[kahljorn]

Yeah? And how long do you think its going to be until the problems are totally worked out? Lets see, we've had powerplants for...well over half a century. Sure, they've improved, but are they problem free today? Are they not making any negative environmental impact? If we can't so much as get our power plants in order over the time that we've had so far what on Earth makes you think we can overcome the probelms that cybernetics might pose in timely fashion?

The environmental impact isn't a malfunction ;/. It's not like power plants have been consistently exploding for "well over half a century." The environmental "problems" are a side-effect that is widely known and accepted ;/

Anyway, my retort tot his still stands. What you're saying only means that we might have problems we will have to work out. Or this:

And not to be a jerk like you would be: whether or not the technologies will have a problem or two isn't really relevant. Transhumanism doesn't posit that we will be perfect. If anything, it posits that we will be significantly more perfect as a whole. And further, it doesn't posit that we will have NO problems, only that many of the problems we have will be either eradicated or lessened in effect, and that a new host of previously unhuman problems may arise.

It doesn't really matter if the problems are completely worked out, either, anytime soon. It could be tomorrow it could be ten billion years from now.

Now who's making a strawman? I'm not proposing we abolish the technology, you utter moron. I'm just saying that it may not be as wonderful and utopia-creating as you seem to think it is, and that rushing to embrace it without anticipating these negative consequences is unwise.

Okay, I guess I stood to understand what you were saying in the only way that it could possibly mean anything.

Well, given your insistance that cybernetics would allow for fundamental changes in the negative aspects of human nature, what is to stop those in power from forcing it on the masses "for their own good"? Sure, in an ideal world the technology would be used fairly and justly and never forced upon anyone, but in the real world, that doesn't happen.

the natural conclusion to draw from this is that we shouldn't do it. For me, at least.

Also, I would like to add that the failure to achieve an ideal is not the same thing as the ideal. There can't really be such a thing as a "Flawed transhumanism." I don't doubt that these possibilities aren't possible to happen. Sure, a civilization could go awry with their technology. But the ideal and the technologies are not the same thing. the technology is merely a means to an end. The reason it is so fascinating for the achieval of such an ideal, however, is the fact that it fundamentally alters people. So yes, it could be used to fundamentally alter people for the achievement of evil, but again, what this means is that we should try to keep it from being used that way ;/

also i don't think anybody is rushing to achieve this, either. Too much natural fear of, basically, exactly what you've been saying... that natural human fear of becoming unhuman.

No they are not. And World Peace isn't impossible either. That doesn't mean I expect it to arrive quickly.

Transhumanism doesn't necessarily have a time frame, so BOOYAH! I guess.
although I'm sure most transhumanists would argue that it's just around the corner with the kaleidoscopinng parascoping nature of advancing technologies! someday your paradigm will shift and you will understand that the future comes faster than the future; here time turns into space!