The Instigator
King_Giza9
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SkyLeach
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Trans-Humanism Is Not The Rightful Path Of Humanity

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 423 times Debate No: 89911
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (0)

 

King_Giza9

Pro

My argument is simply that the theory of Trans-humanism, or uploading human intelligence into an artificial data base is completely off the path of the true nature of humanity.

My Opposition would obviously be going con to my statement with an idea of Trans-humanism being beneficial and great towards human continuity.
SkyLeach

Con

I believe my opponent is taking a false position.

We can debate science and technology, but ultimate the flaw in my opponent's logic is one of speculation, not science or technology.

Essentially, any argument for or against digitization of human intelligence requires that we examine the nature of the digitization and the limitations, if any, placed on future evolution by such an action being taken.

This difficulty can be explored via a comparative analysis of two hypothetical futures which take very different views on the subject.

The author Richard K Morgan uses DHC as the primary means of space travel in the trilogy of books known as the Takeshi Kovacs Novels. In this fictional universe, infants are implanted with high-density 'stack' of computational storage in order to preserve the consciousness of an individual. Human bodies become an economic resource. Later in the series, one discovers that the ancient and presumed extinct Martian civilization (named due to a flawed theory that the civilization originated on Mars and was now extinct) has in fact found a way to quantum-encode not only consciousness, but physical reality itself.

Taking a different approach entirely, the Finnish author Hannu Rajaniemi in his fantastic and riveting novel Quantum Theif describes a future in which mankind has mastered the art of creating nearly infinite copies of themselves in quantum computers. These variable-function copies, known as 'Gogols' (probably derived from the mathematical term googol or 1.0 x 10^100) can be created with limitations in their quantum variability which affects their sapience. Any human which uses the technology gains effectively god-like powers over their lives, including the ability to use nanotechnology to recreate new bodies and to dominate the rest of humanity.

The technological differences in the application of the technology clearly influences any argument towards the veracity of the argument. Since we have not yet managed to come anywhere close to the encoding and upload of human consciousness, we cannot quantify the value of doing so.

Essentially my argument is that my opponent is perpetuating an argument from ignorance and as such arguing a speculative slippery-slope fallacy from the outset.
Debate Round No. 1
King_Giza9

Pro

King_Giza9 forfeited this round.
SkyLeach

Con

I yield more time to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 2
King_Giza9

Pro

King_Giza9 forfeited this round.
SkyLeach

Con

Very well, it seems my opponent forfeited the debate. I therefore rest my case.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by SkyLeach 10 months ago
SkyLeach
:dusts off hands, clears throat, and begins to sing:

~o Ooooooh I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral,
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical,
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical,
About binomial theorem I'm teeming with a lot o' news,
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse. ~o
Posted by King_Giza9 10 months ago
King_Giza9
And if you chose to disagree with me explain what aspect of transhumism is beneficial to human continuity without any future repercussions. Let's talk science !
Posted by King_Giza9 10 months ago
King_Giza9
Yes you have a point but I am fully eligible to involve Homo-Sapien Sapien evolution in general because all species regardless of their genus of class undergoes transformation over time. But to clarify my argument, transhumism in all of its entirety is wrong for humanity. It wouldn't matter which division of trans humanism as all aspects of artificially changing the natural state of the Homo-Sapien Sapien is immoral And wrong. And please forgive me for just specifying on one aspect of the trans-humanistic theory.
Posted by Overhead 10 months ago
Overhead
Yes, you might feel that way. That's besides the point though.

The point being made is that "Trans-humanism" is not synonymous with "uploading human intelligence into an artificial data base" in the same way that "Evolution" is not synonymous with "The change from Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens". In both cases, the latter as just one of many examples of the latter.

So the question is: Do you want to debate if transhumanism (which includes but is not limited to potential AI conciousness uploads) is the rightful path to humanity or do you want to debate if just AI conciousness uploads are the rightful path to humanity exclude discussion of any other forms of transhumanism.

Those are two separate debates and it's not clear which one you want.
Posted by childfornicator 10 months ago
childfornicator
That is fine, but I wanted to know if you were trying tobdebaye transhumanism or just mind uploading.
Posted by King_Giza9 10 months ago
King_Giza9
forgive me for the typo *physiology
Posted by King_Giza9 10 months ago
King_Giza9
After reviewing both of your claims, I still cannot agree with your assertions. The very concept of implementing artificial systems into human nature in general is wrong upon our natural evolution. Yes a small sector of the trans-humanist intelligentsia would be for uploading human consciousness, but as I stated earlier in the first comment, the very act of using artificial systems into the human psiology is diverted from our natural upbringing.
Posted by Overhead 10 months ago
Overhead
No, it isn't. Transhumanism is simply the transformation into something post-human. As well as the possibility of an artificial enhancement (which doesn't necessarily involve uploading intelligence to an artificial system, it covers biological augmentation. too The idea of genetically engineering children to never die of old age and have all kind of wonderful abilities like enhanced intelligence and strength is one alternative possibility with transhumanism.
Posted by childfornicator 10 months ago
childfornicator
A small minority of transhumanists even think mind uploading would work. Most think that an attempt at that would be conpletely unpredictable no matter how advanced technology becomes
Posted by childfornicator 10 months ago
childfornicator
That's wrong. For example proponents of a Kurzwelian Merger would be against mind uploading, and instead just use technology to keep their biological brain alive.
No votes have been placed for this debate.