 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Posted on 10/03/2007 1:31:45 AM PDT by B-Chan
Science Fiction has a lousy record of predicting the future. In the 1930s, for example, it was widely held that by 1970, toga-clad descendants of the Depression Generation would be living in giant art deco cities full of speeding Dymaxion Cars and dining on food pills. In the '50s and '60s, it was rocket belts and atomic-powered flying cars we were supposed to be enjoying by 2000. And today? In almost every extrapolation of the future I've read lately, the ultimate fate of mankind is uploading -- the transference of consciousness from biological to digital substrates. Such uploads, it is claimed, will be immortal and (within the environments they inhabit) omnipotent as well. "Ye shall become as gods," the futurists tell us, 'knowing Good and Evil... AND ye shall not surely die."
Leaving aside the soteriological results of our last gamble for that prize, one question always remains in my mind after reading the latest sci-fi scenario of our imminent apotheosis: so what?
The question seems facetious, but I'm asking in earnest: what's the point? Given unlimited power its environment and an eternity in which to shape it, the human mind is doubtless capable of creating paradises both gross and subtle. Yet, when spread over capital-E Eternity, surely even human creativity ends up as pretty thin gruel. And, when one factors in the exponential speed of thought that will supposedly be available to our uploaded selves, surely Eternity will end up being a lot longer than we might imagine. After all, eventually even the most creative of uploaded minds is going to reach the limits of its creativity, even if that creativity is expanded by collaboration with the creativity of the billions of other uploaded minds. It may take a million years, or a billion, but sooner or later every iteration of every creative idea is going to be experienced by the godlings that once were us. And then what?
(Some would argue that the AIs we're going to build will transcend our own intelligence and create godlike super-intelligences that will be "as gods", providing meaning and purpose for post-humanity. I myself don't see a market for such machines. To what purpose would people of today invest in their construction? "We're looking for investors to help us build a machine that will instantly render all human life obsolete, Mr. Bigbux. How much shall we put you down for?"
So we become immortal, all-powerful digital beings. What then? An eternity of reruns doesn't sound like much fun to me. A cosmic reset button, making us forget everything so we can start afresh? Sure, but that dooms us to an endless cycle of resets. It pains me to think that our deified, uploaded descendants may eventually decide to delete all backups and pull the plug on the whole works out of sheer ennui.
I hate to say it, but the Heaven promised us by Moore's Law sounds more like Hell to me. To my (admittedly limited) mind, a "heaven" that is limited by human ingenuity is always going to end up in a yawn. Perhaps this is why God's Heaven is described as being beyond human comprehension — to give us an eternity that goes beyond what we ourselves can create.
Don't get me wrong — I'm all for living as long as possible. I want to walk on the moon, for one thing, and I intend to stick around until I can. But living forever — as an uploaded mind or as a biological human — eventually leads to "So what?"
(And I haven't even discussed the effect of physical immortality on the human family. After all, people who live forever don't need to have offspring. I for one would not want to live forever in a universe without children.)
Nope, I don't buy it. I know that most SF writers are way smarter than I am, and I know they have Moore's Law on their side, but I've got to believe that there has to be something better as the end of existence than boredom. I may be a Luddite, but I'm hoping that the future of uploads and artificial gods that we're being promised now ends up looking as silly as the rocket-belt-and-toga future we looked forward to Way Back When
The much-overblown conflict between science and religion is a propagandistic myth of nineteenth-century historiography. Galileo's case, a much more complex event than you let on here, happened four centuries ago. It's as about as relevant to modern religion as witchburnings.
These are fundamental questions that I'm pretty sure scare the heck out of the religious. Because it means immortality.
It doesn't mean personal immortality for us. It means a computer simulation of us will keep running until the power runs out. It's the Nerd Rapture, a poor shadow of the hope for the real thing.
And I'm sorry to say it, but the basis of religion is that you will find comfort after you leave the physical world.
Your concept of religion, like your concept of man, is adolescent and reductionist.
And in the Japanese version of the future, maybe we finally get to find out what happens after the last episode of Cowboy Bebop.
like there is any question as to what happened at the end of Bebop....
The much-overblown conflict between science and religion is a propagandistic myth of nineteenth-century historiography. Galileo's case, a much more complex event than you let on here, happened four centuries ago. It's as about as relevant to modern religion as witchburnings.
Then why are the religious so afraid of science and why do they choose to ridicule it at every turn?
It doesn't mean personal immortality for us. It means a computer simulation of us will keep running until the power runs out. It's the Nerd Rapture, a poor shadow of the hope for the real thing.
I don't think you understand the thought experiment quite right. Go back and do it again until you do. The point is the line gets blurred. And your use of the derogatory term "Nerd" says to me that you just don't understand what is being proposed here. Which is fine. But at least admit it. Like I've stated above, when people's beliefs are challenged they become very defensive about their belief (right or wrong).
Your concept of religion, like your concept of man, is adolescent and reductionist.
Again, your belief system has been challenged. You choose to fight rather than discuss...that's fine, I realize why.
"History does not record anywhere a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help."
*Puts on asbestos suit.*
Spike lives. No question about it. If this were a Chinese anime, no question he’d be dead — they’d have killed off every major character in the last ten minutes of the show. But a Japanese director is at least 50/50 likely to sew him back up. After all, it was only a flesh wound.
Besides, the director was dropping hints last year about reviving the series. Absolutely necessary since my youngest daughter has adopted the nickname “Radical Ed.”
Nah, he’s dead. His star went out.
"Religion" is of course a weasely word, though I sometimes use it myself. It includes everyone from backwater fundies to urbane professors, Buddhists, Muslims, pagans, and Christians. Name the specific denomination of a specific religion. Name the specific people you are talking about.
Go back and do it again until you do. The point is the line gets blurred.
Until such a time as there is evidence human personality and high-level thought can be mediated in electronic implants, the question is purely hypothetical, and interesting only for speculative purposes.
Again, your belief system has been challenged.
Trust me, your weak-kneed agnosticism isn't much of a challenge.
. You choose to fight rather than discuss...that's fine, I realize why.
To discuss is to fight. You throw out caricatures and well-worn insults like religion being driven by "fear of death"(why not love of life, among many other things?) and then pretend you're above the rough-and-tumble of polemic. Don't start arguments you don't care to follow through.
"History does not record anywhere a religion that has any rational basis.
Feh. Reason itself doesn't have a rational basis. But this statement is a falsehood. Christian theology, in its better moments, holds that reason is a participation in the Divine, indeed that Reason and Intelligence were in existence before any matter. Agnosticism and atheism generally suppose that reason and personality are epiphenomenal effects of impersonal forces of no inherent benevolence or accuracy. That is, when atheism isn't piggy-backing upon Christian presuppositions about rationality.
Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help."
Heck, all of us cannot even stand up to the known without help. We're dependent rational animals, worthy of more acceptance than egoistic pop-psychology can handle.
Your beloved transhumanists think mankind wasting their lives in infinitely-malleable VR simulations will be the best thing ever. Such men should not have the gall and hypocrisy to blame religion for building comfortable illusions for the weak-minded, when they themselves think there is nothing wrong about comfortable illusions.
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks B-Chan. This is one of those rare four-banger topics. :') |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
AI is impossible in its total definition, however the bar is being lowered day by day so they already have AI, it’s as good as done. Hook up a couple rat brain neurons and Lo!
My cell phone looks a lot like Captain Kirk's "Communicator" from 1966.
An’ I wanna make out with hot, green alien chicks like Cap’n Kirk!
I am completely sure that an immortal man would be an insane man.You, a completely mortal creature, inhabiting a planet in which all creatures -- thinking and non-thinking -- are similarly mortal, declare that you are "completely sure" about the mental state of an immortal creature, one you've never met and can't really conceive of.
I'm completely sure that if biological immortality is ever achieved in humans (and that still won't preclude accidental death or murder, you know), that they will look back on your post here on this server (or the backup server it's been archived to) and smile.
(PS: For the purists reading this, I am aware that there are some single-celled organisms that are considered to be, in a certain sense, immortal.)
You can see that Battlestar Galactica was influenced by Blade Runner..
I see our future more like Firefly than anything else..
Me too - probably heavier on the Chinese influences and lighter on the American.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
