Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea? "What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the welfare of humanity?" That question was posed to eight prominent policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea? Transhumanism. In his Foreign Policy article, Fukuyama identifies transhumanism as "a strange liberation movement" that wants "nothing less than to liberate the human race from its biological constraints." Human liberation from our biological constraints began when an ancestor first sharpened a stick and used it to kill an animal for food. What is a human capacity anyway? Our ancestors had no wings; now we fly.
Lust for life: Breaking the 120-year barrier in human aging I hate this mentality. The truth is, as long as we're tied to this rock of a planet, we only harm future generations by extending out longevity. If we could migrate to other planets? Sure, I'm all for it. On a personal level, I understand the fear of a final concept like death, especially when you have a decline in religious beliefs (I myself subscribe to none), but I'd argue that at least for those who do, perhaps they have a greater peace of mind with regard to death. I don't think it's in our best interest to eliminate disease.
9 Overlooked Technologies That Could Transform The World What I've noticed is that most people don't really pay attention to "science" news, unless it's something that they can see immediately. I think this is at least partially because of the amount of news that comes out daily - whatever we may think about the quality of news, there is just a flood of it, which makes picking out "interesting" items difficult. When I talk about (just for example) the idea of gene therapy, most people think that it is still complete science fiction, as opposed to a very near-term product that will be available. Of course, CSP has been around for years, so it isn't really "new" to the average person. What they don't realize is the way that efficiencies have improved... Finally, of course, for a majority of people, the only science fiction they think of it Star Wars/Trek, or (advanced!) If you are on friendly terms with a non-technical coworker, ask them about any of the subjects mentioned here, you will be surprised at their response.
British Astronomers to Join Search for Intelligent Alien Life If you're terrible with math I suggest you fix that for the following reasons: A) As an engineer, I need to do mathematics to improve on existent, and create new awesomeness. B) A scientist needs mathematics to discover more awesomeness about the universe (universe in the sense of everything in it, not just in the cosmological sense). C) The truth is mathematics doesn't care about being useful, it just wants to be awesome and the fact it works so well attests to it's being so. D) And if you really want to know why it's so awesome, you're going to have to learn mathematics. Where should I start you might ask. I'm sorry, you misunderstood. I think the Brits want ET to stop drawing graffiti in their crops.
Bostrom Responds to Fukuyama’s Assertion that Transhumanism is World’s Most Dangerous Idea Nick Bostrom (Sept 10, 2004) “What idea, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the welfare of humanity?” This was the question posed by the editors of Foreign Policy in the September/October issue to eight prominent policy intellectuals, among them Francis Fukuyama, professor of international political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and member of the President’s Council on Bioethics. And Fukuyama’s answer? More accurately, transhumanists advocate increased funding for research to radically extend healthy lifespan and favor the development of medical and technological means to improve memory, concentration, and other human capacities. According to transhumanists, however, the choice whether to avail oneself of such enhancement options should generally reside with the individual. So why does Fukuyama nominate this transhumanist ideal, of working towards making enhancement options universally available, as the most dangerous idea in the world?
Human head transplants? Neurosurgeon says ‘we have the technology’ This is a link to a neurologist talking just a few days ago about the general concept of 'head transplants.' - It address your B question somewhat. Basically as it stands now, the spinal cord still can't be reconnected. As to your A question, here is another link, from the same doctor, directly talking about this particular claim - The C question is probably up to the individual.
Institute - Bioethics - Articles/News - The Transhumanists: By: Wesley J. SmithNational Review OnlineSeptember 20, 2002 Original article In recent years, scientists have mixed the DNA of a jellyfish with that of a monkey, creating a "transgenic" animal that glows in the dark. Other researchers are creating transgenic animals that contain minute quantities of human DNA. But what about human transgenic research? Welcome to the surreal world of "transhumanism," a nascent and explicitly eugenic philosophy that advocates taking control of human evolution through gene modification. Transhumanists are breaking the intellectual ground they hope will eventually lead to public acceptance of genetic manipulation — not just to improve health, but to change our very natures. Transhumanists are biotech absolutists. Transhumanist theory has arisen in the context of a strengthening nexus between the views already popular in bioethics and animal-rights advocacy. This is certainly the approach of University of Alabama bioethicist Gregory E. — Wesley J.
How Artificial Chromosomes Could Transform Humanity I think the difficulties in using artificial chromosomes to provide benefits like seeing ultraviolet light (especially since our corneas absorb the bulk of ultraviolet light) and sonar (which would requite not only organs to generate the noise but also organs to receive it) are significantly understated. The challenge of actually integrating something new into the development of a human embryo is likely to be extraordinarily difficult, especially since you would need, you know, human embryos to practice on. And not just cell clusters, you'd need to grow them up completely into actual babies to see if the additions actually worked. Good luck getting THAT past the ethics committee. Additionally, the FDA doesn't provide approval for enhancements like that, only treatments...sadly "not being able to see in the ultraviolet spectrum" isn't a treatable disorder. Something they didn't mention that I'd be curious about would be using artificial chromosomes in combination with cloned organs.
Transhumanism For the United Nations, relevance may be almost as perilous as irrelevance. In the span of a year, the Bush administration went from taunting the world body to begging for its help. A beefed-up U.N. team will soon arrive in Baghdad to advise the Iraqi government on reconstruction, social services, and human rights and directly assist with elections. At the same time, U.N. peacekeeping missions are sprouting or expanding in Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, and Ivory Coast. Indeed, by the end of 2004, more blue helmets will likely be in action than at any time in history. Although some U.N. backers revel in the growing global reliance on the world body, now is no time to get smug. The idea that the United Nations can stumble along in its atrophied condition has powerful appeal in capitals around the world -- and even in some offices at U.N. headquarters. Regrettably, most of those who could change the organization have an interest in resisting reform. Much U.N.