Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Emelina

(188 posts)
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 03:42 PM Jul 2013

Will transhumanism eradicate the need for political parties?

An interview with a leading proponent of transhumanism and her predictions for the future:



If by 2040 we have cures for most diseases, can replace arms, legs and organs with superior synthetic alternatives and can engineer away many problems at the point of conception then will this usher in a new age of enlightenment that will take away many of the problems of today and leave us, dare I say, a true utopia?
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Will transhumanism eradicate the need for political parties? (Original Post) Emelina Jul 2013 OP
Is this for everyone... MrScorpio Jul 2013 #1
Well computers... Emelina Jul 2013 #2
Well, yes. That's certainly true MrScorpio Jul 2013 #12
Yes. If we all live longer, we will all have a stake in keeping the planet fit. randome Jul 2013 #3
bullshit. we all live longer *now* and no such thing has happened. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #10
No. As long as our system is based on capitalism, the profit motive will trump Cleita Jul 2013 #4
Agreed. bunnies Jul 2013 #6
I am becoming inclined to think that we are somewhat Skidmore Jul 2013 #7
Actually, according to Thom Hartmann, we are not. Cleita Jul 2013 #11
Projections like this are basically meaningless. longship Jul 2013 #5
Whatever "transhumanism" calls itself to look good. ananda Jul 2013 #8
no. HiPointDem Jul 2013 #9

Emelina

(188 posts)
2. Well computers...
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 03:46 PM
Jul 2013

Personal computers went from only being a toy for the rich to being a household necessity in less than a generation.

MrScorpio

(73,631 posts)
12. Well, yes. That's certainly true
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:29 PM
Jul 2013

However, they still cost money... An out of pocket expense, achievable to own, only based on ones ability to afford it. Or at least the ability to obtain credit so they can get one on an installment plan.

And as necessities, people are required to have them as far as they can afford them and maintaining their operation and connection to the net. But it's not like people are getting any additional help to do that.

If what this woman says is true, where human beings will eventually find ways to retrofit and repair our bodies at will, that's going to cost a lot of money to accomplish and maintain. Will some kind of insurance plan provide for that? What if some people have life-saving replacement organs and for one reason or another, are unable to keep up with the payments?

There was a recent movie called "Repo Men" that touched on that subject. People who were unable to keep up with the payments for their artificial organs were hunted down by "Repo Men", who basically murdered them and removed the organs.

Also, let's not forget that human beings are obscenely vain creatures. Those who can afford it and are willing to undergo the process, could basically transform themselves into literally anything. There's an entire movement based on Modern Primitivism, where people cover there entire bodies with tattoos, piercing, scars and what-not. Will the next movement create a class of people who would have six limbs and two heads?

Now, of course, there's nothing wrong with that. But that obviously something to think about if we're going to start changing social norms to accommodate an entirely new class of human beings. Again, how are they going to pay for all of that? Or, is society going to foot the bill? How long do you think that would last when some people realize that they're paying for the elective transformation of the terminally vain?

But most of all, consider the trend of a diminishing middle class and falling wages. People are less and less able to afford even the basics... Like food, much less, any computers that people can own. And then, we'd have to factor in a transhumanistic system that could dictate what's available to preserve, maintain and enhance human life. If our capitalistic system of health care, which is based on profit from survival, is still somewhat intact in this future, it would mean that access to insurance and care facilities would be paramount.

Obviously, the rich would have access to both the best care and options in such a situation. While the rest of us without available means would have to scrape by, vulnerable to the leeches that would limit access by way of a high premium. Talk about a perfect storm of capitalistic exploitation.

It has always cost more to be poor than it does to be rich in America. Now we're imagining an America where our survival could be at stake based on our ability to enhance our own bodies.

It's not like something like that is going to come free.

Just like the necessities of computers and cell phones today, one's access to them depends on ones ability to afford them.

Will Transhumanism create another new necessity for human survival that we'll have to figure out how to afford as well?

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
3. Yes. If we all live longer, we will all have a stake in keeping the planet fit.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 03:51 PM
Jul 2013

I would expect to see more care for the environment because it will be our environment, not someone else's.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.
[/center][/font]
[hr]

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
4. No. As long as our system is based on capitalism, the profit motive will trump
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 03:54 PM
Jul 2013

everything else and we will continue on our competitive,destructive path until there is nothing left except at the top for the few that own everything. We are already halfway there.

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
7. I am becoming inclined to think that we are somewhat
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:09 PM
Jul 2013

hardwired to compete and am not certain that, short of breeding it out of the human species, we will ever not have some person seeking to dominate others. We can at best seek to inculcate prosocial values and behavior.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
11. Actually, according to Thom Hartmann, we are not.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:25 PM
Jul 2013

He posits that we are actually hardwired to cooperate with each other. That's why our closest primate cousins live in troops for safety and to share resources. Also, if you study primitive societies who still are in the hunter/gatherer type of economy, they share everything. The strongest go out and hunt and dig for the food, but they bring it back to camp and share it with every one, the children, the elderly and the disabled. No one goes hungry in times of abundance. When there is a lack of food resources then everyone goes hungry.

You know how competitive our games are and how there can only be one champion in the end? Well, anthropologists studying children playing games in those aforementioned societies aren't competitive. There is no winner and loser. It's just a game for everyone to participate in. This is interesting stuff and makes you wonder when we made a wrong turn, maybe when we settled down to farm and the concept of property and ownership came into play?

longship

(40,416 posts)
5. Projections like this are basically meaningless.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:04 PM
Jul 2013

It's like flying cars, jet packs, and nuclear powered vacuum cleaners.

People expect too much, too soon. I blame people like that Singularity guy, Ray Kurzweil, for this stuff.

The future will be what it will be. Predicting technological advancements like this is an invitation to look foolish.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Will transhumanism eradic...