menu Home

Transhumanism: “The World’s Most Dangerous Idea” | Philosophy Tube

Philosophy Tube | April 3, 2024
Transhumanism: "The World's Most Dangerous Idea" | Philosophy Tube


This post currently has 36 comments.

  1. @Nagutama

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    I was enjoying until you get to the "everyone who does not agree with me is a literal nazi". And how you made fun of legitimate concerns towards the rapid avance of technology.

  2. @QuintonMurdock

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    I used to hate at fear trans humanism. Until I realized I was a wyvern being forced to appear as a human by other people perceiving me. A comic by an artist about HRT that doesn’t just trans your gender but also species (into that of a dragon) fully pushed me to accept like..nah trans humanism is pretty neat and god fucking damn this rotten universe for denying me the scales I deserve

  3. @MatthewSmith-sz1yq

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    Genetic engineering is what has me really scared, because its something that doesn't just alter your own body, but any decendants. In fact, it might not even alter your body, JUST your decendants. Unless this technology is made widely available at low or no cost, genetic engineering could turn social class divisions (rich vs poor) into physical, biological, inheritable divisions. Rich people would be physically stronger, smarter, healthier, and prettier.

    Even aside from class mobility issues, this would almost certainly result in extreme dehumanization of the poor, if genetic engineering became the perceived "standard" for what a human should be. Those who weren't able to afford it would by definition be below that standard, or to put it in a more chilling way, "sub-human" compared to everybody else. Currently, most of the rich like to pretend that they are the "cream of the crop," that they are somehow superior to the rest of the population, rather than just winning the inheritance lottery, largely because it allows them to justify doing terrible things to millions of people, such as laying off 20% of their workforce, because those people are somehow different, and more expendable, than the people making those decisions. Genetic engineering could make this "cream of the crop" sentiment objectively correct, with there being clear, obvious differences.

  4. @tealkerberus748

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    So does this mean that one day I'll be able to get my brain transplanted into a nice robotic body that doesn't have all the problems my current body has? I really like the idea of being abled again.

  5. @user-md4zr6jr6t

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    oh, btw, at least some of dugin's ideas are compiled after he has horribly misused some heavy drugs, some of his…ermm… downfall was witnessed by the cult musician Letov, it's googleble (not o confuse with Jared Leto though!).

    some anthropologiss say that it's not dugin who has fathered the horrible ideology of putinism but rather some less known elderly guys form Saint Petersburg – those say exactly the same things one may heat from the president snow. but again, i didn't pay attention to the names as trying to do high quality slavic and east asian linguistics is a handful already 🙁

  6. @user-md4zr6jr6t

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    28:10 well, as a person living in russia, i may say, that новороссия (with an 'o') is not an ideology, but a really antiquated term for some parts of modern south east of ukraine (like 18 century, before it was even settled). and the ideology of putinist imperialism is misleadingly called евразийство. it does include tonnes of nearly fascist ideas and some openly fascist ones, first spoken by russian post-revolutionary emigrant monarchist philosophers (i'm bad with their names, live's trashy even without those – it's is already a crime to be vocal about being an lgbtq+ person. do hope, i will never be so in britain – i always dreamt of working on my thesis in wales!)

  7. @Azord

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    anyone who has spent time with cyberpunk media should be familiar with transhumanism, and to put it modestly, it's a double edged sword at best. I really liked seeing the issue from the more philisophical side, very enlightening

  8. @DanielleA2023

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    Right wing govts are destroying our world, having started the plummet to multiple Global Crisis we suffer today (climate, homelessness, misinformation) under Regan Thatcher Murdoch and evangelists

  9. @gusandsciolla

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    [These kind of] Ideas tend to be always nice, positive and progressive…the problem is that these nice ideas also tend to be screwed up by corporations, military complexes and government agencies in general. That’s the scary part.

  10. @RichardLucas

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    Yeah, well, we as narrative creatures aren't driving the bus so much as describing the trip to ourselves. We're each more or less a pseudopod, one of billions, with which the human superorganism moves around in space and time, but more importantly, in abstraction. What's funny is we all know it on some level and intentionally hide this awareness from ourselves. We lean into the artifice of the I-Thou imposed by language. Language being the connective tissue.

  11. @bangtanssera

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    i still won't blame tools for being useful yet humanity is all at fault maybe i have internet connection but at least a billion doesn't… they grow up in wars, dictatorships, depressions, disconnected from our better world. and those very rich capable people just accept it and count their capital. fuck it really

  12. @Bloodysugar

    April 3, 2024 at 12:26 am

    Excellent !

    BTW progress is a development from a state to an other one thanks to an enhancement. It is a very neutral concept that does not include good or bad, its moral implications only are subsidiary. This subsidiary consequence is important for sure, as by definition killing more people "thanks" to new techs is a progress too. In order to avoid toxic consequences progress needs humanist deontology setting preventive limitations to innovations.

    Transhumanism is indeed full of eugenism, validism etc, and I tend to think that it is because it lakes deontology. I feel it wont change as deontology restrains many aspects of the progress transhumanists are hoping for. And maybe also because deontology asks a lot of efforts to think about and organize, and for what I've seen so far transhumanists tend to get lazy as soon as it involves more than fantasizing about science fiction. Just like as mentioned here, they indeed tend to forget about socio-economic realities making their grandiloquent claims mainly BS : it takes efforts to analyze systemic factors, read sociologic studies, and above all changing opinions.

    For sure the far right has reasons exposed here to reject transhumanism, but far left can do it too for other reasons, and every political stance in between can do it too.

    Personally I'm all for it : Earth could be a better place if transhumanists would upload themselves on an USB key so we can send them to Mars.

Leave a Reply

play_arrow skip_previous skip_next volume_down