Ethics and Morals of Human enhancement

Human enhancement - the use of technologies to not only repair, but also enhance the human body and make it more. Make it more than what it is; make it stronger, more resilient; make the brain more intelligent.

However, that is only part of the picture. In reality, once we develop the necessary technologies such as nanotechnologies, the sky is the limit.

People don't realize exactly what this means; not only could we enhance our bodies and brains to be more powerful, but at that stage we could even tamper with human nature itself: human emotions, human "morality", human social systems, human instinct.

We would have the power to alter the very consciousness of the human.

The question is, do you think any sort of enhancement is morally acceptable or even morally righteous? And do you think, further, that tampering with human nature is morally acceptable or righteous?

I say that it is for both. People often say "you're playing god" or "you're messing with nature's way"....nature has no will. Why leave your existence to mere happenstance if you have the power to bend it to your will, to make it more perfect for you? To better suit your needs and desires? Humanity absolutely should alter itself to create a more perfect world, and not only that but humanity should also seek to conquer the natural forces at play and use them in a controlled manner (whatever that means) to better suit our needs.


Imagine: we could create true paradise. Eliminate hatred, eliminate anger, eliminate depression and create pure ecstasy, pure orgasm, pleasure, and happiness, and maintain this state forever. We might even discover how to create simulated realities to better engage us in paradise.

Why not?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I say let the bio games begin...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No matter how you may alter human beings, it will not succeed in bringing any drastic chances to 'enhance' human beings. Scientific meddling in the human body, and especially the brain, has not resulted in any positive consequences.

God created mankind in the best of forms. We should have pride in how we were created. Every person is unique.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

However, we can improve on "God's" creation and make it even better; and why bother having pain in life when we can engineer pure paradise and immortality and everlasting youth?

 

I AM God.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Seriously, while I see the risks, I see far more benefits. This is a major reason stem cell research is so important in learning about human repair/enhancement. There's a lot of positive news in this regarding degenerative diseases. Support it.

 

That's the spirit!

Absolutely. And my position is: why bother waiting for paradise, when we can build it ourselves?

 

It's impossible to improve the creation of God. All attempts are futile. Furthermore, our society is witness to the fact that the human mind, without God's guidance, can easily become corrupted and the consequences are bad for humans, plants, animals, and the Earth. God has created all living things with His Mercy and benevolence, why must we corrupt the Earth? Live peacefully with nature and God will bless humankind.

 

The problem is not if individuals willingly opt for self-improvement but if society decides to mandate it for others whether they want it or not.
Also why do you assume anger is negative? Or even depression? These moods are designed to let us know something is wrong. I think the world void of all bad or all good is simply boring. How can you actually 'enjoy' a constant state and not be bored? After a while you would not feel the 'ecstasy' at all as there is nothing to compare it with, constant elevation is actually a plateau in feeling, a one dimension of mood. There is also the chance that it would leave a society without ambition and productive effort as there isn't anything to strive for, it would also leave you prey to predators. A happy person in a constant state of ecstatsy who doesn't feel anger or hate will not have the cues as when to fight or when to protest...like dodo birds!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Actually I think its the best means to control a society...even hasten our extinction.

I can imagine the dirth in artists as there is nothing to feed off, no inspiration and no agony. To rid yourself of the latter negates the former. Actually there would be no need to have them at all, no need to create anything. Bye Bye literature.

 

So what you are saying is heaven is dull and artless?

 

Well except for all the lives save and enhanced...

 

But WHO's Paradise? Shall it be for the Muslims? Or should it be patterned after the Hindu's? There in lies the major problem of just what anyone thinks that paradise really should be. I do not believe that we should be messing around with stuff like that but do think we should try to prevent diseases, help others with medical problems and solve a host of other maladies that humanity has been afflicted with.

 

I wear glasses. My Mom has a cochlear implant. My son wore braces.
I remember when Louise Brown was made and the HUGE fuss that created. Now nobody thinks twice about it.
Our morals and laws always change with medical advances.

 

I wear glasses, I love my glasses. My near "blindness" is a part of me and I wouldn't trade it for anything, however even if we were able to "fix" everyone's body so that there was no more pain or illness or whatever. It would hardly be paradise. So you can't complain about your fat stomach, you'll find something else to complain about. People will always hate on each other and someone will always disagree with your methods. I'm not sure I would really enjoy a paradise where everyone and everything was perfect. What would you talk about?

 

I'd talk about and wonder why there were whiney ass bawl baby men in my paradise.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I don't know anything about heaven. Norse is speaking of life right here right now on earth not some place in our heads.

 

Read the post he isn't speaking of physical ailments:

"...at that stage we could even tamper with human nature itself: human emotions, human "morality", human social systems, human instinct.
We would have the power to alter the very consciousness of the human.
The question is, do you think any sort of enhancement is morally acceptable or even morally righteous? And do you think, further, that tampering with human nature is morally acceptable or righteous? Imagine: we could create true paradise. Eliminate hatred, eliminate anger, eliminate depression and create pure ecstasy, pure orgasm, pleasure, and happiness, and maintain this state forever. We might even discover how to create simulated realities to better engage us in paradise"

As usual the devil is in the details.

 

Aren't there a lot of meds being used already to change the very nature of the person taking them?

 

Meds are temporary, meds are not nanotechnology neurotechnology and biotechnology, its not using a microchip to impede or change your genetic structure. Meds do not alter a mans morals nor does it promise 'paradise'. Norse is speaking of a utopia where there is no 'hatred' 'anger' or 'depression'.

Norse, quite brilliantly I may add, speaks of this:

'...but at that stage we could even tamper with human nature itself: human emotions, human "morality", human social systems, human instinct. We would have the power to alter the very consciousness of the human.'

I say he does so brilliantly because even though he askes questions no one bothers to critically think anything through, everyone is simply 'game' (I love that expression, people being 'game'), on the idea. Jump on board its great! Not one critical 'yeah but what about this...' Anyway besides Diamond who rejects the idea on religious grounds, no one even bothered to consider what he was speaking of. It amazes me that although the signs are there, the history is there that people can still take any utopia seriously at all, we had communism, jim Jones and David Berger's 'Family' where people were also offered the same promises as above:

'Living in 'paradise' (this promise itself should send red flags)
'Perfect world'
"Elimination of all perceived negatives 'hatred' 'anger' 'depression'

And like these other 'answers' to human life and nature, he then shares a vision of the world as becoming "pure ecstasy, pure orgasm, pleasure, and happiness" and states it can be maintained 'forever'.

What he has inadvertently proven is that men are not gods in nature but sheep. Promise them the impossible and they will follow the idea without any question, criticism, ethical guildelines or legalities.

It should surprise me that after all the efforts by people like Orwell (1984), Huxley (Brave New World), William Gibson (Neuromancer) or exploratory film efforts like Ghosts in the Shell, Matrix, Gattaca, the Borg on Star Treck people still think utopia is possible. Progress yes and technological advancement, but man still has to always stay vigilant in maintaining his freedom and watching the system no matter what system it is and what it offers and deal with his existential misery.

There is no proof that we can change man's consciousness but if we could is he still 'himself' and is he still 'man' or has he 'transcended' that state ie.Transhumanism. You may just as well cease to be in your goal towards self-enhancement especially if the goal is changing ones ability to feel and adding physical abilities above what is possible in a human being. But maybe that's ok, fine but at least ask what the terms are.
Transhumanism is fine as a philosophy but using it in society necessitates dialogue. For example the world is what, 6 billion strong. Who has access to these advancements? Will you create an elite class based on financial means? In which case you'll have Paris Hilton and her ilk ruling over you. Will you create a class structure based on human slaves and the evolutionary enhanced? How do you introduce transhumanism without killing the notion of man? Or maybe this is desirable, maybe we are fed up with man and want to 'transcend' our humaness, our humanity.

All these are possibilites people but please show some promise and think through what the man asked you to think through

 

I don't think it can be done. I think without bad times there are no good times. There are just times. From a neuroscience perspective, we would eventually grow immune to the high level of neurotransmitters that these micro chips or whatever would induce. Being in a state of neither happiness nor sadness, just being. Even Disneyland isn't as magical when you've been there for 3 months straight. Plus everyone's paradise is different, so to create true paradise everyone would have to live in their own reality, but even then I think the same thing day after day after day would begin to wear on you quite quickly. To me paradise is no paradise, unless it's temporary and infrequent.

 

how about open heart surgery and eyeglasses?