PDA

View Full Version : Transhumanism and cultural dichotomy


Aerozord
04-10-2013, 02:27 PM
Something that often gets overlooked with transhumanism are the political aspects of it.

One thing I have noticed is our culture loves dichotomy. The idea of us vs them that there are exactly two sides to an argument and if you care about the topic you must fall into one group or the other. This of course doesn't reflect individuals, almost no one is an extreme but both sides think those on the other side are. That however isn't what this is about.

Namely its that neither conservatives nor liberals in their current ideology support transhumanism.

Conservatives by their definition are against moving away from tradition and radical cultural shifts. Liberals worry about gene tampering and environmental affects of technology, perhaps more importantly the fact in the immediate future transhumanism will create a bigger socio-economic gap as those with money actually will become smarter, faster, and stronger.

Now the extremists of both sides will be against it, but the middle ground will likely support it. On the personal level, like with most commercial technology the convenience will cause gradual acceptance.

This will create an odd political environment. Technically both parties should oppose it for ideological reasons, but vast tracks of its membership will accept it. This brings me back to what I spoke about with dichotomy. For that reason you will not see both accepting it (cause heaven forbid you agree with a liberal/conservative on something) nor both rejecting it (cannot deny there is a push for it). You wont see a third bloc appear or universal policy.

Question becomes who will be the for and against. One possibility is replacement. Its not unheard of for a new political entity to replace another. I mean republican and democrats are mostly in name only, essentially replaced by conservatives and liberals.

More likely I see it shifting back and forth over the next century. Initially more forward thinking left wing will support it, especially for its ability to help generally improve peoples lives. But then move away from it as realities start sinking in that not everyone can afford it and the ecological side effects of nanotechnology and genesplicing. Where conservatives will support it because, screw everyone else I want to be an ageless ubermensch. Then have it shift again when price drops and the technology becomes affordable to the majority.

Magus
04-10-2013, 07:58 PM
I think with liberals it's more that they actually think about it, whereas with conservatives the conversation only seems to go as far as, "What if they cloned Jesus?" One should not tamper in God's domain and etc.

There is quackery on the liberal side of things. Like take the gene tampering or all the bad press about genetically modified crops. There aren't actually any identified problems with genetically modified crops related to consumption (there are some with the pests or whatever) but because of the whole "MONSANTO IS THE DEVIL!" thing and people not actually understanding the process they are afraid they will get cancer from eating genetically modified corn or something, which is tied into the whole "organic" food movement in the worst ways possible usually.

Aerozord
04-11-2013, 10:22 AM
its possible this cycle of shifting political focus has already begun and we are merely leaving the first part of it with liberals knee-jerk suspicion of corporate interests. Namely their rejection of genetically modified foods, early implementation of nanomaterials, and transpecies medical techniques.

Admittedly not transhuman by definition they are necessary steps to reaching it. We wont see much serious political lobbying until the technology is at the point safe upgrades with clear advantages are available. Since initially only the wealthy will have access to them. This might not hold true of course since cost might be driven down while usefulness becomes more apparent. Personal computers for example were never really a play thing for the rich because by the time they were powerful enough for recreational use they were also cheap enough for the average person to use. In a similar fashion by the time we have say, a non-invasive rejection free way to have a mind-computer link the cost of it might be fairly low.

Shyria Dracnoir
04-11-2013, 11:16 AM
IFe9wiDfb0E