine.

I think it's safe to say that The Rich are the closest to a show of this additional freedom brought by sort-of-transhumanism, they have more options, but frankly simply going off to just eat and drink lots of stuff and pay for hookers and blow is boring. That's why there exist hobbies like making art, learning martial arts, flying a helicopter, travelling the world etc.

It's lazy to simply enjoy yourself with boring consumption
 
Lanmandragon said:
If that can be done without turning into borg lite I'd be game. Otherwise I'd prefer death. I'd imagine alot of folks are like me. Also no need to get worked up I'm just proposing a theory.
Click to expand...

How about a simple injection?

Because ya, we can do that. Just a bit of gene modding and poof, nigh immortality.

Captain-General said:
@Marduk well, Leto II didn't lack these things either...

...But if it is still part of the human condition, is it really transhumanism?
Click to expand...

Transhumanism is about getting rid of the bad and emphasising the good. It's idealistic to hell, but what isn't really?

As a post humanist, I believe that human limitations are caused by the negative aspects of humanity as a whole and believe that we can ascend past those limits, to become something far, far greater than we are right now.
 
Vyor said:
How about a simple injection?

Because ya, we can do that. Just a bit of gene modding and poof, nigh immortality.



Transhumanism is about getting rid of the bad and emphasising the good. It's idealistic to hell, but what isn't really?

As a post humanist, I believe that human limitations are caused by the negative aspects of humanity as a whole and believe that we can ascend past those limits, to become something far, far greater than we are right now.
Click to expand...
I'm just not going to turn myself into a robot or computer. I don't object to Cap America type modding.
 
Vyor said:
How about a simple injection?

Because ya, we can do that. Just a bit of gene modding and poof, nigh immortality.



Transhumanism is about getting rid of the bad and emphasising the good. It's idealistic to hell, but what isn't really?

As a post humanist, I believe that human limitations are caused by the negative aspects of humanity as a whole and believe that we can ascend past those limits, to become something far, far greater than we are right now.
Click to expand...

I also believe that, but I call it enlightenment and believe it happens at the conclusion of the path of samsara beyond this material existence. In a sense post/transhumanism is just religion based on technology.
 
Vyor said:
Do you feel that cybernetics make someone less human?
Click to expand...
I think that it is possible they would.

Part of being human is engaging with the world through the various senses, and any cybernetics that reduce or remove sense inputs run the risk of fundamentally altering the way a person interacts and engages with the world. Making them less human in that regard. Now this is not to say cybernetics WILL result in this, but if we do not find a way to integrate them with the human nervous system I think it would be a risk. If we can, and equip them with sensors that match up with natural human senses, then I think it wouldn't matter so much.
 
I don’t think robot parts are a problem unless they facilitate a loss of self-awareness through net interfaces, personally.
 
Captain-General said:
I don’t think robot parts are a problem unless they facilitate a loss of self-awareness through net interfaces, personally.
Click to expand...

Admittedly, I think there is something rather disturbing when even there are no physical defects or crippling, people casually having their body parts replaced shows just how much they value the bodies they were born with.

Then again, we already have plastic surgeons
 
CarlManvers2019 said:
Admittedly, I think there is something rather disturbing when even there are no physical defects or crippling, people casually having their body parts replaced shows just how much they value the bodies they were born with.

Then again, we already have plastic surgeons
Click to expand...

That’s not disturbing at all, body modification is as old as humanity.
 
CarlManvers2019 said:
I find plastic surgery kinda creepy, then again, not everybody has the luxury of looking nice from birth
Click to expand...


It’s arguing much less aesthetically graphic than some traditional tattooing and piercing... Let alone head-flattening, neck-lengthening, etc.
 
Captain-General said:
It’s arguing much less aesthetically graphic than some traditional tattooing and piercing... Let alone head-flattening, neck-lengthening, etc.
Click to expand...

I find those disturbing as well....still my issue with plastic surgery is that you're actually "ugly" without it and anybody showing flattery or attraction is really falling for a mask of sorts with something "ugly" behind it

That even includes makeup

I have some very strange views at times
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top