http://bigthink.com/articles/10-human-body-modifications-you-can-expect-in-the-next-decade
"Transformative technologies have always been accompanied by optimistic and pessimistic visions of how they will change humanity and society. Socrates worried that the invention of writing would have a deletrious effect on the memories of young Greeks who, he predicted, would become : the hearers of many things and will have learned nothing."
"But it is clear that we are heading in a direction that has no broader comparison in terms of it's impact on humanity as a species itself. For instance take Zoltan Istvan. He wants to live forever. Not in the metaphysical sense (books or memories) but in a very real, practical sense. And he believes technology will soon make it possible. Zoltan is planning to upload his brian and all its billions of unique synaptic pathways to a computer server. He's part of a growing community of people who believe technology can make us physically, intellectually, even morally better. They call themselves transhumanists. Transhumanists seek the continued evolution of humans beyond its current form."
Now meet John Zerzan. "He's one of the world's most famous anarcho-primitivist who believe that technology is at the root of many, if not all, of today's social problems. He wants to jettison Facebook, computers, telephones, electricity, steam-powered engines and more. He believes technology tends to distract us from our natural state, pushing us further away from what it really is to be free humans."
For this post I want you to research Transhumanist and Anarcho-Primitivism and inform yourself on the debate. Then write about which side of the debate do you find yourself. Provide a link to one of your sources that you found convincing.
Credit: The Dark Net, Inside the Digital Underworld. By Jamie Barlett
If I had to pick between Transhumanist and Anarcho-Primitvism, I would probably choose Transhumanist, but not by a very large gap. While researching I found that although I do agree that technology has gotten a little out of hand, I still don't fully agree with the Anarcho-Primitivism point of view. They believe that we should go back to the days of no running water, uncomfortable living arrangements, and other stuff like that. Considering elements like that, I'm pretty happy with our day and age and would rather just settle as a not fully Transhumanist.
ReplyDeletehttps://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/nzeqak/transhumanism-versus-anarcho-primitivism
In my opinion I agree with the Transhumanist side because we're going into the future and not the past. On the other hand, its a little scary what technology has become and how much it will advance in the future. Even though it would be amazing if we could live forever and understand what is happening in people's minds.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/zoltan-istvan/a-stanford-university-deb_b_6186982.html
I would have to go with Transhumanism because us humans are evolving and the more we evolve the more technology is sold. A lot of people use technology in their everyday lives and are discovering new things about technology and how it could change the world. Technology has its good and bad sides and when you looke at the bad sides there are alot such as isolation,lack of social skills,poor sleep habits, etc. Technology will evolve and it's a little scary to think and what new things people are going to be able to do.
ReplyDeletehttp://whatistranshumanism.org/
I am on Transhumanist's side mostly because as the years go by,technology is changing drastically. Technology is everywhere at anytime. And it is used for almost everything. Living forever could be enjoyable however its just not ideal. especially if technology just keeps evolving its scary to think about the gismos and gadgets that could help or harm the world.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/zoltan-istvan/a-stanford-university-deb_b_6186982.html
I am on Transhumanist's side because technology is not the main root of problems. Technology is not such a distraction to us for the most part. To complete half of the task we do today it would take longer to do so. We write papers,place orders, etc.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.huffingtonpost.com/zoltan-istvan/a-stanford-university-deb_b_6186982.html
I would go with Transhumanist's side. This is because technology has advanced and is now everywhere. It helped life become simpler.Technology has bad effects to life like making us lazy because technology is doing most of the work. Its going to advance more and more everyday and thinking about the future of technology is horrifying.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.fifthestate.org/archive/394-summer-2015/transhumanism-vs-primitivism/
I agree most with the Transhumanist side. I agree with this side because I think that technology can really make humankind better and it has already helped us in the past so just imagine how much more it can help us in a few years. We will probably find a way to live longer because we could add so many technological advances to them. We will also be able to live even longer because we'd save our thoughts for future generations. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarwantsingh/2017/11/20/transhumanism-and-the-future-of-humanity-seven-ways-the-world-will-change-by-2030/#726e93d97d79
ReplyDeletei agree with the transhumanist side because with technology our future can go so far and plus we already rely on technology a lot and even tho there are some flaws of it, it still helps us in many ways and without it we wouldnt know what to do without it. the old days were hard every hard without technology. there were diseases that were not curable because we didnt have the right technology to help them. technology also isnt just electronics. technology is also like the pen and paper, or the pulley. they're all forms of different technology. without those, wed literally just be sitting on stones with like a feather or something. so i think we should have more technology in the world
ReplyDelete