UncommonSense 3
Random Opinion in Response to a Friend

this is a response to a buddy o'mine, who's a dedicated adherent of the Transhumanist movement. preceded by a definition of "Transhumanism" from Wikipedia, the following is geared towards mainly the Transhumanist faction seeking to replace all organic matter of the human body with synthetic/artificial technology, who would like to "upload consciousness" into this form and thereby "transcend" the human condition...

-----------

"from Wikipedia:

Transhumanism (sometimes symbolized by >H or H+),[1] a term often used as a synonym for "human enhancement", is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human mental and physical abilities and aptitudes, and ameliorate what it regards as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition, such as stupidity, suffering, disease, aging and involuntary death. Transhumanist thinkers study the possibilities and consequences of developing and using human enhancement techniques and other emerging technologies for these purposes. Possible dangers, as well as benefits, of powerful new technologies that might radically change the conditions of human life are also of concern to the transhumanist movement.[2]

Although the first known use of the term "transhumanism" dates from 1957, the contemporary meaning is a product of the 1980s, when a group of scientists, artists, and futurists based in the United States began to organize what has since grown into the transhumanist movement. Transhumanist thinkers predict that human beings will eventually be transformed into beings with such greatly expanded abilities as to merit the label "posthuman".[2] Transhumanism is therefore sometimes referred to as "posthumanism" or a form of transformational activism influenced by posthumanist ideals.[3]
"

--------------

re transhumanism in general:

if you can bring together, determined by general consensus within each of these groups, the foremost representatives, to describe what is humanity in essence and component together, then there is at least some chance of using the best of what we know about humanity, to achieve something of a simulacrum of humans artificially/technologically. moreover, i would suggest that from within every group listed, there must be selected (where possible), equal numbers of men and women, equal numbers of politically "right leaning" and "left leaning" adherents, and moreover a precise selection based upon proportional representation of these specialists relative to the group they represent, at all levels of involvement in the group, ordinary members included. and yes, this will involve a sacrificing sometimes of socially valued exemplars, in favour of a more truly "human" selection.

- psychologists (cognitive behavioural,
transpersonal, jungian, freudian, gestalt)
- christian/catholic hesychists
- jewish rabbis and kabbalists
- islamic sufi masters
- saivite gurus
- taoist masters
- african witch doctors & voodoo priests
- siberian shamans of the highest order
- psychiatrists
- sociologists
- anthropologists
- south american shamans
- vaisnavite gurus
- tibetan lamas
- chinese medical practitioners
- australian aboriginal elders
- maori elders
- zen masters
- neurologists
- political theorists
- medical doctors
- tantra masters
- native american and inuit shamans
- polynesian healers
- geneticists
- educators
- ethical theorists
- magistrates
- artists (visual, musical, performance, etc.)
- siddha yogis
- etc.

get the 7 best in the world, peer-selected, of each of these groups, and have them reach broad consensus on what is human. this is overcoming one challenge - to determine what we "know" of being human - irrespective of whether this is adequate to describe humanity to the extent that it becomes replicable without severe damage to our integrity. which it may not be. it may not be, through technological means, although many who will be chosen are indeed "transhuman", yet not in the conventional modern sense, but in the sense in which the term "transpersonal" was first used, by Julian Huxley, "man remaining man, but transcending himself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature".

look up the word "transcend" upon which the linguistic terms of the "transhuman" movement are based. we find that the transcended must lose *nothing* of what it is in the non-transcended state. rather, to "transcend" is to be beyond, while retaining the essence of the original condition. to be clear an example: categorically "transcending" apples and oranges, is to use the term "fruit", and if while making alterations to the unique example of an apple, for instance, the *trans-apple* result is not still fruit, then it has not "transcended" apples, but has "changed" into something "not-fruit", and so becomes not transcendent, but merely altered, or augmented. so, if humanity can be completely retained, in all its aspects emotional, intuitive, physical, intuitive, cognitive, empathic, sensual, sexual (to name but 1/100th of human nature), then a chance exists to investigate whether or not we can move beyond it while retaining it. ...of course, what most transhumanists seem to be interested in, is "Augmented-humanism", and very well, as we have this already with our mobile phones, hearing aids, cars, computers, shoes, etc. wonderful, that augmentation will continue. but, can transcendence of humanity be achieved through augmentation..?

it may certainly be achieved through introspection, meditation, "spiritual" discipline, all without technology. yet, this modern transhuman endeavour (as opposed to the so-called "spiritual" transhumanising activities practised for thousands of years all around the globe) seems *projection* of the ancient quest, traditionally via methods of transcendence valuing the subjective experience of the individual, into the "outer" world. and there is a place for the application of technology as a "key", such as psychedelics, hashish, music, lighting, artificial sensory deprivation environments, etc. still, a transhumanism which clings to the technology, not embracing the transcendence attained therefrom, risks a symbiosis with an element that has outlived utility once transcendence is realised. and this dependence on technology is already with us - the *addiction* to technological augmentation with the original intent to heighten capabilities weighs us down, *diminishes* the very humanity it is adopted to serve. like the businessman who cannot leave his mobile phone when on holiday, and thereby lacks peace of mind. or the habitual watcher of television who can no longer recall the last time they visited one of the amazing places they see on television every day. or, like the person who becomes so reliant on their car to travel short distances, that they develop chronic fatigue syndrome, or heart condition, or other disorders of lowered energic disposition from reliance on the mechanical support.

unfortunately, the philosophical basis of transhumanism, in my view (and of many others), upon examination, reveals a materialist bias. such that, "subtle" phenomena, including 'emotion, ideas, intuitions, etc.' are presupposed to be "transcended" by materiality. the assumption is that by altering physical "stuff", that the "subtle" nature of existence may be "contained" in the stuff, the unique humanity of the energic and imaginal, and the dream realms, supposedly "transcended" by a substitution of one material substance by another. shame indeed, that the foundation is so turned wrong-side up, and that the transcendent element is seen as matter, and not, as may be argued justifiably, a less gross and obvious level of existence, as in the theories of many cultures much more ancient, tested through millenia by far more people of equivalent human judgement, than suggested by the secular movement of biological reductionism.

that is, the critical assumption of the transhuman endeavour by technological enhancement, is that all the non-material realms of human experience are epiphenomenal, relative to matter. wheras, in cultures other than this one in which transhumanism in current form is being promoted, matter itself is seen, believed in, experienced palpably, as an epiphenomenon. in fact, not only is it not inherently fundamental apart from in the zealous beliefs of scientismists and assorted materialists but, there are many levels of humanity which "transcend" matter. libidinal energy, prana, chi, by any other names (and there are many, from all around the world), is lived by many as more fundamental than matter, and it is this energy which would be better worked upon, since it transcends the physical realm, if the resultant transcendence is to be achieved. similarly, *love* is lived by countless people as transcending matter, such that matter is suffused throughout by love, and formed and changed, molded by love into its various forms. likewise, moving further into transcendence is the realm of platonic "idea" or "forms", which though they may not be lasting and eternal in themselves, are far more unchanging, and basic, than the transient and fickle material world. and then, the realm which is virtually unknown to the secular scientismists, because of the access possible only through such experiential (*not* merely theoretical) disciplines like Transendental Meditation, Jnana Yoga, Taoist Cultivation - the visionary morass of primordial stirrings from which descendent reality continually manifests, like the plant-form from the seed, or the finished building from the very first feeling of creative tension within the architect.

let alone the transcendent experience of Moksha, Satori, Samadhi, from which spring every facet previously mentioned, all emerging, as you might remember at about age two years old, from the undifferentiated turbulence of self-shining being. that is, before it began to be a "becoming" into what it was taught to become. yet, the vast majority have difficulty feeling the way it was before the emergence of egoic consciousness, and allow the similar predjudice regarding waking as primal, relative to the sleep and dream states, to interfere with their reasoning. since, reasoning may only work with what is known, and more than this becomes intuition, relying on pre-perceptive datum - like the unknown dreamlife, and the unremembered living being prior to consciousness, and the sheer non-becoming and unthinking state of deep sleep. so the "wakers" of the world attempt to manufacture a lifetime of wakefullness, which has no ending. since the before-ego self is not known and experienced, and is thus feared and escape is attempted into the arms of a material girl named sweet technological utopia. created "weird science" style from only what is known, as if the known is all there is. and as if the unknown, and what is unknown to the transhuman theorists, may be disposed of.

yet, not so readily into the light will the darkness of seedform energies and sleep-bliss, the root of manifestation and the birthright of us all, dissipate. since, through methods of inner transcendence a la Zen, Advaita, etc., access is gained to the realms of pure bliss and contentment (potentially stable, though in these traditions a voluntarily "transcended" waypoint on the path to further experiential realisation), and the secular scientismic community simply cannot achieve for themselves these states of "transcendent bliss" predictably accomplished by Tibetan and Indian Yogis (for example), then the very quest to have a transhuman condition as soon as possible, will necessarily mean that these avenues are permanently closed to whoever adopts the technological transformations.

or, is there a suggestion that mechanisms of "spiritual" transcendence by scientific method (tested by millions over thousands of years with repeatable results, verifiable by one's own experiment) like the yogas and meditative disciplines, are to be replicated without being understood? and this is meant to not just approximate, but replicate humanity in non-organic form, while *losing nothing*...?

hmmm...

if it remains unclear by now, there is no suggestion herein that the attempt to create "transhumans" is "wrong". that is, unless the suggestion is that future generations have it forced upon them before reaching an age of reasonable capacity to clearly understand all arguments pertaining to the issue - i would suggest 26 years old, somewhat arbitrarily. and, provisional upon no methods of coercion via social control through economic or emotional means, manipulation of media by financially interested or otherwise unrepresentative parties, or any other ways of undermining a person's freedom of full information about both sides of the debate, and feedom of choice, are employed. moreover, the consequenses of genetic manipulation at this stage of our understanding are too little known to reasonably safeguard against massive crises in a future wherin reproduction occurs from the coupling of people changed in this way, so for now it would seem wise to investigate alternatives.

so basically, it seems very unlikely that anything remotely approximating a complete human with all faculties and potentials intact will emerge in the near future given the current philosophical assumptions, since the models of humanity being considered are limited by the degree to which secular materialist scientism sets the definition of humanity. yet, i would encourage, after your reviewing for a good long time all the available research, theories, debates and mostly contradictory conclusions, following your dreams and seeking to make it a reality if that is your way in life. with a caution, that you will most likely succeed in augmentation, undoubtedy change, yet not "transcending" humanity at this stage by replacing our organism with a synthetic equivalent. at least, not this century, without striking your humanity a fatal blow to its integrity. unless, and this is a very real possibility, but unlikely in my opinion, the leaders of all the abovementioned fields of processing reality achieve quantum advances in co-operative communication, and the fundamental principles of the movement are re-examined in light of the inevitable changing philosophical assumptions resulting from inclusion of representatives from all parts of humanity with views of what it is to be human, into the process of determining what will be *created* as the new humanity.