On the future of super-monkeys, smart drugs and transhumanism.

Posted by

Jeremy Clarke

May 25, 2004

when the wonder of a body brings nothing at all

1. Evolution is over. We are currently taking care of everyone that happens to get born and making sure that they do not get un-born. We refuse to let anyone die, no matter how weak, as that would be unfair. Thus the weak keep on keeping on, instead of dying and making room for the strong.

(a) Furthermore, we encourage and aid them in their quest to accomlish that trick of tricks, procreation, effectively sewing the seeds of destruction within our genetic makeup (shallowing the gene-pool so to speak).

(b) This would be a serious bummer were it not for the fact that regardless of our level of natural selection and evolution, we will all be dead because of resource and cultural limits we face today long before any change could even theoretically take place.

[i]No longer a bummer, we can then see this lack of natural selection for what it really is, a kick in the pants for a world full of humans on the verge of something far more efficient, spectacular and mind blowing. Our assured and imminent destruction serves not only to render the question of oldschool evolution defunct, it is also caused by something that will allow the true possibilities in humanity to flourish.

( c) Technology opens many doors for us, and infinitely more for those that will come after us. Within our lifetimes we will face decisions concerning the destiny of our bodies, our minds and our species. We will see our inner and outer worlds being altered to suit the needs we will face. Pharmaceuticals, cogniceuticals, gene-therapy, genetic enhancement, bionic enhancement, all will come into their own to varying degrees. Technological enablement.

2. Would you take a pill that made you smarter for a limited amount of time? That allowed you the clarity and focus of mind to read the most difficult book, or the freedom of communication between cerebral hemispheres to truly come into contact with your intuition?

(a)
When this becomes a serious option would you actually be able to say no? Would you choose sluggishness? Ignorance? Regression? Would you keep smoking pot on the weekend?

(b)Would you deny this of future generations?

[i] Is there anything wrong with that?

Comments

4 responses to “On the future of super-monkeys, smart drugs and transhumanism.”

May 27, 2004

Li

yeah there is something wrong with it, there is something terribly wrong. I agree with you, jer. there are weak people everywhere and they are going to breed! well something like that. now the only people who want to breed are the dumb ones, because the smart ones know that the earth is overpopulated and refuse to (they also know children ruin your body, mind and life). there is nothing physical we need to do anymore so inadequate humans can easily survive. survival of the fittest is through, along with the breeding of the strongest and most attractive. sexual partners were once chosen by their fertility (large breasts are better for nursing, blond hair is generally more fertile and wide “child bearing” hips on women) and their ability to raise and protect a family (broad shoulders, long legs, thick neck, extra fat, strength in general) yes ladies that is why your men develop a bad case of rubber neck whenever a busty blond girl passes by, and boys that is why us girls cant take our eyes off those gay guys’ thick arms. its caveman biology. but now the weak and stupid are considered beautiful, the rich and powerful are apparently more attractive, and people forget that there are already too many of them (us) around and insist on producing ugly, spoiled and slow-learning offspring which the world would be much better off without.
June 6, 2004

lyss

wow li, theres quite the amount of hate in that comment… i would hardly say that people consider the weak and stupid beautiful, and i strongly doubt that people insist on having “ugly, spoiled and slow-learning offspring”
“hey honey i think im ready to have a baby”
“alright as long as you promise me that it will be ugly and dumb”
“i wouldn’t have it any other way… and hey while we’re at it lets give it everything it asks for”
The problem isn’t that people insist on having children, it’s that everyone is so fearful of death. People dedicate their lives to advancing science to prolong our mostly useless lives. People who burden society more than contribute to it are sustained by modern medicine even though, by all logic, they should have been weeded out by natural selection.
Now don’t get me wrong, the advancement of technology and medicine has also helped society move forward, diseases have been cured and/or found ways to reduce the affects of them. People who are mentally functional, but have certain physical handicaps, are given equal opportunites (or as equal as possible) which is great because just by expressing an opinion you are contributing to society.
However in my opinion there is too much energy placed on maintaining the present level of people who are mentally challanged or have some form of brain damage. Although society has placed so much effort into maintaining their current level of existance, they also hide these “unnatural” births away, they have made it that they just rely on everyone to take care of them until they do eventually die, and that kind human resource could be used in a much more useful manner. For instance many people of limited capacity can be taught to perform low level tasks which makes them useful to society and fills positions which may not me fulfilled be society, such as assembly line work.
Li, I find your concept of natural selection amusing and antiquated. What would make you think that big brawny men would be more fertile, or more fit to survive than smart men? The smart sucessful men are the current “fittest”, our society is no longer based on how much you can lift and your ability to hunt. It is based on your ability to adapt to the present and future needs of society, which puts more emphasis on technology than on manual labour. Although i agree that some men like to look at large breasted women, I’m not sure what part of the breast you think produces milk, but it’s the milk ducts that produce the milk and they are not effected by the size of the breast.
Lastly natural selection is still in affect, people who have severe handicaps and have problems functioning in society, have an average life expectancy equivalent to 1/3 of the average man’s.
June 8, 2004

jer

you make some usefull points alyssa, but the fact that the smartest are now the most successfull doesn’t change the fact that even the stupid can REPRODUCE (and i believe if you looked at a IQ/birthrate study it would show that there is a negative correlation) and that as such the GENETIC heritage that we leave our children is both lame (literally) and unenthusiastic.
November 3, 2004

Johnny

Hello