Anarcho-Primitivism or Transhumanism?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Anarcho-Primitivism or Transhumanism?

Anarcho-Primitivism
5
18%
Transhumanism
5
18%
It Doesn't Matter, Both Ultimately Have the Same Goal
2
7%
Neither
16
57%
 
Total votes : 28

Postby monster » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:32 am

The Hedonistic Imperative

The Hedonistic Imperative outlines how genetic engineering and nanotechnology will abolish suffering in all sentient life.

The abolitionist project is hugely ambitious but technically feasible. It is also instrumentally rational and morally urgent. The metabolic pathways of pain and malaise evolved because they served the fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment. They will be replaced by a different sort of neural architecture - a motivational system based on heritable gradients of bliss. States of sublime well-being are destined to become the genetically pre-programmed norm of mental health. It is predicted that the world's last unpleasant experience will be a precisely dateable event.

Two hundred years ago, powerful synthetic pain-killers and surgical anesthetics were unknown. The notion that physical pain could be banished from most people's lives would have seemed absurd. Today most of us in the technically advanced nations take its routine absence for granted. The prospect that what we describe as psychological pain, too, could ever be banished is equally counter-intuitive. The feasibility of its abolition turns its deliberate retention into an issue of social policy and ethical choice.
"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."
User avatar
monster
 
Posts: 1712
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:55 pm
Location: Everywhere
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AhabsOtherLeg » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:34 am

slomo wrote: Complexity theory is valuable only in its ability to prove that we don't really understand shit.


We can still talk it, though, eh? :D

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Anyway, all this transhuman anarcho-primitivist stuff reminds me of pre-revolutionary Russia. Are you a White, a Red, a Green? An SR, an Anarchist, a Bolshevik, a Menshevik, a Bolsho-Menshevik, a Black Hundred, an Anarcho-Bakuninite... and on and on and on.

"Do you hate the Tsar? Do you want liberty?"

That question worked.

Well... kind of. For a while.

It mostly reminds me of Russia because the Tsar's cops started dozens of pointless movements themselves in order to divide and weaken any kind of coherent resistance they faced - they encouraged and facilitated attacks on state officials, to increase their arrest rates, and show their usefulness to the State, as the FBI and MI5 do now. And secured their funding by doing so.

But Rasputin humped them all in the end.
User avatar
AhabsOtherLeg
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:39 am

AhabsOtherLeg wrote:Transprimitivist. Intellectually, anyway.

Anarcho-humanist when the chips are down, I suppose.

Neither at heart.


Heh.
Ok, If I was tortured and had to make that call,
anarcho-animist, yeah.

But as Ahab said above - yeah. I aint nothing of those, really. Im just a blip, a blip...

One story ... Goes well with the reds and whites theme. From our civil war. There were 2 brothers, farmers. They were also vegetarians and pacifists, not religious. They were asked to join the "reds" (leftists). They said no, they will not fight, for violencee only begets violence. They said they take no sides.

Next day the red guard came back. They said you either join or you will be shot. The brothers said at once that its shot then - but as their last wish they demanded a document be made, abjudicating everyone from blame of their killing - since they did not want their deaths to be used as justification for more killing. So it was done, and they were shot.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Perelandra » Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:16 am

slomo wrote:
Perelandra wrote:Nicely put, both times. You're one of those butterfly people, aren't you? :D


Thanks... I get crotchety when people blame me for their own vocabulary deficits. Although I'll admit that threw in "teratoid" because it's my new favorite word :D, it really applies to so much that goes on these days.

Butterfly people? You mean like complexity theory? Kinda... My professional work is on the boundary of biology and mathematics, but I actually have little faith in the ability of math to solve our real problems. Complexity theory is valuable only in its ability to prove that we don't really understand shit.
Sorry, my own inside joke. I was never a hippy, but that's what I was called once.

I'm reading some Feynman, where he states that all science is just mapping of probabilities.

Love to talk, though, amen Ahab.

Penguin, thanks for all your consistently good info.
User avatar
Perelandra
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:12 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:24 am

OT, Perelandra:
Read up also on Feynmans experience with acid and John Lillys sensory deprivation tank :)

"Richard Feynman

Richard Feynman was an extraordinary intellect who revolutionized modern physics. During his astounding career he helped design the atomic bomb, created a Nobel Prize winning theory of quantum electrodynamics, became a skilled safecracker and exposed the flaws which had led to the space shuttle Challenger disaster. His autobiography Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman! is full of anecdotes as to how he used his vast repertoire of arcane mathematical knowledge and plain common sense to outsmart and outwit the scientific, political and military establishments.

Feynman was a brilliant scientist long before he sampled marijuana and LSD while in his mid 50's, but he did claim to have learned from the mind-expanding experiences. Feynman was a friend of John Lilly, a researcher who pioneered the use of the tanks, studied psychedelics and consciousness, and is best known for his work with dolphins. Feynman's use of these illegal substances was mostly in the context of experimenting with his own consciousness while in a sensory deprivation tank.

While experimenting with his mind and memories in Lilly's tanks, Feynman also met Baba Ram Das, formerly Professor Richard Alpert of Harvard, friend of Timothy Leary and author of Be Here Now. Das instructed Feynman in how to achieve out of body experiences, which Feynman accomplished while in the tank.

Feynman found that pot helped him to achieve the hallucinatory state he was seeking. "Ordinarily it would take me about fifteen minutes to get a hallucination going," wrote Feynman, "but on a few occasions, when I smoked some marijuana beforehand, it came very quickly."

Feynman also tried LSD under these circumstances, but in his biography Genius by James Gleick, Feynman is described as being "embarrassed" by his LSD experiences. Feynman also received some criticism from his colleagues for his admission. In an essay called To Smoke Or Not To Smoke, Dr Lester Grinspoon wrote that "Feynman, by courageously acknowledging his ongoing use of marijuana, won the respect and appreciation of many and the enmity of others."

Id really like to know what embarrassed him so :D :D :D
I mean, Ive been puked on, drenched in the stuff, and even that wasnt even slightly disturbing in that context.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby AhabsOtherLeg » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:03 am

Penguin wrote:
One story ... Goes well with the reds and whites theme. From our civil war. There were 2 brothers, farmers. They were also vegetarians and pacifists, not religious. They were asked to join the "reds" (leftists). They said no, they will not fight, for violencee only begets violence. They said they take no sides.

Next day the red guard came back. They said you either join or you will be shot. The brothers said at once that its shot then - but as their last wish they demanded a document be made, abjudicating everyone from blame of their killing - since they did not want their deaths to be used as justification for more killing. So it was done, and they were shot.


I was going to post Shot By Both Sides, by Magazine, but I just re-listened to it and discovered it is actually quite rubbish.

The middle of the road is the most dangerous place to be, though, with deep trenches on both sides. It takes a truly brave man to die there, for things he might not viscerally believe in - after all, it's easier to believe in an enemy than a friend, and easier to die for war than peace.

Anyway, here is one of the most chilling evocations of Stalin's purges I have ever heard, recorded by Middle Of The Road. Not joking, neither.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=HSNSTerj2Kc
User avatar
AhabsOtherLeg
 
Posts: 3285
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:27 am

Primative societies aren't against technology per se.

Many have other goals and technological advancement for its own sake is a lower priority than their other goals.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby slomo » Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:41 am

Joe Hillshoist wrote:Primative societies aren't against technology per se.

Many have other goals and technological advancement for its own sake is a lower priority than their other goals.


That's exactly where we need to be. There is no such thing as a homo sapiens (or maybe even a primate) who is "against technology". It's part of our biological nature to make and use tools. But it's one thing to use tools to achieve some other end, it's another to worship the process of toolmaking itself.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby MacCruiskeen » Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:27 am

Anarcho-Primitivism or Transhumanism?


More to the point: Socialism or Barbara?

Image

Image
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966

TESTDEMIC ➝ "CASE"DEMIC
User avatar
MacCruiskeen
 
Posts: 10558
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Perelandra » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:43 pm

Penguin wrote:OT, Perelandra:
Read up also on Feynmans experience with acid and John Lillys sensory deprivation tank :)
I have, in his autobio. He was so wonderful.
User avatar
Perelandra
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:12 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Perelandra » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:49 pm

slomo wrote:
Joe Hillshoist wrote:Primitive societies aren't against technology per se.

Many have other goals and technological advancement for its own sake is a lower priority than their other goals.


That's exactly where we need to be. There is no such thing as a homo sapiens (or maybe even a primate) who is "against technology". It's part of our biological nature to make and use tools. But it's one thing to use tools to achieve some other end, it's another to worship the process of toolmaking itself.
Yes, or use your tools to take without giving.
User avatar
Perelandra
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:12 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Jan 25, 2009 2:50 pm

monster wrote:The Hedonistic Imperative

The Hedonistic Imperative outlines how genetic engineering and nanotechnology will abolish suffering in all sentient life.

(...)

The prospect that what we describe as psychological pain, too, could ever be banished is equally counter-intuitive. The feasibility of its abolition turns its deliberate retention into an issue of social policy and ethical choice.


Read that years and years ago. It's stayed with me. Ain't gonna follow the link again. Reckless and destructive universal imperatives, derived from faulty premises rooted in an unfeasible and in fact fantastically witless individualism, still give me a chill. Tell me, does it count as hubris if it's completely unconscious? Can we save the world from the power of Zombie Nerds? (Or are they Nerd Zombies? Can't be sure...)

.
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:53 am

There are 2 posts in this thread that may give an understanding of why primative culture has a different attitude to technology.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread73215/pg4

Specifically by gammin_myall (despite what her name suggests), and Wanya.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:57 am

none of the above and/or below.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Penguin » Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:08 am

Imho, I suppose all somewhat wise societies understood that technology sways the balance. And balance and equilibrium are really all that matters.

Our tech is war tech. Almost exclusively. For waging war of attrition against our planet.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 158 guests