Transhumanism and Religion(s)

[xkatz]

What are the stances of various religions when it comes to transhumanism?

 

[Absolute Zero]

whats transhumanism ?

 

[Boethiah]

I'm not sure how some religions view Transhumanism, but I do know that before humanity can begin working towards being super-humans, we have to be able to feed everyone and get everyone access to clean drinking water.

Many religions want to improve the human condition with spirituality, but I don't think this counts. The only ways to improve a human's physical, intellectual, or psychological characteristics seems to be science. Science is science. A religion that supports science that seeks to improve humans would be a transhumanist-supporting religion. Unfortunately, no examples come to mind immediately.

 

[ManTimeForgot]

I'm not sure how some religions view Transhumanism, but I do know that before humanity can begin working towards being super-humans, we have to be able to feed everyone and get everyone access to clean drinking water.

Many religions want to improve the human condition with spirituality, but I don't think this counts. The only ways to improve a human's physical, intellectual, or psychological characteristics seems to be science. Science is science. A religion that supports science that seeks to improve humans would be a transhumanist-supporting religion. Unfortunately, no examples come to mind immediately.

If by religion you mean an organized large group of people who share a spiritual ideology, then you might be correct. Though it does bare mentioning that the Dalai Lama has been known to have discussions with many scientific leaders even including those where both sides disagree.

Interesting Fact: Zen Buddhism has been reliably correlated with increased mental faculty. So it is demonstrably not true that ONLY "science" can improve the human condition.

Side Note: Science has absolutely nothing to say on topics regarding whether or not we should do something. Science only deals in possibilities and empirical outcomes. Exactly where does one derive morality from science? Should I rob from the super market in order to feed my family? Can science provide the answer?



If by religion one is describing all spiritual ideologies, then there are plenty of positions which are either non-interacting or support scientific endeavors. The founding fathers of the United States were almost unilaterally Deists. They were strong rationalists and managed to improve the human condition for a great many people; not through science but by establishing a system of government which was better able to satisfy the wants and needs of the people while guarding against abuses of power.

Science cannot ignore Philosophy. Rationality and meta-scientific analysis are very important to transhumanism as well. And I am thoroughly convinced that in order to be successful transhumanism will have to explain the value of religion, the successes of mysticism, how psychology and religion interact, and how it is possible to reconcile Science, Philosophy, and Spirituality (mysticism).

MTF

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Fun, semi-relevant fact: The Dalai Lama has stated that if machines ever reach a level equal or surpassing human intellect and consciousness, he may reincarnate into one.

[youtube]6JNyUVSoiAE[/youtube]

 

[elmarna]

While I can not speak for a religious stance. The fact that transhumanisum is a philosphy that insists that mechines will enable man to trancend his capabilities of which mere biology may take him into life. the fact that he can integrate mechines unto him & manfest a different world to define his role in it is in the the objective to become something "more".This is not without a capacity that while he has now infused the mechine to him , the fact of losing his humanity or actually embraced the essence of the mechine & lost some of himself in the "trade off" is considered.
whatever is the outcome of this formation is in the tellings of his or hers beliefs for religion to be considered! I find the whole idea of it distasteful! Mechines are tools. I do not want to rely on tools to live out my life. So many moral & ethical questions revolve around a cyborg & that catagory I can not see it in a reasonable manner. Humans made mechines. God did not. I realize we all wish to improve upon most things in our life & this is 1 avenue.
It is the outcome of it where the answer to this question lies!
I believe that transhumanisum is wrong. It is my belief & not dictated by the religion I follow!

 

[ManTimeForgot]

While I can not speak for a religious stance. The fact that transhumanisum is a philosphy that insists that mechines will enable man to trancend his capabilities of which mere biology may take him into life. the fact that he can integrate mechines unto him & manfest a different world to define his role in it is in the the objective to become something "more".This is not without a capacity that while he has now infused the mechine to him , the fact of losing his humanity or actually embraced the essence of the mechine & lost some of himself in the "trade off" is considered.
whatever is the outcome of this formation is in the tellings of his or hers beliefs for religion to be considered! I find the whole idea of it distasteful! Mechines are tools. I do not want to rely on tools to live out my life. So many moral & ethical questions revolve around a cyborg & that catagory I can not see it in a reasonable manner. Humans made mechines. God did not. I realize we all wish to improve upon most things in our life & this is 1 avenue.
It is the outcome of it where the answer to this question lies!
I believe that transhumanisum is wrong. It is my belief & not dictated by the religion I follow!

You are laboring under a misapprehension about what transhumanism entails. Transhumanism is the philosophical position that man is evolving (developing positively) and that it is possible to supplement this growth through tools. Not all of the tools are machines; some posit the use of psychology to develop more beneficial learning schema or world views; some posit the use of genetic engineering to be born with greater intellect or memory capacity; some posit the use of computers or AI development to enhance our ability to process information... Cyberization is only one plausible outcome amongst many. All of these things are leading towards something; and that something according to transhumanists is a singularity. When we reach the singularity we will cease to be human; not because we have lost our humanity but because we will have become something Greater than humanity; hence the term transhumanism.

MTF

 

[The Sum of Awe]

whats transhumanism ?

Waiting for the answer to this post.

 

[ManTimeForgot]

Waiting for the answer to this post.

Please read the post above yours. It contains the answer to your question.

MTF

 

[Boethiah]

If by religion you mean an organized large group of people who share a spiritual ideology, then you might be correct. Though it does bare mentioning that the Dalai Lama has been known to have discussions with many scientific leaders even including those where both sides disagree.

Interesting Fact: Zen Buddhism has been reliably correlated with increased mental faculty. So it is demonstrably not true that ONLY "science" can improve the human condition.

Can you elaborate on what "reliably correlated" means?

Side Note: Science has absolutely nothing to say on topics regarding whether or not we should do something. Science only deals in possibilities and empirical outcomes. Exactly where does one derive morality from science? Should I rob from the super market in order to feed my family? Can science provide the answer?

Yes, but I am not question that. I am supporting the notion that presently, the only way to "enhance the human condition", meaning improving quality of life etc can only come about through the development of technologies that reach those goals. This is what transhumanism seems to be. I am not belittling the importance of spiritual paths, but I am requesting information that supports the idea that any form of spirituality can cause some sort of "enhancement" in the human condition. Direct, observable evidence.

If by religion one is describing all spiritual ideologies, then there are plenty of positions which are either non-interacting or support scientific endeavors. The founding fathers of the United States were almost unilaterally Deists. They were strong rationalists and managed to improve the human condition for a great many people; not through science but by establishing a system of government which was better able to satisfy the wants and needs of the people while guarding against abuses of power.

Correct. However, the fact that they were Deists doesn't make any difference in the matter. The founding fathers forged a democratic society that improved quality of life, but I would argue quality of life is relative. Many hundreds or thousands of years ago, one might be lucky if they reached the age of thirty. The founding fathers did not utilize spiritual principles to form a nation. They utilized ideas from the Age of Enlightenment.

Science cannot ignore Philosophy. Rationality and meta-scientific analysis are very important to transhumanism as well. And I am thoroughly convinced that in order to be successful transhumanism will have to explain the value of religion, the successes of mysticism, how psychology and religion interact, and how it is possible to reconcile Science, Philosophy, and Spirituality (mysticism).

MTF

I am not a scientist, but I would say that "Science" is in no place to begin a political game with "Philosophy" and "Spirituality" as if they were unified institutes vying for power. Science operates with empirical data and cannot reconcile spirituality there is no observable proof. The jury is still out. Psychology has only become a science in last hundred years or so. Transhumanism will always be the sci-fi of today, as it is relative on the current human condition. I'd imagine that the very idea of modern medicine and the advent of the computer would seem far out to generations past.

If transhumanism is simply the movement to improve human condition through technology, I think a few steps forward are required.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Please read the post above yours. It contains the answer to your question.

MTF

Ah thank you

 

[ManTimeForgot]

Can you elaborate on what "reliably correlated" means?



Yes, but I am not question that. I am supporting the notion that presently, the only way to "enhance the human condition", meaning improving quality of life etc can only come about through the development of technologies that reach those goals. This is what transhumanism seems to be. I am not belittling the importance of spiritual paths, but I am requesting information that supports the idea that any form of spirituality can cause some sort of "enhancement" in the human condition. Direct, observable evidence.



Correct. However, the fact that they were Deists doesn't make any difference in the matter. The founding fathers forged a democratic society that improved quality of life, but I would argue quality of life is relative. Many hundreds or thousands of years ago, one might be lucky if they reached the age of thirty. The founding fathers did not utilize spiritual principles to form a nation. They utilized ideas from the Age of Enlightenment.



I am not a scientist, but I would say that "Science" is in no place to begin a political game with "Philosophy" and "Spirituality" as if they were unified institutes vying for power. Science operates with empirical data and cannot reconcile spirituality there is no observable proof. The jury is still out. Psychology has only become a science in last hundred years or so. Transhumanism will always be the sci-fi of today, as it is relative on the current human condition. I'd imagine that the very idea of modern medicine and the advent of the computer would seem far out to generations past.

If transhumanism is simply the movement to improve human condition through technology, I think a few steps forward are required.

Experimentally verified studies have shown that zen increases your IQ. The only other method for doing so that I am aware of is Rationality (use of experimentally verified knowledge to recognize and overcome human cognitive biases).

How exactly do you acquire "direct observable evidence" of a better system of organization? Hundreds of years later we can look back and compare the paths that Great Britain and the United States have taken since they split apart. The fact that Britain has drifted towards a system more similar to the US than vice versa suggests that Monarchy is a less effective method of organizing people than a Republic. But that isn't an empirically verifiable fact (what experimental study would you propose; introduce anarchy so you can get a good "control group?") Similarly, how do you acquire "direct observable evidence" of greater peace of mind? It is an empirically verifiable fact that during times of economic trouble the number of millennial and apocalyptic movements increase. And while this suggests that people find ordered detriment to be preferable to random detriment it is not a verifiable fact that people need religion because of that.


I would say you are trying to split hairs. Read the language of the constitution and the declaration of independence. "God" and other aspects of the divine are mentioned quite considerably. And even if you want to claim that religion had nothing do with what happened (which is debatable); it is clearly shown that religion did not detract from their efforts. Free will and non-intervention (major tenets of Deism) are major portions of how the US government was originally designed to operate.


The point is that even if all spirituality is wrong in why it does something that does not mean that what they are doing is also wrong. Religion would not be as successful as it is if that were the case. It is up to Science and Philosophy to figure out what religion is doing right and emulate it should it prove to be the case that all religion is not just false but detrimental to human progress.


MTF