#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).
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/02/15, 12:58

Of course, the differences between the leaders of the time and the USA are not nil and I recognize that it is more the psychic functioning that has manifested itself (it is the case to say it!) During these events than the political background that holds my interest.

The ambiguity between religion and spirituality is at the source of many misunderstandings, especially since they are knowingly maintained.
I myself am fond of assimilating between religion and economics, as you must remember, and that is why I would be very badly placed to criticize you.

In this sentence:
Hence my comparison between economic religion and classical religion, the foundations that constitute them are the same (sic): a societal organization, a founding myth, an abstract omnipotence, and a promise of a better world.

I note that you mention "the promise of a better world", this deserves that we look at it.
Unlike the religions which only promise (with important variations) a paradise in an ultra-mundane hereafter, capitalism assures an "earthly" realization, however, on the bottom the difference is not so great since this "advent" is also situated in an indeterminate future which, in essence, recedes in time as the horizon recedes in space in front of the steps of the walker ...
What has added to the credit of this ideology is that in a time and a limited space, a beginning of realization could be an illusion; enough in any case to disarm durably all the structured oppositions and unfortunately to conform the psychisms.
Today, the global success of capitalism puts it in front of its contradictions: its practical application is absolutely not generalizable * and its simple maintenance is more than problematic (because even considering only a reduced number of participants, the accumulation year after year is too important).
This promise seems more and more illusory in the eyes of many people who see this level of comfort, which had won their support, questioned. However, even if economism is no longer dreaming, he knew how to colonize the imaginary to such a point and to establish so firmly any social relations that he does not need any more to bring about any approval: the void that he knew how to realize around him is enough for everyone to resign themselves to it.

Here I envisage the impossibility of its generalization only from the angle of the physical limits, but there exists another even more fundamental one which is of a principal order: the extractivism presumes a flow of value which is torn from the to be transferred to others ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 13/02/15, 18:11

An article on the dangers of transhumanism: http://www.pourlascience.fr/ewb_pages/a ... -33756.php
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 13/02/15, 18:27

Ahmed wrote:I note that you mention "the promise of a better world", this deserves that we look at it.
Unlike the religions which only promise (with important variations) a paradise in an ultra-mundane hereafter, capitalism assures an "earthly" realization, however, on the bottom the difference is not so great since this "advent" is also situated in an indeterminate future which, in essence, recedes in time as the horizon recedes in space in front of the steps of the walker ...
What has added to the credit of this ideology is that in a time and a limited space, a beginning of realization could be an illusion; enough in any case to disarm durably all the structured oppositions and unfortunately to conform the psychisms.


Parousia and paradise are concepts that have taken many forms throughout the ages.
For the communists the parousia corresponds to the "big evening" which was to lead to communism (materialist paradise) itself ...
This is hardly surprising since Karl Marx came from an Ashkenazi Jewish family strongly imbued with messianism.
There was therefore a memetic hybridization between materialism and messianism.

What we call capitalism, is itself only an aggregate of concepts that is developed through the classical liberal school emanating mainly from Protestant circles on the one hand and libertarian anarchism on the other. other.
This system was perfectly developed because it offers a range of advantages that allowed it to supplant others:, respect for fundamental freedoms (for the rights holders!), But also free trade, respect for private property, Deregulation etc ... is all the ingredients to allow a company to maximize energy dissipation.
This system does not escape the memetic hybridization since it is severely contaminated by messianism (growth and techno-science);

However, even if economism is no longer dreaming, he knew how to colonize the imaginary to such a point and to establish so firmly any social relations that he does not need any more to bring about any approval: the void that he knew how to realize around him is enough for everyone to resign themselves to it.

Exactly!
It is the immense danger that hangs over humanity: the inability to identify the ideological hold of the system.
Moreover, the remarks that one finds on the following post factually demonstrate the power of this ideological domination:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/nature-le-nouvel-eldorado-de-la-finance-t13742.html
There is no longer any question for a large number of "dissidents" of wanting to operate outside the system, because of a certain form of "realism" *.
When we see that environmentalists and other NGOs are now operating within the framework of the single thought, there is something to ask about the chance of survival within the technocène.


* Realism is something to be wary of, because any reality is relative to a given observer, to enclose in a system an observer of this kind will have little chance of finding a solution!
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/02/15, 19:37

Adam Smith, which is made Le the thinker of liberalism was himself a pastor's son and before writing the work that made him famous (The Wealth of Nations [short title]), he wrote a little known moral treatise (Theory of moral feelings) .
And when it talks about the economy, ethical concerns are not absent, contrary to what is usually presented, in a partial way.
As for the influence of Protestantism, Max Weber has long disputed on this proximity in an exciting work.
I do not know, however, whether it is right to speak of contamination by messianism, since any system must necessarily be self-promoting and natural enough to shine the achievements that will not fail to arouse the application ideas that can not influence a less satisfactory immediate reality (by definition, since if everything is perfect, we must not change anything!).

I do not see the role of anarchist ideas so well, can you enlighten me on this?

We look forward to seeing you! Janic, for your flattering appreciation!

* "Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism", available online. [/ B]
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 13/02/15, 21:23

Ahmed wrote:I do not see the role of anarchist ideas so well, can you enlighten me on this?


Anarchism as you know it is a current of thought which was very influential during the XNIXXème centuries, this one advocates as value the total freedom of the individual but also the idea that god is a brake on this freedom: "Neither God nor master".
Most of the anarchist thinkers were ardent defenders of atheism.
Apart from anarchism, although popularly recognized as a current of dissent from capitalism, it was in fact a powerful ally.
In fact, freed from morality and religion, the individual can then, within the system, get rid of prohibitions, which, in a capitalist model, can not be more profitable!
We come back to our example of May 68: the dissent currents of the time actually have, "unwittingly of their own free will"participate in the restructuring of the social system, making it more permeable to the logic of the market formerly blocked by certain cultural prohibitions.

Evolution of the concept of anarchism and liberalism, the libertarianism finds in his aficionados people of finance such as Milton Friedman,Murray Rothbard or even Alan Greenspan... strange no? : Lol:
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/02/15, 21:43

Anticlericalism absorbed considerable energy in the nineteenth century, to the point of defusing other fights. The anarchist movement did not escape ...
One of its rather unexpected consequences of this struggle was the attention of socialist and trade union organizations to women's emancipation, since traditionally women were more subject to religious influence.

If I can afford a small addition that seems important to me, I would rewrite your sentence as follows:
But anarchism, although popularly recognized as a dissenting trend of capitalism, was in fact a powerful ally goal.



* At the time when this term made sense!
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 14/02/15, 10:10

But precisely, we must not confuse religions and spirituality.
All right ! This could be compared to intention and action.

Religions are systems of thought whose purpose is to connect individuals through a founding myth. It occupies a political role and is therefore forced to win against other competing system.
Their role is to channel the desires and existential fears of the crowds.

Indeed, but it can be extended to all forms of thoughts that "connect" and few, if any, escapes, it's our lot!

Spirituality, for its part, comes first and foremost from the intimate journey of an individual towards his essence, his being.
If indeed the latter uses as a skeleton a system of thought, it is above all a way to overcome it.

This is very theoretical, philosophical because there is a true spirituality that can abstain from its cultural, family, social, etc ... and really exceed it as some orientalists want to believe?

It is clear that despite the billions of believers, very few are really turned to a truly spiritual practice!
One could even say no (believer or not) because the spirit is in the flesh and it is weak (as the expression used) and that the Apostle Paul of tarsus expresses well in this passage, often distorted by the religious cultures, among others:
7-14 ROMANS ¶ "We know, indeed, that the law is spiritual; but I am a being of flesh, sold to sin.
15 Because what I produce, I do not understand it. What I want, I do not practice it, but what I do is what I hate.
16 If what I'm doing is what I do not want, I agree with the law that it's good.
17 Now, it's not me who produces that anymore, it's the sin that dwells in me.
18 I know it, nothing good lives in me, that is to say in my flesh. Because it is within my reach to want, but not to produce good.
19 I do not do the good that I want, but I practice the evil that I do not want.
20 If I do what I do not want, it is not me who produces it, it is the sin that dwells in me.
21 So I find this law, for me who want to do good: what is within my reach is evil.
22 For, as far as the man I am inside, I take pleasure in the law of God,
23 but I see in my whole body another law that fights against the law of my intelligence and makes me captive - captive to the law of sin that is in my whole body.
24 Miserable that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?
25 Thanks to God through Jesus Christ, our Lord! So then, by my intelligence, I am a slave to the law of God, while through my flesh I am a slave to the law of sin.
"Etc ...

For the rest, many ultra-liberals will say that the economy has done more for humanity in a few centuries than the whole of religions in millennia ....
From a certain angle, it's true! Let us take the example of medicine (a very large sector of liberal economy) that performs "miracles" permanently, better than God himself (at least apparently) through gurus of all kinds.
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749




by sen-no-sen » 14/02/15, 12:37

Janic wrote:Indeed, but it can be extended to all forms of thoughts that "connect" and few, if any, escapes, it's our lot!


We must not confuse a religion and a frame of reference.
Religions are relatively well structured, while the frame of reference is informal.


This is very theoretical, philosophical because there is a true spirituality that can abstain from its cultural, family, social, etc ... and really exceed it as some orientalists want to believe?


There is no question of abstain,but of overcome,shade!
In the same way that a child learns to ride a bike with stabilizing wheels: necessary for learning at first, it quickly becomes an obstacle to cycling.
The same is true of religions.
And this is the purpose of Awakening and Liberation.
And since you're talking about orientalists, the Indian term Jivan Mukta (literally "freed alive") corresponds precisely to going beyond its socio-cultural determinism.
And according to the reading and the testimonies of observers it is not an idealistic concept.
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 14/02/15, 14:27

Janic, you quote Paul's Epistle to the Romans: Could we not read it as a source of inspiration for transhumanists?
Contempt of the body and the value of a higher order (which would no longer be the law of God, but the instrumental rationality), the principal is there!

Further, you write:
For the rest, many ultra-liberals will say that the economy has done more for humanity in a few centuries than the whole of religions in millennia ....
From a certain angle, it's true! Let us take the example of medicine (a very large sector of liberal economy) that performs "miracles" permanently, better than God himself (at least in appearance), through gurus of all kinds.

This is a classic and interesting argument. Its logical bias lies in a carefully selective approach, so misleading.
Modern medicine, although criticized by many of its aspects, in particular methodological, assures many of us an unexpected survival, but medical progress can not be disjoined from the general environment of technical evolution; in this way, it is unimaginable that there is a medicine as we know it without destructive technologies proliferating in parallel.
To put it another way, the survival and comfort of some finds its counterpart in misery and the threat of actual or potential destruction of other humans. This is a sad reality that we strive to hide in all possible ways.

I would like to add, without being strictly related to the above, some reflections that inspired me to watch a video on military drones.
To observe the other to control it and possibly to kill it without risking one's own life and in a more effective way than by human means, is the first remark rather banal, but that goes well in the direction of promoting transhumanism.
More interesting, what is striking is the extraordinary contrast between the social context of the user of the drone and the one who is the target: obviously, it is a balance of power that opposes a technological power and language to weaker and poorer ones.
This social dimension, which is excluded from the vision of the proselytes of transhumanism, breaks out here in all its magnitude; it seems to me that this is something that is the dead angle of the debates on the question: transhumanism is opposed to the essence of the human, but it attacks in the first place certain humans and is working to dig the already deep divisions that separate them.

Another consideration is that what is aimed at is less the annihilation of the enemy than its "control", this term being used here in its modest meaning meaning metered destruction, so that a predatory balance is established. / stable and balanced prey, each establishing itself over time in a well-defined role.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491




by Janic » 14/02/15, 16:40

Janic wrote:

Indeed, but it can be extended to all forms of thoughts that "connect" and few, if any, escapes, it's our lot!

We must not confuse a religion and a frame of reference.
Religions are relatively well structured, while the frame of reference is informal.

Assuredly, but both are inseparable (I do not take into account the flaws inherent in any structured framework).
Thus the automobile can be considered as informal, it is a simple concept in itself, yet it must go through engineering offices, manufacturing plants, distribution and repair networks which are each, each, these frames more or less well structured. Which gives these marks all similar and different at the same time. Could we get rid of it? Part of this is likely to be handicraft, but at what cost price as much as social (in the system where we are obviously!)

Quote:
This is very theoretical, philosophical because there is a true spirituality that can abstain from its cultural, family, social, etc ... and really exceed it as some orientalists want to believe?

It is not a question of abstaining, but of freeing oneself, nuance!
In the same way that a child learns to ride a bike with stabilizing wheels: necessary for learning at first, it quickly becomes an obstacle to cycling.
The same is true of religions.

One can also consider that these religions are the pedals, the chain or the wheels, it is just a question of appreciation of the optimal utility (in fact each part plays its role as indispensable as complementary).

And this is the purpose of Awakening and Liberation.
The real release (always by comparison) is walking, without shoes elsewhere! But we are far from it, even in an impossible return.

And since you are talking about orientalists, the Indian term Jivan mukta (literally "freed alive") corresponds precisely to going beyond its socio-cultural determinism.
A little like the one who liberates himself from a blind dependence, but who would immediately replace it by another dependence, chosen or supposed such?

And according to the reading and the testimonies of observers it is not an idealistic concept.
Good for them! It is the role of any questioning which in a certain way releases what can be considered as a charge, a ball to drag; it is necessary to feel this need or even its simple reality which can only be subjective elsewhere. Thus, for example, the work may be considered as a punishment by some, but as a development for others, which does not call into question the work itself but the conditions that accompany it, very little ideal most of the time.
However, I told you that thousands, millions of people testified verbally or in writing, their experience with what you consider only as an abstract concept and therefore non-existent as a reality. Everything is about faith, belief, even self suggestion whose effects can actually be very positive. No matter, it's the result that counts!

Ahmed
Janic, you quote Paul's Epistle to the Romans: Could we not read it as a source of inspiration for transhumanists?
Contempt of the body and the value of a higher order (which would no longer be the law of God, but the instrumental rationality), the principal is there!


We are far from it! Pauline literature is often considered (wrongly in my opinion) to be negative: contempt for the body, contempt for women, contempt for mosaic laws, etc.
In this case, for the body in question, there is not the ounce of a contemptuous attitude, but only a statement of the limits of human nature who would like a perfection, never reached, and which makes the simple statement . This is a little what Sen Sen sen says: " It is clear that despite the billions of believers, very few are really turned to a truly spiritual practice! Hence this shortened quote from Paul and thus cut off from his context, more explicit.

Further, you write:
Quote:
From a certain angle, it's true! Let us take the example of medicine (a very large sector of liberal economy) that performs "miracles" permanently, better than God himself (at least in appearance), through gurus of all kinds.

Modern medicine, although criticized by many aspects, especially methodological, ensures for many of us an unexpected survival,
This is where the rub right! Indeed, these distinct aspects are related to medical techniques, humanism and affective relationships between individuals. Starting with the latter where few can support the death of a loved one (or self) and therefore are ready to justify anything to preserve this emotional relationship for others as for oneself. This dimension reinforces that of humanism
Humanism, a philosophical attitude that puts man and human values ​​at the heart of his questions.
Which regards life (human and only) as sacred and that the laws will protect and punish its transgressors. What makes us come to the first dimension: medical techniques to ensure survival at all costs.
Excluding this "at any price" at precisely an exorbitant price (outside the financial aspect) by making individuals dependent on the pharmaceutical industry by doctors interposed. It is no longer a question of using simple, effective, non-toxic means, and this is where transhumanism comes in: being dependent on the technological devices of humans. Thus a transplanted becomes, for life (what remains of it) slave of these anti-rejects products, toxic elsewhere. Ditto for everything else: vaccines, treatments of all kinds, despite the bankruptcy of all these artificial means, short and long term.
So, as you point out, it is unexpected for many of those who would never have reached these breaking points, by better management of their lives and thus of their health (I am speaking here of real health whose education is absent, no illness).
To use the image of the automobile, it is like saying that garages provide "unexpected survival" for automobiles (which is not wrong in a certain way) whereas reasonable driving of these vehicles would have avoided many recourse to these repairers.
0 x

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 158 guests