• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

What is the next step in evolution?

Whe might become nanotech/robot hybrids, or super intelligent beings or fatsos who never move and just fly on some weirdass levitation device.... or then we become cavemen again lol =D
 
Instead of physical evolution we are seeing a mental evolution occurring. Not as in our actual brain is changing, but the rate and speed at which information is exchanged is staggering and will soon change us in many, many ways, leading to i-don't-know-where.

Physical evolution is difficult for the human race. There little natural selection occurring. Exactly who is surviving the most?
In africa a mutation which has rendered people immune to AIDS is spreading. There's one form that I can think of.
I think we are heading to a place where our genes, not being trimmed by natural selection, cause the % of the population that has illnesses to increase. We may be able to alter our genes though.

One possibility also (which is recent, and kinda scary) is that recently especially in Europe, there are superbugs that are developing that are pretty much resistant to every antibiotic that we have. It had to happen at some point. Some scientists are likening it to a second pre-anti-biotic age. That will definitely affect human evolution.
 
The next step of human evolution is USB sockets, though there is a concern that technology may out-run evolution so for example, as the human develops USB 27145.0 ports, technology will by then have advanced to USB 481093473.0 standard.

If evolution is determined by survival of the fittest then the only way we can evolve is to adapt to climate/environment.

Eventually we shall all evolve to be dust....
 
maybe be able to project ourselves into our own digital world where we can customize everything.
 
The evolution I see occurring as mentioned in my posts above is not natural evolution. One scenario is liberal eugenics (the term liberal being pretty well redundant when you get to the core of the idea)

Eugenics alone could alter our 'natural' evolutionary path, and at quite a rate. And the technologies for its implementation are with us now.

Gerontology involves the use of selective gene therapies and medicines at the neonatal stage to 'improve' our offspring. Eugenicists (generally but not always from as libertarian position) believe that there should be no government interference with their desires to use gerontology to 'improve' their offspring, whether it be for height, IQ, eye colour etc. (though I think M. Sandel has given very good arguments as to why this is not a favourable course for society.

Lifespan - In the West lifespans have been seen to double over the last hundred years or so. This is not via normative evolutionary processes, but the avent of modern medicine, neo-natal care, immunisation, diet (for some :-), invasive surgery, even statistics etc etc.

These tools, fashioned by humans, and applied to humans, are working in concert, with new technologies (nano-tech bio-informatics etc) have vastly increased life expectancy, to the extent where it is becoming a socio-economic problem.

At the outreaches are the Transhumanists who deny the precautionary principle and dream of physical computer-mind connections, and finally, at the Omega Point, The Singularity, the Eschaton...call it what you will mankind will be so transformed, that he becomes Posthuman, and what it has taken mankind to learn across its entire existence will be equal to that which can be learnt in a day. Science-fiction, perhaps, but not according to the Transhumanist, who include some of the greatest minds on earth.

So will we evolve? Yes. How fast is entirely up to the policy makers who decide, for the greater good, how fast, is just fast enough.
 
riptide 818 said:
this is a nice watch, he goes over the future of humans a bit.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/juan_enriquez_shares_mindboggling_new_science.html
Click to expand...

This is a great find, but as with my previous posts I think as with most routes to Posthumanism, Homo evolutis as Juan Enriques calles them, the precautionary-principle must adhere. It is of course exciting to look at the medical developments that allow for non-rejectable bladders, bionic arms etc. But there is a flip side to all this. We are in many cases dealing with subjects that are in their infancy, and in the drive to have one's lab succeed the pre-cautionary principle may come to be seen as a hinderance. And in our Hubirs we may either a - persuade governments to develop a pro-active principle or b- Locate where governments allow proactivity in these nascent sciences. My greatest fear is that a pro-active approach to emerging technologies (especially when one is talking of altering the germ line sequence in DNA) could lead to a Promethean disaster (or perhaps Icarus is a better model here).

Just because it can be done, does not mean it should, as the bio-ethics community around the world have found out.
 
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
There's some talk in the medical community that in the future, human women will largely lose the ability to vaginally deliver a baby, and C-sections will become the only way. We just select for brains (and therefore heads) that are bigger than the female pelvic inlets we select for.

I disagree entirely that people have stopped evolving. Evolution is just change on a large group scale, and as long as factors in our environment (including our own population size and living circumstances) continue to change, the traits we select for and manifest will continue to change.
Click to expand...

we need an evolution of our minds to occur, or some new revelation of thought - more then we know.(?)

a re-evaluation of our existence; that of nature, and spirit seems in order, we die for a reason... i believe respecting our personal existence, and carrying the message of our neighbors existence - will ensure our existence for the future- IAH.


altering our genes to further our lives, is infinitely stupid...
trying to out-wit our existence then rather appreciate and accept - is asking for our ends. unless, this is a way for 'they' to further themselves... leaving behind the 'others' and their names.
 
It's interesting that you bring up the whole notion of 'they'.

Although Transhumanism has tried to gloss over its image as regards elitism (including the IEET website), eugenics (liberal or otherwise), radical life extension, cryogenics, bionics and the drive towards the Omega Point/Singularity (no different than the eschaton of Theology) is by nature, and design an elitist fare, generally mapping onto extant Global elites.

Its all very well to pump research money into Gerontology, Gene therapy and radical life extensions but these choices will not be 'choices', in that they remain a choice only for the global uber-rich.

Watching some of them in interview in genuinely creepy. And the ultras are all highly intelligent, very wealthy people who see the drive to a Posthuman age as an imperative, and that we would somehow be morally lacking if we did not bring it about. They attract $$ because of the defence applications of their technologies, and despise the precautionary principle.

For these people it is a race, whose value makes others pale into insignificance. This is a race to Human 2.0. The only technologies from which we, the masses, will benefit is from their slick marketing, PR and lobby work to make their ideas acceptable to the masses.

And whilst the masses are distracted with the cult of celebrity, obsessive consumption, and techie gadgets - What th Romans termed 'The Games', uniquely designed by them to distract the common Roman citizen, lulled into accidie, whilst the elites sought out the best education, careers through connections - with no one to notice the kleptocracy under which they lived, and continue to live now. The Posthuman readily admits that normal humans could act out roles of docile pet, slave...or if no purposeful activity could be found, liquidation on the cost benefit analysis of their continued existence.

The frightening thing is, that given one or two generations of Posthuman, homo sapiens will be seen as threatening the gene pool, Eugenics would have to be reinstated, and accelerated (not unlike the film classic Logan's Run with the ubermensch devaluing normative species function as something no longer required. That would lead to an epic battle, human against post-human for the domination of resources and commodities.....oops, there I go again. Inserting Transhumans where perhaps they have no place at all - not hard when writing a paper on Transhumanist Bio-ethics - the soocio-economic problems that arise between 'normal species functioning' humans, and the self-Deified Posthumans who may side with Plato in thinking that the time of the philosopher king had come....and they were it.

If you have the time I stronly recommend you look at the documentary 'Singularity and the Transhumanists' wet dream.

The first i the series can be found HERE
 
Last edited:
http://www.youtube.com/user/MsAnnieOne#p/c/748F0ACC35DC687D/1/IEbCgr9vwdg

your link is broken,,, but^this is the addy i believe.
t/y
heh, very interesting to say the least -
i do have the time, but a list...
this bumped its way through though and is bookmarked;-)

" Its all very well to pump research money into Gerontology, Gene therapy and radical life extensions but these choices will not be 'choices', in that they remain a choice only for the global uber-rich "

exactly, this wont work though -
endless problems come to my mind, and maybe they have all this considered and beat, but lol- bullshit.

piss in wind '101'
... and for every action, the is a reaction.
as MDAO, pointed out.
 
Evolution? not sure.

I know evolution is the new trend and now widely excepted religion. Evolution is a science based religion with ALOT of unsure holes in it. I think evolution is politics because it tends to be politically correct. I think evolution is man's way of saying I'm so smart and I have it figured out. I think in evolution we believe that the species becomes better and more adaptable in the environment. With humans it doesn't seem to be the case. We as humans are much much more corrupt than all the animals put together. Which animals rape? murder each other and their children? serial kill? global wars? ect.... just a few examples with millions more. I asked myself this evolution = better species. We dropped off a ledge. I want to add being gay is not elvolution its the oppisite of evolution. If everyone was gay we would not last long 1 generation to be exact.
I come to the conclusion that we do not know where, how and when we arrived. I think scienctist think their smart/geniuses, but are pretty dumb in a real sense. I think the smarter we think we are we are dumber, kind of like the blind and dumb leadin the blind. What have we figured out? can we cure a disease? the common cold? flu?cancer?aids?diabetes? heart disease? how a simple cell works not alone a hand or an eye. Why do we goto war over political reasons? many,many more examples of dumbness.
In conclusion, I don't have it figured out, but I narrowed it down alittle. Since none of us know facts about who we are. We have to rely on hope...hope to who we are. So, with hope in mind I think we have 2 choices. We can hope in evolution and the out come is we goto a grave with no better place. Or we believe in a god(any such) and hope there is a better place to go than the grave. We have to have hope its not our understanding. How do you tell your kids that they are going to be worm food? life is it and nothing better is coming? I've been on both sides of the fence, but only one makes final sense in the end. Life is hard,cold, dark place with moments of greatness. We have to hope there might be something better. thank you for reading this long rant.
 
That is the dumbest post I've seen on P&S in a long time. I know that civility is in the rules, but I think we're allowed to make exceptions for posts like this...

tapuout101 said:
I know evolution is the new trend and now widely excepted religion.
Click to expand...

Evolution is a religion? Exactly how is it religious? Evolution is a descriptive scientific theory that offers no instruction or creed, and no account of creation. Not sure what exactly is "religious" about evolution.

Evolution is a science based religion with ALOT of unsure holes in it. I think evolution is politics because it tends to be politically correct. I think evolution is man's way of saying I'm so smart and I have it figured out.
Click to expand...

Just what are these "holes?" Honestly, every time I hear someone say this, they either cannot back this statement up, or provide me with misinterpreted factoids.

Furthermore, I can't stand when these retards who clearly don't know anything misunderstand the basic tenets of the freakin theory. Evolution as a process is directly observable and fact. We can look at species today and species in the past and see physiological differences. Species have and do change, period. The only difference between something like evolution and gravity is a difference in explanatory power. Evolution, via natural selection, however, actually has quite a bit of descriptive power.

I think in evolution we believe that the species becomes better and more adaptable in the environment. With humans it doesn't seem to be the case. We as humans are much much more corrupt than all the animals put together.
Click to expand...

Are you retarded? Maybe YOU'RE a counter example to evolution... Lol. Humans are obviously the most adapted species in the world. That's why we have a huge population, high life expectancies, and have basically all but killed natural selection's effect on us. Has any other animal been able to manipulate their environment to the extent that we can? Modern medicine? Evolution describes are very specific process by which living beings physically adapt to their environment and constraints. Fecundity does not guarantee long-term sustainability. Again, usually the most ardent evolution opponents are the most ignorant. How can you sit here and try to argue against a theory of which you don't even have surface understanding?

Which animals rape? murder each other and their children? serial kill? global wars? ect.... just a few examples with millions more.
Click to expand...

Orangutans have been observed to rape. Some species eat their own children for sustenance. Serial killing? predation. Regardless, there are plausible explanations for all of these actions within the evolutionary paradigm. And, of course, with further research comes further explanation.

I asked myself this evolution = better species. We dropped off a ledge. I want to add being gay is not elvolution its the oppisite of evolution. If everyone was gay we would not last long 1 generation to be exact.
Click to expand...

I'm gay and I'm clearly far more fit and less idiotic than you are.

At any rate, homosexuality is observed in many mammalian species. And not everyone is gay, what the fuck is your point? If everyone had terminal cancer we would not last 1 generation to be exact. Guess any illness or negative attribute ever disproves a theory that asserts adaptation. Oh wait, you just don't understand evolution, fuckwad.

I come to the conclusion that we do not know where, how and when we arrived. I think scienctist think their smart/geniuses, but are pretty dumb in a real sense. I think the smarter we think we are we are dumber, kind of like the blind and dumb leadin the blind. What have we figured out? can we cure a disease? the common cold? flu?cancer?aids?diabetes? heart disease? how a simple cell works not alone a hand or an eye. Why do we goto war over political reasons? many,many more examples of dumbness.
Click to expand...

I come to the conclusion that you are a bible thumping retard. Can we cure a disease? Why certainly, many! Strep, pneumonia, forms of cancer, mononucleosis, literally hundreds more? (probably more but I'm no doctor so I don't want to give an unfair figure)

In conclusion, I don't have it figured out, but I narrowed it down alittle. Since none of us know facts about who we are. We have to rely on hope...hope to who we are. So, with hope in mind I think we have 2 choices. We can hope in evolution and the out come is we goto a grave with no better place. Or we believe in a god(any such) and hope there is a better place to go than the grave. We have to have hope its not our understanding. How do you tell your kids that they are going to be worm food? life is it and nothing better is coming? I've been on both sides of the fence, but only one makes final sense in the end. Life is hard,cold, dark place with moments of greatness. We have to hope there might be something better. thank you for reading this long rant.
Click to expand...

Oh boy, another conclusion? In conclusion, you don't have a basic grasp on evolutionary theory.

Sorry but I don't subscribe to an empty "hope" when I know that the world is in fact a "hard, cold, dark place." However, I let those moments of greatness make life worth living. You, on the other hand, live a lie. Have fun with that, bro.
 
Re Up

I might be dumb and a retard, but doesn't that confirm what I posted? You actually confirmed alot of what i posted. Name calling is very childish and simplistic. You asked questions and didn't give your opinion. I was looking for peoples opinions about these things not to goto war. I posted, but you didn't have to read its what I found in my life. You proof read the whole thing. Ok.I don't believe I mentioned the bible at all I used simple logic. To be politicaly correct I said, " a god" none specific. I was referring to evolution to be religious by belief. No we haven't cured anything in terms of disease not cancer nothing its treated not cured with meds,or surgery. I think that has to do with drug companies, politics,money and power,but I won't go down that road. I did offer examples of evolution mishaps which I think is very valid. We do not out number the animals. You havn't discredited any of my points for me being so dumb,retarded,ahole ect. Like I said in my post the smart people(scientist,you ect.) can't stoop to I don't know. The fact is none of us know. The differance is I except it I'm not that smart. I did narrow it down to 2 roads and hope. Like I stated I've been on both sides 1 is self seeking and the other is other seeking. You probally insulted me about the gay statement in the evolutionary process its an example. I wasn't trying to take anyones inventory. I have enough of my own junk to worry about. I believe I posted a pretty good life experiances lesson. I'm sticking with hope.thanks for the reply.

IamMe90 said:
That is the dumbest post I've seen on P&S in a long time. I know that civility is in the rules, but I think we're allowed to make exceptions for posts like this...



Evolution is a religion? Exactly how is it religious? Evolution is a descriptive scientific theory that offers no instruction or creed, and no account of creation. Not sure what exactly is "religious" about evolution.



Just what are these "holes?" Honestly, every time I hear someone say this, they either cannot back this statement up, or provide me with misinterpreted factoids.

Furthermore, I can't stand when these retards who clearly don't know anything misunderstand the basic tenets of the freakin theory. Evolution as a process is directly observable and fact. We can look at species today and species in the past and see physiological differences. Species have and do change, period. The only difference between something like evolution and gravity is a difference in explanatory power. Evolution, via natural selection, however, actually has quite a bit of descriptive power.



Are you retarded? Maybe YOU'RE a counter example to evolution... Lol. Humans are obviously the most adapted species in the world. That's why we have a huge population, high life expectancies, and have basically all but killed natural selection's effect on us. Has any other animal been able to manipulate their environment to the extent that we can? Modern medicine? Evolution describes are very specific process by which living beings physically adapt to their environment and constraints. Fecundity does not guarantee long-term sustainability. Again, usually the most ardent evolution opponents are the most ignorant. How can you sit here and try to argue against a theory of which you don't even have surface understanding?



Orangutans have been observed to rape. Some species eat their own children for sustenance. Serial killing? predation. Regardless, there are plausible explanations for all of these actions within the evolutionary paradigm. And, of course, with further research comes further explanation.



I'm gay and I'm clearly far more fit and less idiotic than you are.

At any rate, homosexuality is observed in many mammalian species. And not everyone is gay, what the fuck is your point? If everyone had terminal cancer we would not last 1 generation to be exact. Guess any illness or negative attribute ever disproves a theory that asserts adaptation. Oh wait, you just don't understand evolution, fuckwad.



I come to the conclusion that you are a bible thumping retard. Can we cure a disease? Why certainly, many! Strep, pneumonia, forms of cancer, mononucleosis, literally hundreds more? (probably more but I'm no doctor so I don't want to give an unfair figure)



Oh boy, another conclusion? In conclusion, you don't have a basic grasp on evolutionary theory.

Sorry but I don't subscribe to an empty "hope" when I know that the world is in fact a "hard, cold, dark place." However, I let those moments of greatness make life worth living. You, on the other hand, live a lie. Have fun with that, bro.
Click to expand...
 
I think tapuot 101 is using some translation software - (is that correct) - which is leading to some odd turns of phrase. Maybe is tapuot browsed some of the rest of the forum to see how others structure their post, and the language they use/don't use, you may be in a better position to provide a post worthy to be read. Words like retard and dumb is not the normal nomenclature for P+S.

Also read MDAOs excellent forum guidelines, available Here before posting again and you might receive a more friendly welcome.

I would also invest in some basic textbook on an introduction to evolutionary theory.

PAX
 
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
There's some talk in the medical community that in the future, human women will largely lose the ability to vaginally deliver a baby, and C-sections will become the only way.
Click to expand...

I had not thought of this, but it makes a lot of sense. But, damn! Do you guys realize how really, really awful that is?! If they'd quit doing the Csecs, our pelvises would have to evolve along with our heads. And that would kill more women in childbirth, which sucks, but it would also preserve the organic birthing experience, which IS important, regardless of how much the med community would like to sterilize and clinicalize it. BIRTHING IS SPIRITUAL. Every OB needs that tattooed on his/her corneas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top