tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post6096595207612950067..comments2023-10-30T04:16:25.917-04:00Comments on Sentient Developments: Interpretive Dance of the Transhumanist FutureGeorgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13003484633933455827noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-19051443781344716822009-07-05T04:21:31.007-04:002009-07-05T04:21:31.007-04:00Transhumanism is secularized Christian theology. W...Transhumanism is secularized Christian theology. With transhumanism we can note that Karl Lowith (in 'Meaning and History') was right in saying all modern forms of thought are an extension of Christian eschatology.Lucashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07935291401039846922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-41843225265837162252009-06-29T09:57:05.000-04:002009-06-29T09:57:05.000-04:00Following our conversation here I wrote a first es...Following our conversation here I wrote a first essay (which hopefully will have a follow up) concerning the Aesthetics of posthumanism.<br />The post : "Beauty is a restless entity" appears on my blog at space collective.<br />http://spacecollective.org/Wildcat/5017/Beauty-Is-A-Restless-EntityUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-34177249004790238002009-06-25T16:24:19.034-04:002009-06-25T16:24:19.034-04:00I agree that aesthetics as a philosophical investi...I agree that aesthetics as a philosophical investigation of beauty and perception has not been significantly identified in discourse on transhumanism. But then it was not written by a philosopher of aesthetics. However it has been the area of research, contemplation, and discussion in regards to “perceptions” of enhanced humans. Sasha Chislenko was a key contributor in the 90s. In fact, out of transhumanism’s dicussions came ideas about “enhanced reality” (Chislenko) and other trends in ideas of simulation. The aesthetics in regards to science fiction narratives has been highly relevant.<br /><br />The Hybrider Conference in Trondheim, Norway this year was fascinating. http://matchmaking.no/wp/2008/?p=315<br /><br />I'm sorry you could not download the paper without paying for it. I can send you a copy if you send me your email address.Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-80802161530742195112009-06-22T10:13:26.428-04:002009-06-22T10:13:26.428-04:00Hello again Natasha,
Thank you for your comments....Hello again Natasha,<br /><br />Thank you for your comments.<br /><br />Before I enter the deep savannah of the aesthetic perspective allow me to say that to my eyes, perspectivism (a la’ Nietzsche) is both overrated and underestimated. Overrated in that contexts or perspectives do not offer ‘truths’ but indeed as the word implies → ‘perspectives’ and underappreciated in that perspectives are a fundamental of the human mind operation.<br />We thrive as a species primarily because of the multiplicity of perspectives; we diminish as a specie primarily when we hold a stance of claiming a truth that is at core unassailable. (not to mention the obvious that not all perspectives are equally valid, useful or indeed perspectives at all). In that respect it may very well be that posthumanism offers a diversity of views and sensibilities that transhumanism to the best of my knowledge, does not.<br /><br />It is highly probable that our minds are ‘probability’ machines (pun intended) and in that respect our internal adhocracy translating into something akin to Feyerabend’ Epistemological anarchism, is more or less the sanest perspective we could take when tackling the future unknowns.<br /><br />Such is the case in fact that for all practical purposes a transhumanist perspective (from which a posthumanist philosophy takes abundantly as you pointed out) need be adjusted to fit the language topology of our extended present.<br />As I see it, the transhumanist perspective as for example presented under the title of the ‘transhumanist manifesto’ lacks a certain plasticity of beauty appreciation that our minds require in order to accept ideas that might seem at first alien or utterly disruptive. <br />We need embed a fresh mode of hybrid fascination into technology and body. Hybrid in the sense that a posthuman philosophy of beauty needs extend its tentacles into the enhancement debate.<br /><br />These are just a few notes from a larger piece I am writing on this subject implied by the need for a meta-aestheticism.<br /><br />“Grace is the beauty of form under the influence of freedom.”<br />Friedrich SchillerUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-26453422642126072622009-06-20T05:42:55.617-04:002009-06-20T05:42:55.617-04:00@Natasha,
where or how can this article be access...@Natasha,<br /><br />where or how can this article be accessed?<br /><br />"You have no access to this article" :-(<br />Brave BioArt 2: shedding the bio, amassing the nano, and cultivating posthuman lifeUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-2390272599162099372009-06-17T21:44:22.447-04:002009-06-17T21:44:22.447-04:00I want to prove right here and now to all readers ...I want to prove right here and now to all readers of this blog Natasha's point that there are actually many different facets to cognition and that IQ is not the most powerful force in the universe. <br /><br />I recently tripped over my own boot-laces, bent over to retie the damn laces, had the following quick rough ideas for a paper based purely on my own reflections:<br /><br />Abstrast<br />'Cognitive Reflectivity' <br />Marc Geddes <br />Melbourne, Australia <br />18th June, 2009 <br /><br /><br />Abstract <br /><br /><br />"A change in the goal-system of an agent is equivalent to a change in <br />the way in which knowledge is represented by the agent. It follows that it is equivalent to a change in the complexity of the program representing the agent. Thus we require a method of comparing the complexity of strings in order to ensure that relevant program structure is preserved with state transitions over time. Standard probability theory cannot be used because; (1) Consistent probability calculations require implicit universal generalizations, but a <br />universal measure of the complexity of finite strings is a logical impossibility (fromGodel, Lob theorems); and (2) Standard measures of complexity (e.g Kolmogorov complexity) from information theory deal <br />only with one aspect of information (i.e. Shannon information), and fail to consider semantic content. The solution must resolve both these problems. <br /><br /><br />Regarding (2) the solution is as follows:, information theory is <br />generalized to deal with the actual meaning of information (i.e . the semantics of Shannon information) .The generalized definition of the complexity of a finite string is based on the conceptual clustering of <br />semantic categories specifying the knowledge a string represents. The generation of hierarchical category structures representing the knowledge in a string is also associated with a generalization of Occam’s razor. The justification for Occam’s razor and the problem of priors in induction is resolved by defining ‘utility’ in terms of <br />‘aesthetic goodness’, which is the degree of integration of different <br />concept hierarchies. This considers the process through which a theory is generated; it is a form of process-oriented evaluation. <br /><br /><br />Regarding (1); The Godel limitation is bypassed by using relative complexity measures of pairs of strings . This requires generalizing standard Bayesian induction ; in fact induction is merely a special case of a new form of case-based reasoning (analogical reasoning) . <br />Analogical reasoning can be formalized by utilizing concepts from category theory to implement prototype theory, where mathematical categories are regarded as semantic categories. Semantic concepts representing the knowledge encoded in strings can be considered to reside in multi-dimensional feature space, and this enables mappings between concepts; such mappings are defined by functors representing <br />conceptual distance; this gives a formal definition of an analogy. <br />The reason this overcomes the Godel limitation and is more general than induction is because it always enables relative comparisons of the complexity of pairs of strings. This is because case-based reasoning depends only on the specific details on the strings being compared, whereas induction makes implicit universal generalizations, and thus fails." <br /><br /><br />See? All of us are capable of the odd small insight. <br /><br />CheersZARZUELAZENhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07742429508206464486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-40421495672778307522009-06-17T18:03:06.743-04:002009-06-17T18:03:06.743-04:00Oops. Correction: "Brave BioArt 2: shedding t...Oops. Correction: "Brave BioArt 2: shedding the bio, amassing the nano, and cultivating posthuman life" (I wasn't focusing, as my fingers were dancing freely to Marc and Athena's words.)Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-88334403727726897512009-06-17T15:06:40.748-04:002009-06-17T15:06:40.748-04:00Wildcat, thank you for your excellent comments. I...Wildcat, thank you for your excellent comments. I'd like to adddress a few points that have developed for me from your response. Since aesthetics is my prime area of experience, we seem to have much in common.<br /><br />Wildcat wrote: "I think that the main difference [between transhumanism and posthumanism] lies in emphasis and semantics, for whilst the technological enhancements of the transhumanist approach are both desirable and of far reaching consequences, the radical transformation implied is not often tackled on the ground of the larger picture entailed by a coherent philosophy of mind."<br /><br />Transhumanism as a philosophy and a cultural movement has indeed tackled the larger picture. Much of the discussions, papers, etc. are neither promoted nor referenced in academia. (Especially the arts - including, but not limited to bioart, which now wants to include human enhancement and life extension).**[see below] Hayles admittedly ignored transhumanism for reasons she has explained at Metanexus (she hoped it would go away but she sees that it is here to stay). <br /><br />Wildcat says: "That is where I see posthumanism coming into the picture though at present Posthumanism is really more of an approach than a full fledged philosophy. That is where aesthetics and posthumanism converge,"<br /><br />It seems that what you call posthumanism is dipping into the visionary well of transhumanism for ideas about human enhancement and converging technologies.<br /><br />Wildcat says: "for as I see it, it is the added value of the inherent need of expression of the artistic approach that may allow our specie to move into its next step of evolution."<br /><br />That is indeed a transhumanist approach of human enhancement and evolution. <br /><br />I am now looking more deeply into the new approach to posthumanism. You say they should remain separate, but I’m wondering what the particular separation is? I understand that some posthumanist theorists think that transhumanism lacks what posthumanism offers in depth of thinking, etc. I would like to see this discussed/debated, as I am sure many transhumanist scholars would as well.<br /><br />**I wrote a paper about this issue in "Brave Board 2: shedding the bio, amassing the nano, and cultivating posthuman life" and it (2007) Intellect @ <br />http://www.atypon-link.com/INT/doi/abs/10.1386/tear.5.3.171_1Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-35626714735664089392009-06-17T10:36:28.992-04:002009-06-17T10:36:28.992-04:00Or, for that matter, Kathleen Raine (section V of ...Or, for that matter, Kathleen Raine (section V of The Northumbrian Sequence, The Dreamer under the Rowan -- a more animistic stance) or Rainer Maria Rilke (Spanish Dancer, a complete fusion in imagery and language).Athena Andreadishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07650180659001228746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-49163818124296319842009-06-17T10:18:33.894-04:002009-06-17T10:18:33.894-04:00Yeats said it far more eloquently and succinctly:
...Yeats said it far more eloquently and succinctly:<br /><br />Labour is blossoming or dancing where<br />The body is not bruised to pleasure soul.<br />Nor beauty born out of its own despair,<br />Nor blear-eyed wisdom out of midnight oil.<br />O chestnut-tree, great-rooted blossomer,<br />Are you the leaf, the blossom or the bole?<br />O body swayed to music, O brightening glance,<br />How can we know the dancer from the dance?Athena Andreadishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07650180659001228746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-58112690882760872302009-06-17T08:52:25.790-04:002009-06-17T08:52:25.790-04:00Yes Natasha,
You know I think a lot of people are...Yes Natasha,<br /><br />You know I think a lot of people are capable of much more than they think if they just put their minds to it and play to their particular strengths, the mind is multi-faceted so there’s plenty of different niches in there.<br /><br />I like the reference to dance in the Natasha piece; there’s a really catchy song by the Killers called ‘Human’; some lyrics:<br /><br />Human Lyrics<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6r4KT8-VX0<br /><br /><br />I did my best to notice<br />When the call came down the line<br />Up to the platform of surrender<br />I was brought but I was kind<br />And sometimes I get nervous<br />When I see an open door<br />Close your eyes <br />Clear your heart...<br />Cut the cord<br /><br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br />My sign is vital<br />My hands are cold<br />And I'm on my knees<br />Looking for the answer<br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br /><br />Pay my respects to grace and virtue<br />Send my condolences to good<br />Give my regards to soul and romance,<br />They always did the best they could<br />And so long to devotion<br />You taught me everything I know<br />Wave goodbye<br />Wish me well..<br />You've gotta let me go<br /><br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br />My sign is vital<br />My hands are cold<br />And I'm on my knees<br />Looking for the answer<br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br /><br />Will your system be alright<br />When you dream of home tonight?<br />There is no message we're receiving<br />Let me know is your heart still beating<br /><br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br />My sign is vital<br />My hands are cold<br />And I'm on my knees<br />Looking for the answer<br /><br />You've gotta let me know<br /><br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br />My sign is vital<br />My hands are cold<br />And I'm on my knees<br />Looking for the answer<br />Are we human<br />Or are we dancer?<br /><br />Are we human?<br />Or are we dancer?<br /><br />Are we human<br />Or are we dancer?ZARZUELAZENhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07742429508206464486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-89865804323998078002009-06-15T13:13:05.848-04:002009-06-15T13:13:05.848-04:00Well said Marc. We need more transhumanist voices ...Well said Marc. We need more transhumanist voices proclaiming a healthful state of being. <br /><br />It is true that one can identify a transhumanist who values IQ test results over sports and arts, but that characteristic can be found in many types (programmers and scientists have often been judged and characterized by a type of non-physical existence, while musicians, filmmakers and other artists are often judged and characterized by indulging in too much physicality). I don't give IQ all that much attention, even though it is still the standard. I want to see how a person applies the intelligence and handles conflicts.<br /><br />The transhumanist view about an upload, were it to come about, would consider intelligence as far more than IQ. I do not know about all those who are proactive about the technological singularity (Singularatarians), but I am aware that many value <b>all areas of intelligence</b> <i> and </i> ones not currently recognized as being essential to an upload. <br /><br />(as an aside)"Our emotional intelligence is the cutting edge of human intelligence. Being funny or convincingly expressing an emotional sentiment is a very complex and intelligent behavior. This is the area we need to work the most on to pass the Turing test." (Kurzweil, 6/14/2009) <br /><br /> <br />Anyway, the choices we make in how far to augment and enhance with NBIC+ will lead to, hopefully, a more open and mindful sense of diversity and acceptance amongst us all. (Cup 1/2 full.) <br /><br />During a time when we have become more receptive to each other's beliefs, skills, knowledge, and we engage within transdisciplinary fields and diversified backgrounds, I wonder why we (including myself) still generalize/characterize.Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-61561009555566210662009-06-14T09:32:26.844-04:002009-06-14T09:32:26.844-04:00Good article Natasha,
Unfortunately, whilst you a...Good article Natasha,<br /><br />Unfortunately, whilst you and other sensible transhumanists may realize that there's multiple components to 'intelligence, the 'Singularitarians' seem to have a singular obsession with IQ ( 'IQ is the most powerful force in the universe') is their mantra. I'm not making this up. <br /><br />I think Singularitarians are grossly overestimating the importance of IQ.<br /><br />Most high-IQers are spouting a load of crap. 999 out of 1000 high-IQers have zero interest in transhumanist issues, and believe all sorts of irrational nonsense. Chris Langan, tested to have the highest IQ in America (200) belives in intelligent design, Penrose (IQ 180) believes consciousness is caused by quantum gravity, Chalmers (another super high-IQer) believes the most bizarre nonsense ('property dualism') about consciousness, the list goes on and on.<br /><br />Reflection (the ability the introspect) is far more important than IQ in my opinion. Someone with an IQ of 200 and no reflective capabilities could not introspect and would have no desire to self-improve. On the other hand, a joe average with strong reflective capabilities would at least be trying and eventually come up with the right hacks. <br /><br />In short: Reflection trumps IQ because without reflective capabilities you're really screwed, no matter what your IQ is.ZARZUELAZENhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07742429508206464486noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-66525155466915462762009-06-14T07:23:00.067-04:002009-06-14T07:23:00.067-04:00Natasha, thank you for the thought you invest in a...Natasha, thank you for the thought you invest in appreciating the subtleties of the variety of possible interpretations of Post-humanism and Posthumanism. I think the distinction is critically important, indeed Post-humanism and Posthumanism are not the same (will expand in a coming paper).<br />I am aware (and appreciate much) of the thoughts and writings of both N.Bostrom and M.More, I do believe they are thinkers of an under-appreciated magnitude.<br /><br />As to the difference between posthumanism and transhumanism, I shall make here only a brief comment and will write a larger essay on the subject on my blog at Space Collective.<br /><br />My short (really only a sketch) comment is as follows:<br />I think that the main difference lies in emphasis and semantics, for whilst the technological enhancements of the transhumanist approach are both desirable and of far reaching consequences, the radical transformation implied is not often tackled on the ground of the larger picture entailed by a coherent philosophy of mind. That is where I see posthumanism coming into the picture though at present Posthumanism is really more of an approach than a full fledged philosophy. That is where aesthetics and posthumanism converge, for as I see it, it is the added value of the inherent need of expression of the artistic approach that may allow our specie to move into its next step of evolution.<br /><br />When I mentioned above that the difference is one of emphasis and semantics, I meant to provide a background for a deeper understanding of motives, for change and self-guided evolution. Meanings are platforms of engagement and in no fashion do I take them lightly. The interrelation of technology and advancement of the specie is a complex subject to which I do not think that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is suitable.<br />It is my understanding that a multiplicity of possibilities, based on an aesthetic experience allows for a wide range of spaces of manifestation. I think that both approaches will be served well, by a high dose of both salt and gentleness, beauty appreciation and critical thought.<br /><br />I appreciate much this discussion and though busy at the moment I shall dedicate the time and resources to write a more comprehensible and wide ranging essay on the topic.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-72474737165808378302009-06-14T06:40:09.968-04:002009-06-14T06:40:09.968-04:00@George thank you for the prompt response, as I am...@George thank you for the prompt response, as I am quite busy at present I think I will remain here with my comments.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-6713193366439819452009-06-13T14:48:26.202-04:002009-06-13T14:48:26.202-04:00I'd like to correct myself: post humanism is n...I'd like to correct myself: post humanism is not the same as posthumanism. <br /><br />My question is where do the concepts of posthumanism and transhumanism differ?Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-39935577031990761602009-06-13T13:33:01.909-04:002009-06-13T13:33:01.909-04:00I agree that transhumanism and posthumanism are un...I agree that transhumanism and posthumanism are unique and ought not to be bundled. My suggestion that academics in the latter camp (and again I agree here that postmodernism and posthumanism not be bundled) do no service to philosophy and the future by ignoring transhumanism. I say this mostly because the philosophy of transhumanism covers a posthuman future, and I think articulately at that. And also because there seems to be a type of dismissive undertone as if transhumanism lacks highly sophisticated and scholarly thinkers. It was a philosopher who wrote the philosophy of transhumanism and another philosopher who built upon that writing to further it within academia. (Both affiliated with Oxford).Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-33677048059975358142009-06-13T10:43:30.195-04:002009-06-13T10:43:30.195-04:00@Wildcat -- I'm afraid not -- I merely grant t...@Wildcat -- I'm afraid not -- I merely grant the IEET permission to re-post my material. I tend not to follow the comment threads over there -- I have a difficult time as it is following (and responding to) the ones here :-PGeorgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13003484633933455827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-43544524430924434812009-06-13T06:45:25.090-04:002009-06-13T06:45:25.090-04:00Hi Natasha,
Thanks for the reply, as concerning t...Hi Natasha,<br /><br />Thanks for the reply, as concerning the subject of the post human philosophers I believe that at present very few have tackled the subject directly. (In fact the very definition of what post-humanism constitutes, as a coherent philosophy is very vague and ambiguous to say the least).<br />It is my view that Transhumanism and Post Humanism should not be bundled together (same goes for postmodernism), if only for the purpose of allowing some breathing space for the conceptualization of post human Aesthetics.<br />To my mind the main philosopher that stands as a corner stone for the development of a coherent post-human philosophy of aesthetics is Deleuze. More particularly the manner in which Deleuze uses (in fact metamorphoses) the concept of the rhizome.<br />Deleuze (and Guattari) view the rhizome as: “..unlike tracings, the rhizome pertains to a map that must be produced, constructed, a map that is always detachable, connectable, reversible, modifiable, and has multiple entranceways and exits and its own lines of flight.<br />(see ‘A Thousand Plateaus’ Deleuze & Guattari, 1987, p. 21)<br /><br />I take this stance primarily because of the immense amount of confusion arising when trying to project futures that are at core based on our pasts, following a linear conception of time and an arboreal conception of evolution.<br />Post humanist philosophy is only now being elucidated step by (slow and small) step and has many hurdles to overcome before it matures into a cogent and coherent body that hopefully will be able to stand firm in front of an unknown future.<br />The conceptual constructions that are the hallmark of the transhumanist motion (to my mind) lack a depth of aesthetic comprehension that no amount of technological/scientific expertise can bring. A post humanist philosophical container that embraces the artfulness of being in its full glory is both necessary and unfortunately lacking at present.<br />We are working on it.. ☺<br /><br /> btw. I find it fascinating that so many transhumanist take their cues from Buddhism, a beautiful philosophical perspective, no doubt (and one which I have studied extensively) however, same critique applies here, it comes from a known past and assumes a coherent continuation with such.<br /><br />Ps. Question to G.Dvorsky, I have noticed that the discussion continues at IEET, should I post there as well? Or do the comments cohere?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-39351608750276464682009-06-12T15:10:00.309-04:002009-06-12T15:10:00.309-04:00I think that as we move forward, transhumanism wil...I think that as we move forward, transhumanism will mean different things to different people. Some will dance, some will not. Some will neglect their bodies and others will find balance. Lets approach with caution and excitement :-)ioscodehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01157908302069996858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-5221245894260851992009-06-12T15:01:00.565-04:002009-06-12T15:01:00.565-04:00Its not an either or scenario because I think the ...Its not an either or scenario because I think the uploading option is not going to become available for another century or two. I see being stored inactively in computer memory being possible in few decades. However, being able to emulate someone actively as pure software is simply not in the cards and Moore's Law is not relevant here. You see, Moore's Law of accelerating improvement applies only to hardware, the reduction in physical size of semiconductor device dimensions. This will reach a limit when it gets to the molecular level, probably in 10-15 years.<br /><br />There is no Moore's Law with respect to software. Software design is as archaic as it was 30 years ago in that software is still based on hand-coding. I do not see any substantial improvements in software development technology.kurt9https://www.blogger.com/profile/02101147267959016924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-88180292658265427142009-06-12T11:14:32.618-04:002009-06-12T11:14:32.618-04:00P.S. I am enjoying reading your blog!P.S. I am enjoying reading your blog!Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-35824147866441951592009-06-12T11:13:26.154-04:002009-06-12T11:13:26.154-04:00Thank you for your observations Wildcat. Well said...Thank you for your observations Wildcat. Well said. I think that posthumanism of academics misses out on a great deal by ignoring transhumanism. And, likewise, transhumanism could do with a good gulp of the posthuman articulations about aesthetics and culture.<br /><br />It seems that transhumanism has the great minds of science and technology and the posthumanism has Foucault, Latour, Hayles (and is also tethered to postmodernism/Hassan). Transhumanism has its well-known philosophers (Max More, Nick Bostrom). Can you tell me who are the philosophers of the posthuman philosophy, outside the above-mentioned theorists (and yourself)?<br /><br />Best -Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-77241647757371468472009-06-12T05:42:36.448-04:002009-06-12T05:42:36.448-04:00Natasha’s article is clear and to the point and re...Natasha’s article is clear and to the point and represents an array of possible interpretations to the question of body and its evolution which most H+ writings do not contain, hence my support and applause.<br />It appears that many H+ adherents miss the larger implications of the posthuman philosophy, especially when dealing with issues of aesthetics and its Rhizomatic implications on culture.<br />Our bodies are an ensemble allowing an extended experience but an experience is not a ‘something’ that needs be digested but a set of relations that needs be assimilated into the greater phase space of a coherent mind. <br />Such a coherent mind might be embodied and then again it might not, embodiment is a complicated issue best tackled on its own ground of experimentation.<br />However from a philosophical point of view I see the posthuman future as an exemplification of ‘Deleuze’ de-territorialization, a reality in which the choice of multiple embodiments for whatever purpose is unlimited and unconstrained.<br />We are many, many facets, many aspects, many modalities of being; our consciousness is multiple and will evolve into a larger multiplicity.<br />I have written elsewhere (http://spacecollective.org/Wildcat/4123/Uncontrolled-hubris-Unrestrained-future) about the subject of an all inclusive betterment process but for now let me state with clarity, I love dancing, and our self-guided evolutionary posthuman future is nothing if not dancing to the full glory of a multidimensional existence.<br /><br />“It is in moments of illness that we are compelled to recognize that we live not alone but chained to a creature of a different kingdom, whole worlds apart, who has no knowledge of us and by whom it is impossible to make ourselves understood: our body. ~Marcel Proust”Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00640227555184280949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-72249540080035718972009-06-11T21:06:06.662-04:002009-06-11T21:06:06.662-04:00Kurt, thank you for your insights.
Because it is...Kurt, thank you for your insights. <br /><br />Because it is not an either or scenario, we do not have to be sequestered to one type of body for personal existence. Observably I love my physicality, as expressed in this article. Nevertheless, I also am developing a relationship with virtuality — exploring Second Life and other online venues which will develop more deeply as the interfaces become more seamless. <br /><br />All in all, why limit our choices of bio-body vs. upload? I think it is highly implausible that a future human will exist in only one medium, but rather enjoy the variety of multiple media, hopefully with backup systems.Natasha Vita-Morehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00159746177701643715noreply@blogger.com