Category Archives: Transhumanism

Dystopian Kurzweil: As Big Tech continues frantically pushing AI development and funding, many users have become concerned about the outcome and dangers of the latest AI advancements. However, one man is more than sold on AI's ability to bring humanity to its next evolutionary level.

Raymond Kurzweil is a well-known computer scientist, author, and artificial intelligence enthusiast. Over the years, he has promoted radical concepts such as transhumanism and technological singularity, where humanity and advanced technology merge to create an evolved hybrid species. Kurzweil's latest predictions on AI and the future of tech essentially double down on twenty-year-old predictions.

In a recent interview with the Guardian, Kurzweil introduced his latest book, "The Singularity Is Nearer," a sequel to his bestselling 2005 book, "The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology." Kurzweil predicted that AI would reach human-level intelligence by 2029, with the merging between computers and humans (the singularity) happening in 2045. Now that AI has become the most talked-about topic, he believes his predictions still hold.

Kurzweil believes that in five years, machine learning will possess the same abilities as the most skilled humans in almost every field. A few "top humans" capable of writing Oscar-level screenplays or conceptualizing deep new philosophical insights will still be able to beat AI, but everything will change when artificial general intelligence (AGI) finally surpasses humans at everything.

Bringing large language models (LLM) to the next level simply requires more computing power. Kurzweil noted that the computing paradigm we have today is "basically perfect," and it will just get better and better over time. The author doesn't believe that quantum computing will turn the world upside down. He says there are too many ways to continue improving modern chips, such as 3D and vertically stacked designs.

Kurzweil predicts that machine-learning engineers will eventually solve the issues caused by hallucinations, uncanny AI-generated images, and other AI anomalies with more advanced algorithms trained on more data. The singularity is still happening and will arrive once people start merging their brains with the cloud. Advancements in brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are already occurring. These BCIs, eventually comprised of nanobots "noninvasively" entering the brain through capillaries, will enable humans to possess a combination of natural and cybernetic intelligence.

Kurzweil's imaginative nature as a book author and enthusiastic transhumanist is plain to see. Science still hasn't discovered an effective way to deliver drugs directly into the brain because human physiology doesn't work the way the futurist thinks. However, he remains confident that nanobots will make humans "a millionfold" more intelligent within the next twenty years.

Kurzweil concedes that AI will radically change society and create a global automated economy. People will lose jobs but will also adapt to new employment roles and opportunities advanced tech brings. A universal basic income will also ease the pain. He expects the first tangible transformative plans will emerge in the 2030s. The inevitable Singularity will enable humans to live forever or extend our living prospects indefinitely. Technology could even resurrect the dead through AI avatars and virtual reality.

Kurzweil says people are misdirecting their worries regarding AI.

"It is not going to be us versus AI: AI is going inside ourselves," he said. "It will allow us to create new things that weren't feasible before. It'll be a pretty fantastic future."

View post:
Transhumanist author predicts artificial super-intelligence, immortality, and the Singularity by 2045 - TechSpot

Why must we suffer? Theologians who need to justify Gods ordinances engage in theodicy, an intellectual swim against lifes current of unpleasantness. The question of suffering claims the attention of secular philosophy as well. Minimizing hurt and pain is, after all, the goal of most projects for worldly improvement. In both disciplines, an understanding of sufferings origins is a necessary first step.

Of course, with respect to sufferings immediate causes and cures, the answers are usually obvious. But they are catch-as-catch-can and transient, aspirins for headaches, bandages for cuts, the human condition left never better than bittersweet. With a deeper comprehension of sufferings roots, we might find better ways forward. Lets look to evolutionary theory for a new answer and then consider paths toward fuller remediation.

Central to my evolutionary approach is the biological distinction between genotype and phenotype. For those unfamiliar, the former refers to an organisms constituent genes bequeathed to it through the process of natural selection. The latter, the genes product, is the organism itselftheir survival machine in Richard Dawkins famously coinageby which they secure their continuing replication.

For most animals the distance between biological ends and means is a short one. They have desires and fears whose intensity roughly corresponds to their contribution to genetic fitness. The actions necessary for attaining or avoiding them, say flight versus fight, are usually limited, survival being more a matter of efficient execution than creative imagination. Most animals might thus be said to reside in the realm of genocracy, being largely ruled by their genes, behavioral options closely coded and held under tight genetic leash.

Uniquely, humans can stretch, sometimes even snap that leash. High intelligence, culturally pooled, allows for behavioral creativity: pleasures sometimes attained and pains avoided by means circuitous and not necessarily adaptiveevolutions true intent thereby cheated.

Overall, human intellectual prowess and cultural capacity have proven immensely adaptive, as stray bands of hunters have multiplied into Earth-covering billions. But intelligences deleterious cheats are now rivaling the force of its honest guides. Step by step, an artificial environment is being constructed that serves personal purposes but stands akilter to genetic interest. This unnatural state of affairs might be called phenocracy: The organisms purposes overruling those of its genes.

Put another way, phenocracy subordinates biological ends to biological means, licensing an organism to pursue personal satisfaction for its own sake. (Needless to say, Im not ascribing real intention to genes, only operational consequencethe intentionality is purely figurative).

Through human artifice, other animals can occasionally experience phenocracy. Those lab rats, for instance, that starved after they learned to stimulate their brains pleasure centers by pushing levers. Such behavior couldnt endure the wild, where selection ruthlessly purges everything maladaptive. Pets live phenocratically as well, but often on the condition of being neutered.

That the human environment exists as a playground of phenocratic contrivance is largely due to modern technology. Insofar as we remain creatures that reproduce through childbirth, its also a condition that cant persist indefinitely. Phenocracy is a serious phenomenon in the shorter frames of human history, wherein behavioral patterns lasting but a few generations can still have major effects. Witness the impact of fast food on American health and military readiness or the sub-replacement birthrates of the developed world, where people regard large families as lowering the quality of life.

The feeling an experience evokes doesnt inhere in the experience itself, but in the ways our genes prompt us to react. We find the proximity of feces repellent; for dung beetles, theyre a feast. We fear death so as not to prematurely die. Yet there are termites that explode in order to defend their nests. Presumably they feel differently. Under pure genocracy, the attraction or repulsion of an experience lies in its relationship to genetic fitness, not anything else.

Critically, pain is as useful a steering device for genes as pleasure, sometimes more so. Genes care nothing for what organisms feel, provided these feelings enhance genetic yield. Suffering from envy, pangs of unrequited love, hunger, or cold? Your genes are telling you to up your game. Enjoying romance, hearty dinners, and secure and comfortable lodgings? Their message is to stay the course. For success genes provide carrots; for failure, sticks.

Pain and suffering are generally linked to difficult situations requiring a sharp concentration of attention: Anxiety when the approach of danger is initially perceived (message: think hard), fright as it closes in (attack, hide, or run), pain when it impacts (stop it now!). All are emotions that rapidly clear the cognitive decks.

Bad experiences are altogether acceptable to our unfeeling genes, provided that the emotional rattling delivered is the most efficient route to problem-solving. The adaptive cost-effectiveness of painful just-in-time rescue, avoiding the cognitive burdens of a more deliberative far-seeing approach, is the principal reason life is so frequently unpleasant.

Pleasant experiences have less need of being disruptive, being generally associated with the continuance of adaptive behaviors (keep eating) or reward for an adaptive goal achieveda new child, a raised salary, or a competitive victory (congrats, stay the course). Under lifes shifting circumstances, however, theres no resting on laurels. Happiness provides but a reprieve from the pressing concerns of staying alive. Euphoria dissipates; fear gnaws or explodes.

Capable of reflection, humans find this Jekyll-and-Hyde genocracy dismaying. Yet its biological explanation is crystal clear. The shortest path to fitness frequently passes through misery.

If it was God who chose natural selection to raise us from the primordial slime, the blame lies with Him. The genetic demiurge to whom he delegated the evolutionary dirty work has proven a hard taskmaster. Perhaps this was the only way that genesis could be divinely accomplished. If so, theodicy has its simple answer. For God, the best of all possible evolutionary worlds required suffering.

We canand dohope for a better hereafter, in which the pains of earthly living give way to eternal bliss. Its an expectation that lightens lifes load. When salvation is rendered conditional on moral conduct, it allows us to live more cooperative as well as better-adapted lives. But note that belief in the hereafter is itself phenocratic, the prospect of a joyous existence purged of gene-caused afflictionsa kind of transhumanism avant la lettre.

Modern science wrought a revolution in thought, bringing heavenly phenocracy down to Earth in both retail and wholesale forms. The first, delivered person-by-person, comprises the project we now call self-realization, made plausible by capitalist plenty and scientifically empowered medicine. Alongside it rises the related vision of collective utopia, humans living harmoniously in a society rationally redesigned.

In practice, both have shown themselves dubious: Utopia because of its biological denialism: an insistence that social reconstruction can overcome genetic self-serving. Self-realization because of its frequent reliance on those rascally cheats severing gratification from fitness, and thereby sabotaging genetic survival. Sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll epitomizes this trap, if rock-and-roll stands in for all the pursuits that disguise barren excitements as adaptive triumphs.

Contemporary sexual practice is its paradigm case, a phenocratic revel celebrating bedroom pleasure as an end-in-itself. Effective contraception cinched the possibility for heterosexual congress, but only as a curtain-raiser. The pursuit of self-realization has increasingly freed eroticism from every constraint beyond the laws of physics. Fun, fulfilling, but hardly fecund!

An economic delusion gives sexual sterilization a further boost. In the bad old days, material growth, insofar as it occurred, was barely visible. Most assumed a steady demographic state. Begetting children consequently did double duty. It not only preserved lineage but was an insurance plan against decrepitude. What one genetically sowed, one might later personally reap.

We now take economic growth for granted, believing that raising all boats will benefit individuals, regardless of their family choices. Assemble a diverse portfolio or vest a pension, andseeminglyprogeny can be struck from ones asset sheet. But this only works where childlessness is the exception to an otherwise fruitful rule. If too many live childlessly, a societys wealth will evaporate alongside its population, empty cradles emptying IRAs. Perhaps immigration and robotics can make up for the birth dearth. But this just changes the form, not the fact of a phenotypic cultures eventual extinction.

Humans, especially males, have long sought out adventure, risky but genetically rewarding exploits like exploration, entrepreneurship, athletics, and combat. No pain no gain, and to the brave belong the fair, as the adages go. Such ventures still call, but virtual reality more and more turns them into pajama games. Kill without consequence, be bootlessly heroic, thrill without thriving, sing the digital sirens. In these altered guises, genocracys laurels still beckon but only as apparitions that dissolve upon grasping.

Then there are drugs. Alcoholism is phenocracys oldest blight, always censured and generally pitied. Drinking, even on binge scale, can sometimes serve to toast missions accomplished, fortify courage, and lubricate sociability, becoming adaptive to a point. But for good evolutionary reason, chronic besottedness is everywhere condemned.

Until recently, nonalcoholic inebriation through drugs was relatively rare in the West, a categorical vice associated with depravity and, in recent times, criminalized. The 1960s, however, saw a decided turn, drug use becoming increasingly widespread at all social levels. There has been a reaction, to be sure, but the trend toward narcotic abandon has phenocracys wind at its back.

Characteristically, phenocracy trades in illusion, providing good feelings as decoys rather than guides. Its altered states emotionally please, but the behaviors they prompt adaptively misfire. Infinitely worse is something that has only recently hoved into view, an end-times phenocracy where environments dont merely beguile but actively predate. There is little reason to believe that a superintelligent AI, if such can be, will forever equate its cares with ours. To serve man may be our anticipation but judging from how weve served our own faunal cousinage, the greater likelihood is that we will be treated the same by AI, ending up as fodder or at least collateral damage in whatever global makeover the intelligent machines may eventually oversee.

The solution to suffering offered by traditional religion is top-down. A divine redeemer descends to deliver us. But per chance there is also one that is bottom-up: Mind redeeming itself by quitting the piping of its genes to join a dance of its own composition, one whose steps lead away from genetic survival and toward highly enriched and self-renewing forms of mental life. The choreography wouldnt be shortsightedly hedonic like that of commonplace phenocracy, but farsightedly uplifting, with gratifications savored rather than greedily bolted down.

One can imagine problem-solving as falling into two categories: calmly considered and urgently pressed. When dangers are spotted from afar, there are numerous options for avoiding them, some more satisfying or at least less galling than others. One can engage in the pleasures of regular exercise or await heart surgery; save money or eke out old age flipping burgers; steer clear of storms or flounder in their midst. Long perspective also heightens lifes pleasures. Family planning is usually more satisfying than haphazard pregnancy.

A general rule, then: The best way to reduce pain and anxiety is by handling their causes at that point in time where the adaptive value of promptness exceeds the risks of prematurity. As intelligence, knowledge, and technical mastery grow, that point recedes, and the quality of experience becomes correspondingly improved.

Given the constrained nature of the cognitive apparatus evolution has provided us, there is probably an effective limit to how far we humans can push this horizon. Our puppeteer genes have decided that myopia, however traumatizing, is still, for them at least, a good evolutionary bargain.

Maybe, as scripturally promised, God will come to our rescue, raising us into a higher realm. If He doesnt, however, there is another way that is conceivably within our advancing technological powers: breaking the genes dominion over the quality of lived experience. Yet doing this must involve a thoroughgoing remake of what we essentially are, that is to say, the birthing an intelligence no longer human.

Most will find that disturbing counsel. Weve been shaped by selection to dread our own demise. Radical organic transmutation, involving the end of our species as now constituted, naturally seems even more appalling. Of course, on the evolutionary record, species extinction is an inescapable fate. But should we want to bring it upon ourselves by handing the future to an alien successor?

Self-alteration is actually nothing new for humans. Weve provided ourselves with extra skin (clothes), artificial teeth and claws (spears, arrows, knives, swords, and guns), accelerated digestion (cooking), and enhanced vision (spectacles, telescopes, microscopes) among now taken-for-granted prosthetics. Even writing, affording an extra-neural medium for memory, falls into this category. To be sure, past alterations were incremental and didnt involve direct biological change. But they certainly have indirectly altered us biologically since theyve drastically changed the selective forces to which we are exposed. That were not the men we used to be back in hominid times is largely due to our self-shaping.

Emancipating ourselves from genocracys trap would entail measures far more severe, and certainly more presumptuous, than these earlier innovations, which were still consistent with evolutions unknowing shuffle. Whether wisely or not, the odds are that well pursue them. After all, to do otherwise would be at odds with our genetically engrained competitiveness. Genocracy drives us toward increased technical mastery, intelligence, health, strength, and longevity, and in so doing renders us less and less like even our fairly recent ancestors. The extent to which the coming alterations will take the form of cybernetic extensions, biological upgrades, or synergies involving both, is hard to predict, though well see soon enough as the advance along these fronts is fast-accelerating. Maybe barrenness, catastrophic violence, or a global epidemic will do us in before we can completely erase our humanity or commission alien successors. But should that happen, no new chapter will be turned. The story of the mind, or at least of the intelligent mind on Earth, will simply come to its end.

But even with the best (or worst) of Promethean intentions, there are countless ways that genetic escape could come a cropper. For one thing, we dont know whether consciousness is substrate dependent. If superintelligent AI is to be our heir, will it possess awareness as well as brilliance?

Its hard to see why an entity that could reason as well as, or better than, a human wouldnt possess a parallel, if not necessarily identical, awareness. Do organic compounds have some odd experiential privilege over silicates and other possible computational building blocks? We cant be sure, and its difficult to even know what would constitute a dispositive test. Nonetheless, a mistake that assigns the future to genius zombies is the equivalent of there not being a future at alla leap into the dark, most literally. Should we stick to organic enhancements for the time being?

The second problem is that our genocentric nature can be expected to corrupt the process of extricating mind from genes, quite possibly in ruinous ways. Self-interested humans will tend to create self-interested intellectual augmentations to promote their self-interested schemes. Altruistic devotion to the emancipation of the mind is unlikely to be the prime directive, to the extent that it directs at all. Despite proclaimed good intentions, it is power and profit that push the development of AI and biotech today, not truth, beauty, or bliss. Any project aimed at emancipating mind from genes would have to be directed, at least for a while, by the same genes keeping the mind prisoner, leading to who knows what existential mayhem?

Our inability to find evidence of extraterrestrial civilization may indicate the difficulty of emancipations accomplishment. Perhaps an S-curve operates here. The further cognitive augmentation proceeds, enhancing foresight and technical acumen, the more likely a successful transition becomes. Were still certainly well toward the curves bottom and, conceivably, almost all ascensions abort early on. (Thankfully, its a big universe!)

On the other hand, if were very lucky, perhaps the traditional path of divine, top-down deliverance and the new one of auto-emancipation can merge. Our superintelligent, genetically liberated, successfully phenocratic successors mightprompted by some initial human seed-plantingcome to regard Homo sapiens as a parent to be comforted in its old age. We could then find ourselves in a comfortable sanctuary designed by them for our retirement, a Garden of Eden at the end of our species travails rather than at its beginning. If our AI guardians were really kind, we might not know the difference between their paradise and the one for whichin protest against the whipping of our genesweve immemorially longed. Although an ersatz version, it may be as much as obsolescing mankind can ever hope for.

View post:
Transhumanism and the Cure for Suffering - Chronicles - A Magazine of American Culture

Kotin / Shutterstock January 16, 2024

Alexander Thomas, University of East London

The tech elites obssession with upgrading humanity offers a grandiose narrative to distract from todays more pressing challenges and injustices.

Owen Chevalier, Western University

New features on Apple iOS 17 aim to give users insights into their mental health, but they may also shape how people see themselves.

Anders Sandberg, University of Oxford

There may be humans who look more or less like us in the year million, but they wont be alone.

Henry-James Meiring, The University of Queensland

Leaving our earthly bodies and living forever as a machine isnt just a thing of modern science fiction. These transhumanist ideas date back to the 18th century.

Alexander Thomas, University of East London

Cantona was right to raise concerns about the future, says an expert on transhumanism.

We shouldnt assume that discussion of bodily changes necessarily means progression towards a more equal society.

James S. Horton, University of Bath and Nicholas K. Priest, University of Bath

Long read: How nature is fighting our attempts to use biohacking to live forever.

Shainaz Firfiray, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

Seemingly innocuous security chips could enable companies to monitor employees in more sinister ways.

Moa Petersn, Lund University

Swedens deep relationship with digital technology helps explain why its biohacking scene is so unique.

Anne-Blandine Caire, Universit Clermont Auvergne (UCA)

Cryonics is no longer synonymous with science fiction. What are we technically capable of doing and what do we have the right to do?

Alexander Thomas, University of East London

This is the audio version of an in depth article from The Conversation, which explores the ethics of transhumanism.

David Trippett, University of Cambridge

We can either take advantage of advances in technology to enhance human beings (never to go back), or we can legislate to prevent this from happening.

Gavin Miller, University of Glasgow

Science fiction has a more important job to do it allows us to see ourselves in a new light.

Grard Dubey, Institut Mines-Tlcom Business School

Will bionic humans, augmented by hi-tech prostheses and microchips, be a benefit for humanity? The reality is more mixed.

Alexander Thomas, University of East London

The quest for technology to be the salvation of humankind neglects to consider some darker truths that lead to dystopia.

Cathal D. O'Connell, The University of Melbourne

How far would you go to better your life, to live longer, to beat death? And how much can technology help us in that quest?

Tony Prescott, University of Sheffield

The latest remake of Ghost in the Shell ducks the philosophical questions posed by the cyborg technology of the future.

Richard Jones, University of Sheffield

Transhumanism sees mind uploading as the ultimate destiny of humanity, but its actually a dangerous distraction.

Anders Sandberg, University of Oxford

Talent is unfair. One can quibble about what it actually is. But there is little doubt that it is something that emerges not just from the genes but also from their interaction with the environment. Different

Read the original here:
Transhumanism News, Research and Analysis The ...

Likewise, its no surprise that armies around the world are eager to lead the way into the new frontier of transhumanism, generals and war leaders have always sought any means to give their army the upper hand over an opponent.

The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has come right out and said that humans [were] the weakest link in defense systems. Some examples of DARPAs research into transhumanist technologies include allowing humans to convert plant matter to glucose, threat detection through optical implants, and even a way for humans to cling to the surface of a flat wall the way lizards do.

As computer technologies advance alongside biotechnologies, there is a growing convergence between the two in the form of neural interfaces that in the future can open the door to linking your mind directly to an AI in order to facilitate greater learning, overcome neurological conditions, or just to use the internet.

In the coming decades, as more advanced computer technologies continue to shrink in size, its not out of the question that brain implants, linked to an AI, might be possible. In fact, DARPA has already started research along these lines.

Without question, these examples of transhumanism point to one of the essential questions every student or teacher of philosophy has grappled with: what does it mean to be human?

Evolution gave us the brain which has given us technologies such as flint tools, the wheel, and clothing that enabled us to extend ourselves past our biological limitations. Is an artificial eye any different? Are we any less human for using an arrow to kill a deer rather than our bare hands? Who gets to decide?

Some critics argue that the two positions transhumanists propose, rejecting human enhancement through augmentation and implants entirely or wholeheartedly embracing everything the transhumanist movement represents is a false dichotomy.

Writing in Psychology Today, Dr. Massimo Pigliucci, a Professor of Philosophy at the University of New York-Lehman College, believes that there is a necessary discussion society must have before we introduceor even think of developingsuch technologies: it is perfectly acceptable indeed necessary for individuals and society to have a thorough discussion about what limits are or are not acceptable when it comes to the ethical issues raised by the use of technologies.

The rest is here:
The Transhuman Revolution: What it is and How to Prepare for its Arrival

Imagine a future when earths inhabitants are not humans, but cyborgsrobotlike beings with both biological and mechanical components. With exosuits for added strength, cybernetic arms and legs, surgically-implanted earbuds for advanced hearing, bionic eyes for X-ray and infrared vision, and digitally-enhanced brains, these superbots think and act at lightning speed. Nanobots inside their bodies work continually to maintain and repair organs and tissues. Equally impressive are their organic parts, which have been genetically engineered for health.

These superbeings may sound like something out of a sci-fi movie, but they are the very real aspiration of influential business leaders, government officials, biotech engineers, scientists and futurists around the world, who are spearheading a philosophical and socio-political movement known as transhumanism.

In a nutshell, the transhumanist movement seeks to develop and use technology to radically transform humanity beyond its current physiology and limitationsto augment or amplify natural abilities like intellect and physical strength, create disease-resistant bodies, and extend lifespans or prevent death altogether.

To accomplish its goals, the transhumanist movement is looking to such technologies as genetic engineering (the deliberate altering of DNA sequences to produce new traits), implant technology (the embedding of digital implants in the body to interface with computers), artificial intelligence (the development of computer systems that mimic the thinking capabilities of the human mind), nanotechnology(the manipulation of atoms and molecules to produce new molecular structures), and cybernetics (the replacement of biological body parts with biomechanical devices).

Those involved in the transhumanism movement concede that much of what they envision is only in the early stages of development. We dont have cyborgs living in our midst quite yet, and many question whether it would even be possible to create such beings. But a lot of research is currently underway, in all of the areas just mentioned, to try to speed the transhumanist agenda along.

Many times the innovations that move us closer to transhumanism were devised for totally different purposes. For instance, invitro fertilization was developed to assist with the conception of a child and screen for genetic diseases, but could also be used to select for certain desirable traits and create designer babies. Neural lace, a wireless brain-computer interface, is being billed as a new way to treat neurological disorders, but could also connect the brain with artificial intelligence (AI) software to boost mental acuity. Radiofrequency ID microchips got their start in retail and business applications, but are now being implanted in peoples hands as universal I.D. cards, building access card keys and credit cards, all under the auspices of convenience and security.

Our world is certainly moving towards a transhuman future. Some leaders in the movement are hoping to have created full-fledged cyborgs by the early 2030s. And while transhumanists would see that as a huge accomplishment, thats not all they want to do. Ultimately, they hope to not only digitally and genetically enhance fleshly bodies, but to actually be liberated from them.

Many futurist thinkers envisage the day when people will be able to separate their minds from their biological bodies, and transfer them to a super computer or mega server (in the same way a computer file could be moved from one machine to another), and live forever in a virtual reality environment. Transhumanists refer to this as the posthuman state. They believe at that point, the distinctions between virtual reality and actual reality, or human and machine, will have been completely dissolved. Individuals will be able to take on holographic-like avatars, changing and shifting their identities to their liking, free to roam the Metaverse as immortal cyberbeings.

Futurist Ray Kurzweil, one of the main leaders in the transhumanism movement, predicts that around 2045, earth will be inhabited entirely by computers. Purely organic humans will have become extinct, he asserts. Those who survive will be the ones who will have fused their minds with the all-powerful computers.

It can be tempting to just laugh all this off, because much of what transhumanists want to do really DOES sound like science fiction. But the fact remains, the early workings of transhumanism ARE here. There are many negative implications of going that direction as a society, particularly from a biblical standpoint. We need to be aware of what this movement is about, because even though its unlikely transhumanists will be able to pull off everything they want to do, some of their ideas could impact us. Here are six very big reasons why transhumanism is so very wrong:

1. God is not part of the thinking.

Transhumanists reject any belief in God or a spiritual realm. Instead, they have generally adopted the philosophical position known as materialism, which regards the natural, material and physical universe as the only reality. They insist that anything which is not composed of matter, does not exist. They see science as the source of all knowledge, and the lens in which to understand the world, find solutions to lifes challenges, and discover meaning in existence.

Romans 1:28 Romans 1:28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;American King James Versionaptly applies to transhumanism: And even as they did not like to retain God intheirknowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting. When people dismiss the Bible, their thinking immediately starts going in the wrong direction. Nothing truly good can come out reasoning that relies on human perspectives alone. Starting with a wrong premise only leads to more bad ideas.

2. The posthuman virtual world is a counterfeit version of eternal life.

Transhumanism is basically an attempt by mankind to achieve eternal life withoutGod. Rather than being thankful for Christs sacrifice and looking to His return as the only hope for mankind, transhumanists regard technology as their savior. They still want to live forever, and have deluded themselves into thinking this can be done via a physical meansby uploading their minds onto a computer-generated virtual world. Even if that was doable, it would not be a joyful existence, as true peace and happiness is not possible apart from God.

3. Transhumanism is a form of evolution.

Materialism, which transhumanism is built on, posits that mankind came into existence through evolutionthe theory that lifeforms are continually changing for the better, and that the present form of any organism is a diminished version of what is to come. Transhumanism offers its own twist: that mankind should use technology to artificially speed up the evolutionary process and bring on the next phasemerging humans with machines.

According to transhumanism, our physical bodies are the primary impediment to our advancement as a species. Yet the Bible describes the human body as fearfully and wonderfully made (Psalms 139:14 Psalms 139:14I will praise you; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are your works; and that my soul knows right well.American King James Version). God created us as He intended. His design for us does not require improvement.

This does not mean that we should oppose thoughtful use of gene editing and other biomedical procedures to treat or screen for genetic diseases, or restore normal body functioning after catastrophic injuries. But if we cross the line to reinvent the human body, we are, in effect, saying that we can do better than God, writes B.M. Coaker in Who are You? (AuthorHouse, 2018). We have been given the ability to appreciate and admire Gods handiwork in His originally unflawed design . . . but He has not given us the mandate to take our exploration and curiosity beyond his handiwork (p. 56). The primary concern lies in implementing biotechnological enhancements to the point that we lose our identity as human beings.

4. There is no recognition of the spiritual components of the mind.

The Bible tells us that we human beings have a spiritual component to our makeup (Job 32:8 Job 32:8But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty gives them understanding.American King James Version, 1 Corinthians 2:11 1 Corinthians 2:11For what man knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knows no man, but the Spirit of God.American King James Version). It is this spirit of man that imparts intellect to our brains, creating the human mind. Transhumanists, as materialists, are not open to this truth. They posit that the human mind (including our thoughts and personalities) is purely physical, consisting of groups of chemicals, neural connections and electrical impulses that operate in predetermined ways. This is why they think its possible to capture and digitize the information patterns that supposedly comprise a persons consciousness, and upload it to a computer server.

However, some scientists, even within the transhumanism movement, have expressed doubts about whether this idea of mind uploading is actually possible, acknowledging that the faculties of the human mind cannot be reduced to simple patterns of brain chemistry. They point out that even if a persons mind could be reproduced in machine form, the results would not preserve the original person in any true sense. At best, it might be a rough copy of a few personality traits or mimic some of the persons attitudes, but without true self-awareness, sentience, and consciousness.

5. Morality is not addressed or seen as important.

When transhumanists talk about the future they envisage, they focus on physical health and strength and cognitive abilities. Thats because they see the human condition as purely a physical problem, needing physical solutions.But the fact is, humanitys foundational problems are spiritual in nature, and require spiritual solutions. We wont be able to control our human nature or have true morality without God.

Human nature cant be changed through the augmentation of intelligence, writes Sandra Godde in Reaching for Immortality: Can Science Cheat Death? (Wipf and Stock, 2022). Even a cursory view of history reminds us that sophisticated societies can still invent more horrific ways to destroy their neighbors and exalt themselves . . . It follows that technological advance does not inevitably lead to advance in human goodness (p. 40).

For the most part, transhumanists have no explanation for what human nature is, where it comes from, or how to manage it. There is also no consensus among them as to how morals are developed. Some transhumanists will at least admit that moral character is not an attribute that can be programmed in. The Bible makes it clear that character development requires the free choice of individuals who must want to build it, and that it is something we have to diligently pursue (2 Peter 1:5-8 2 Peter 1:5-8 [5] And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; [6] And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; [7] And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. [8] For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that you shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.American King James Version).

Even if character could be instilled as an enhancement, there would be no agreement among transhumanists as to what constitutes good morals. Moral absolutes depend on an absolute law giver, which could only be our Creator. Without belief in God, transhumanists become moral relativists by default, meaning individuals decide for themselves whats right and wrong. This inevitably leads to individuals to pursuing their own selfish motives. Living in a world like that for eternity hardly sounds pleasant.

6. Transhumanism could intensify conflict or lead to enslavement.

Without God and His standards of morality and justice being integrated into the theoretical transhuman or posthuman worlds, the machine-beings that exist would still have human nature and the same type of evil predispositions as mankind has always had, but with much more power to perform their acts. Some warn that in the future there could be two classes of beings on earth: the bionically-enhanced superhumans, who brutalize the other weaker class of beings, the non-enhanced humans. Others warn that if computers were to achieve super AI (a level of intelligence thats vastly superior to that of humans) and human minds were able to live via a cloud connection in the virtual world, their more intelligent machine overlords could enslave them.

But even the softer forms of transhumanism were seeing now could set the stage for control. For instance, subdermal microchips and brain computer interfaces could be used for surveillance, or even for reading and manipulating our thoughts and behavior. This is particularly troubling if those who are doing the monitoring are positions over us and have different values or beliefs than we do.

There can be no doubt that Satan is behind the transhumanism movement. Satan hates Gods plan to bring many sons to glory (Hebrews 2:10 Hebrews 2:10For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.American King James Version). He will do everything he can to try to destroy mankind before that happens, and transhumanism appears to be a way he is trying to do that. But it is a futile endeavor. Many of the worlds intellectuals too have convinced themselves transhumanism will work, despite facts indicating just the opposite.

Futurists often point to recent innovations like brain-controlled prosthetic limbs, surgically-implanted hearing aids, and antenna implants in the skull to help colorblind individuals perceive colorsas proof that were on our way to transhumanism. But these kinds of augmentations are a far cry from the creation of cyborgs and avatars.

Transhumanists face some insurmountable challenges. For one, the human mind with its nonphysical components, cannot be removed from a physical body and transferred over to a robot, computer server or any other machine. Moreover, qualities like emotions, beliefs, values and intuition cannot be reduced to mere computer codes, to be uploaded to a digital medium.

The other huge challenge is their quest to achieve strong AI, which is central to creating the superbeings they desire. Strong AI includes Super AI and General AI (intelligence equal to humans), and would have all features of human cognition, including self-awareness, sentience, consciousness. Scientists have been trying to develop Strong AI for several decades and they are still only in the theoretical stage. There is growing doubt about whether a computer could ever really think and understand like a human.

In so many ways, transhumanism is Satans attempt to detour God in His incredible plans for mankind. Thankfully, its unlikely transhumanism will ever come to fruition. It really IS mostly fiction. Still, understanding what transhumanism is about is a helpful exercise and a huge reminder of what happens when humans do not include God in their thinking.

See the rest here:
Transhumanism: What It Is, and Why It Is So Fundamentally Wrong

The aims of the transhumanist movement are summed up by Mark OConnell in his book To Be a Machine, which last week won the Wellcome Book prize. It is their belief that we can and should eradicate ageing as a cause of death; that we can and should use technology to augment our bodies and our minds; that we can and should merge with machines, remaking ourselves, finally, in the image of our own higher ideals.

The idea of technologically enhancing our bodies is not new. But the extent to which transhumanists take the concept is. In the past, we made devices such as wooden legs, hearing aids, spectacles and false teeth. In future, we might use implants to augment our senses so we can detect infrared or ultraviolet radiation directly or boost our cognitive processes by connecting ourselves to memory chips. Ultimately, by merging man and machine, science will produce humans who have vastly increased intelligence, strength, and lifespans; a near embodiment of gods.

Is that a desirable goal? Advocates of transhumanism believe there are spectacular rewards to be reaped from going beyond the natural barriers and limitations that constitute an ordinary human being. But to do so would raise a host of ethical problems and dilemmas. As OConnells book indicates, the ambitions of transhumanism are now rising up our intellectual agenda. But this is a debate that is only just beginning.

There is no doubt that human enhancement is becoming more and more sophisticated as will be demonstrated at the exhibition The Future Starts Here which opens at the V&A museum in London this week. Items on display will include powered clothing made by the US company Seismic. Worn under regular clothes, these suits mimic the biomechanics of the human body and give users typically older people discrete strength when getting out of a chair or climbing stairs, or standing for long periods.

In many cases these technological or medical advances are made to help the injured, sick or elderly but are then adopted by the healthy or young to boost their lifestyle or performance. The drug erythropoietin (EPO) increases red blood cell production in patients with severe anaemia but has also been taken up as an illicit performance booster by some athletes to improve their bloodstreams ability to carry oxygen to their muscles.

And that is just the start, say experts. We are now approaching the time when, for some kinds of track sports such as the 100-metre sprint, athletes who run on carbon-fibre blades will be able outperform those who run on natural legs, says Blay Whitby, an artificial intelligence expert at Sussex University.

The question is: when the technology reaches this level, will it be ethical to allow surgeons to replace someones limbs with carbon-fibre blades just so they can win gold medals? Whitby is sure many athletes will seek such surgery. However, if such an operation came before any ethics committee that I was involved with, I would have none of it. It is a repulsive idea to remove a healthy limb for transient gain.

Not everyone in the field agrees with this view, however. Cybernetics expert Kevin Warwick, of Coventry University, sees no problem in approving the removal of natural limbs and their replacement with artificial blades. What is wrong with replacing imperfect bits of your body with artificial parts that will allow you to perform better or which might allow you to live longer? he says.

Warwick is a cybernetics enthusiast who, over the years, has had several different electronic devices implanted into his body. One allowed me to experience ultrasonic inputs. It gave me a bat sense, as it were. I also interfaced my nervous system with my computer so that I could control a robot hand and experience what it was touching. I did that when I was in New York, but the hand was in a lab in England.

Such interventions enhance the human condition, Warwick insists, and indicate the kind of future humans might have when technology augments performance and the senses. Some might consider this unethical. But even doubters such as Whitby acknowledge the issues are complex. Is it ethical to take two girls under the age of five and train them to play tennis every day of their lives until they have the musculature and skeletons of world champions? he asks. From this perspective the use of implants or drugs to achieve the same goal does not look so deplorable.

This last point is a particular issue for those concerned with the transhumanist movement. They believe that modern technology ultimately offers humans the chance to live for aeons, unshackled as they would be from the frailties of the human body. Failing organs would be replaced by longer-lasting high-tech versions just as carbon-fibre blades could replace the flesh, blood and bone of natural limbs. Thus we would end humanitys reliance on our frail version 1.0 human bodies into a far more durable and capable 2.0 counterpart, as one group has put it.

However, the technology needed to achieve these goals relies on as yet unrealised developments in genetic engineering, nanotechnology and many other sciences and may take many decades to reach fruition. As a result, many advocates such as the US inventor and entrepreneur Ray Kurzweil, nanotechnology pioneer Eric Drexler and PayPal founder and venture capitalist Peter Thiel have backed the idea of having their bodies stored in liquid nitrogen and cryogenically preserved until medical science has reached the stage when they can be revived and their resurrected bodies augmented and enhanced.

Four such cryogenic facilities have now been constructed: three in the US and one in Russia. The largest is the Alcor Life Extension Foundation in Arizona whose refrigerators store more than 100 bodies (nevertheless referred to as patients by staff) in the hope of their subsequent thawing and physiological resurrection. It is a place built to house the corpses of optimists, as OConnell says in To Be a Machine.

Not everyone is convinced about the feasibility of such technology or about its desirability. I was once interviewed by a group of cryonic enthusiasts based in California called the society for the abolition of involuntary death, recalls the Astronomer Royal Martin Rees. I told them Id rather end my days in an English churchyard than a Californian refrigerator. They derided me as a deathist really old-fashioned.

For his part, Rees believes that those who choose to freeze themselves in the hope of being eventually thawed out would be burdening future generations expected to care for these newly defrosted individuals. It is not clear how much consideration they would deserve, Rees adds.

Ultimately, adherents of transhumanism envisage a day when humans will free themselves of all corporeal restraints. Kurzweil and his followers believe this turning point will be reached around the year 2030, when biotechnology will enable a union between humans and genuinely intelligent computers and AI systems. The resulting human-machine mind will become free to roam a universe of its own creation, uploading itself at will on to a suitably powerful computational substrate. We will become gods, or more likely star children similar to the one at the end of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

These are remote and, for many people, very fanciful goals. And the fact that much of the impetus for establishing such extreme forms of transhuman technology comes from California and Silicon Valley is not lost on critics. Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk, the entrepreneur who wants to send the human race to Mars, also believes that to avoid becoming redundant in the face of the development of artificial intelligence, humans must merge with machines to enhance our own intellect.

This is a part of the world where the culture of youth is followed with fanatical intensity and where ageing is feared more acutely than anywhere else on the planet. Hence the overpowering urge to try to use technology to overcome its effects.

It is also one of the worlds richest regions, and many of those who question the values of the transhuman movement warn it risks creating technologies that will only create deeper gulfs in an already divided society where only some people will be able to afford to become enhanced while many other lose out.

The position is summed up by Whitby. History is littered with the evil consequences of one group of humans believing they are superior to another group of humans, he said. Unfortunately in the case of enhanced humans they will be genuinely superior. We need to think about the implications before it is too late.

For their part, transhumanists argue that the costs of enhancement will inevitably plummet and point to the example of the mobile phone, which was once so expensive only the very richest could afford one, but which today is a universal gadget owned by virtually every member of society. Such ubiquity will become a feature of technologies for augmenting men and women, advocates insist.

Many of these issues seem remote, but experts warn that the implications involved need to be debated as a matter of urgency. An example is provided by the artificial hand being developed by Newcastle University. Current prosthetic limbs are limited by their speed of response. But project leader Kianoush Nazarpour believes it will soon be possible to create bionic hands that can assess an object and instantly decide what kind of grip it should adopt.

It will be of enormous benefit, but its use raises all sorts of issues. Who will own it: the wearer or the NHS? And if it is used to carry a crime, who ultimately will be responsible for its control? We are not thinking about these concerns and that is a worry.

The position is summed up by bioethicist professor Andy Miah of Salford University.

Transhumanism is valuable and interesting philosophically because it gets us to think differently about the range of things that humans might be able to do but also because it gets us to think critically about some of those limitations that we think are there but can in fact be overcome, he says. We are talking about the future of our species, after all.

LimbsThe artificial limbs of Luke Skywalker and the Six Million Dollar Man are works of fiction. In reality, bionic limbs have suffered from multiple problems: becoming rigid mid-action, for example. But new generations of sensors are now making it possible for artificial legs and arms to behave in much more complex, human-like ways.

SensesThe light that is visible to humans excludes both infrared and ultra-violet radiation. However, researchers are working on ways of extending the wavelengths of radiation that we can detect, allowing us to see more of the world - and in a different light. Ideas like these are particularly popular with military researchers trying to create cyborg soldiers.

PowerPowered suits or exoskeletons are wearable mobile machines that allow people to move their limbs with increased strength and endurance. Several versions are being developed by the US army, while medical researchers are working on easy-to-wear versions that would be able to help people with severe medical conditions or who have lost limbs to move about naturally.

BrainsTranshumanists envisage the day when memory chips and neural pathways are actually embedded into peoples brains, thus bypassing the need to use external devices such as computers in order to access data and to make complicated calculations. The line between humanity and machines will become increasingly blurred.

View original post here:
No death and an enhanced life: Is the future transhuman?

0:00 Elections

20:55 Breaking Big Story

44:00 Todd Callender

- The transhumanism push is an agenda to annihilate humanity

- Vax injections are just one of many vectors for attempted extermination

- We have passed the false flag window for globalists to try to stop the election

- Next window is AFTER the election; they will try to cause world war before January

- Liz Truss iPhone HACKED by Russian-linked hackers

- Truss text to Blinken CONFIRMS collusion to destroy Nord Stream

- Dems demand AMNESTY for murderous covid propagandists

- Same dems refuse to APOLOGIZE for ruining people's lives with lockdowns, vaccines

- Mass uprisings now under way across Europe: France, Belgium, Hungary, Germany

- Interview with Todd Callender about the "Borgification" of humanity

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, were helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency.

Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/

Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html

Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport

Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger

Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com

Brighteon.Social: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger

Parler: https://parler.com/#/user/naturalnews

Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/naturalnews

Gab: https://gab.ai/NaturalNews

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/naturalnews

Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/HealthRangerReport

Mewe: https://mewe.com/i/health.ranger

Spreely: https://www.spreely.com/page/NaturalNews

PureSocialNetwork: https://puresocialnetwork.com/profile/?NaturalNews/

Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/realhealthrangerstore/

Read more:
Situation Update, Nov 1, 2022 - The transhumanism demonic AI takeover ...

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, were helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency.

Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/

Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html

Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport

Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger

Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com

Brighteon.Social: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger

Parler: https://parler.com/#/user/naturalnews

Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/naturalnews

Gab: https://gab.ai/NaturalNews

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/naturalnews

Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/HealthRangerReport

Mewe: https://mewe.com/i/health.ranger

Spreely: https://www.spreely.com/page/NaturalNews

PureSocialNetwork: https://puresocialnetwork.com/profile/?NaturalNews/

Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/realhealthrangerstore/

See more here:
Dr. Tau Braun and the Health Ranger talk transhumanism, AI infiltration ...

Commentary

There is a straight line that runs from eugenics through infanticide to transhumanism. All three are the devils work in the material world.

Let us explore the issue.

From biblical times to the present, there has been an ongoing battle between good and evil that has been waged. On one side, there are those who believe in a higher power and that mankind was made in the image of God, which is an immutable constant not to be trifled with or corrupted by human beings. Another way of saying that is that people in this camp believe that human nature itself has been immutable and constant through the millennia and that only by looking to God can mankind improve their condition.

On the other side are those who deny the existence of God. They believe that mankind is the supreme intelligence in control of human destiny, is malleable and can be shaped through science, and can evolve to a superior form of man through planning and experimentation by natural leaders over time. Therefore, in their view, there are no moral or religious constraints on the practices intended to evolve mankind toward some conceivedand ever-changingvision of the future.

Many in the first camp would characterize the ongoing battle as good versus evil. Mankind has been arguing about, defining, and redefining what it means to be good for millennia. The ancients defined good in terms of normal versus different, knowledge versus ignorance, and later right versus wrong in the context of defining laws and justice. Societies and governments were organized around these concepts.

The concept of evil has also been defined by many cultures through the ages. The dictionary now defines evil as morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked. Most Americans (and most people in general) have an innate understanding of what is evil on a personal level. Some refer to that understanding as a conscience. Even the people in the second camp who believe that mankind is the supreme being may have consciences informed by religion and experience.

Governments have been organized to reflect, monitor, and control the cultural norms of the people governed. Logic dictates that those governments would also implement and enforce those cultural norms from a different philosophical framework from each other, partly as shaped by their respective religious philosophies and the various ideologies that have been developed and tested over the centuries, such as monarchical rule, Marxism, fascism, socialism, communism, corporate capitalism, patriarchy, oligarchy, philosopher kings, and so on.

The totalitarian ideologies that were developed and tested during the 20th century (particularly fascism and communism) denied the existence of God so that the governments that exercised those ideologies would be unconstrained by religious and moral boundaries in their pursuit of developing and grooming their version of modern man in their societies.

Examples of those perversions of mankind include the following:

The Nazis were obsessed with racial theories that resulted in a pseudoscientific racial classification system in which Aryans (people of German and Nordic descent) were considered to be the master race, at the apex of the human pyramid and destined to rule the world (on Nazi terms, of course). Jews were considered by Nazis to be on the lowest level of the hierarchy.

Nazi society was organized around these concepts in order to develop and promote those with the purest Aryan blood at the expense of those with lesser classifications in the hierarchy. For example, German boys were educated, inculcated, and groomed in Nazi principles through the Hitler Youth program. Girls were brainwashed through two parallel programs: Young Girls was an organization for girls aged 10 to 14, while the League of German Girls was for girls aged 14 to 18, with the latter being focused on comradeship, domestic duties, and motherhood.

The Soviet Man was to be the ultimate proof that communism worked and that mankind could evolve for the better (as defined by the communists) without Gods guidance. The Russian communists attempted to shape individual consciousness, character, and social practices in order to get the people to conform to the Marxist view of the perfect citizen.

The Soviets experimented with telepathic research, cybernetic simulations, and mass hypnotism over television to control the minds of their citizenry. This was a forerunner of the mass formation psychosis being exploited by the left and globalists these days.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has controlled education in China for decades to politically indoctrinate students at all levels according to CCP ideology, principles, history, racial theories, and global objectives, and, most importantly, to condition everyone to acquiesce to the CCPs control of all aspects of Chinese society.

CCP leader Xi Jinping said in 2019, We need to strengthen political guidance for young people, guide them to voluntarily insist on the Partys leadership, to listen to the Party and follow the Party.

And the CCP is leading the world in implementing social controls to monitor all Chinese citizens compliance with CCP directives. Educate, monitor, control, and discipline: the perfect world with perfectly compliant citizens envisioned for all by the Chinese communists.

Theories initiated in the 19th century bore spoiled fruit in the 20th and 21st centuries. Karl Marxs theories (Marxism) begat the Communist Manifesto, whose godless adherents continue to plague the world today. Charles Darwins theory of evolution begat eugenics, which the National Institutes of Healths Genome Research Institute defines as an immoral and pseudoscientific theory that claims it is possible to perfect people and groups through genetics and the scientific laws of inheritance. John Deweys theory of progressive education similarly haunts U.S. public education to this very day.

Eugenics was and is particularly evil. Its adherents included the Nazis, Americans associated with the Population Society, the Committee on Eugenicswhich studied selective and restrictive human breedingand the American Eugenics Society.

Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt even promoted Nazi sympathizer and eugenicist Frederick Osborn to positions in government, including chairman of the Civilian Advisory Committee on Selective Service, chairman of the Army Committee on Welfare and Recreation, and chief of the Morale Branch of the War Department.

The Nazis used eugenics to justify the sterilization and, ultimately, elimination of undesirables, including Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, Slavs, and others. Eugenics theories led directly to the Nazi genocide that killed millions in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s.

Eugenics was also the basis for implementing sterilization laws in the United States in more than 30 states, with some of those laws persisting until the 1980s, according to the NIH Genome Research Institute. More than 60,000 people deemed to be idiots, imbeciles, promiscuous (females), or feebleminded were sterilized in the United States in the 20th century.

Eugenics also heavily influenced Margaret Sanger. A eugenicist and racist, Sanger founded the Birth Control League (1921) and its successor, Planned Parenthood (1942). She supported several eugenics initiatives: sterilization of people with mental and physical disabilities, segregation of undesirable criminals (for example, prostitutes, paupers, drug addicts, and the unemployed) into concentration camps, and mandatory birth control training for mothers with serious disease (choice was not part of the equation).

Another of Sangers initiatives was the Negro Project, in which predominantly black neighborhoods were targeted for birth control programs. Its purpose was evident, as she later disclosed in a private letter in December 1939: We dont want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.

Planned Parenthood was, of course, one of the main organizations behind the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973. The Supreme Court decision claimed that a womans right to an abortion was implicit in the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. As a selling point, its advocates first claimed that abortions should only be performed in rare instancesfor pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, or to save the mothers life.

Once the federal government funded Planned Parenthoods abortion clinics, abortion advocates incentivized by federal money pushed the boundaries of acceptable abortions from within the first trimester to eventually the evil practice of partial-birth abortions, in which a child being birthed is halted halfway and killed with scissors to the neck. Thus, simple therapeutic abortions have evolved into infanticidethe barbaric killing of children.

It should be noted that Adolf Hitlers Nazis were rightfully accused of committing genocide by killing 6 million Jews during the Holocaust. However, these numbers pale in comparison to the 63 million children aborted in the United States since the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973. That number includes over 19 million black babies aborted. That is real genocide, the underpinning philosophy of which is evil. Eugenics has become infanticide.

The newest effort by the godless camp to meddle with the natural course of humanity is the transhumanism movement, which seeks to accelerate human evolution through advanced technologies. It is a segue from eugenics because it aims to enhance the human species through the addition of advanced biological and physical (mechanical, biomechanical) technologies or, as Britannica puts it, to augment or increase human sensory reception, emotive ability, or cognitive capacity as well as radically improve human health and extend human life spans.

In short, the goal is to create super-humans who will live forever. Just like eugenics, there is no natural selection involved, but rather a selective implementation by and for those willing to pay the cost (and to be experimented upon). And there is no limit to the experimentation and no ethical constraints on applying the technologies.

God versus man. Good versus evil. The eternal struggle.

First came eugenics, then came abortion on demand and infanticide, and now there is the new horizon posed by transhumanism. That is the evolution of an evil kind! None of these have moral, ethical, or religious constraintsall are arbitrary, determined by those holding political power.

The Biden administration has cleared the decks for transhumanism by signing the Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy on Sept. 12. Into the Brave New World we gowith much trepidation!

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Follow

Stu Cvrk retired as a captain after serving 30 years in the U.S. Navy in a variety of active and reserve capacities, with considerable operational experience in the Middle East and the Western Pacific. Through education and experience as an oceanographer and systems analyst, Cvrk is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, where he received a classical liberal education that serves as the key foundation for his political commentary.

Read more here:
The Evolution of Godless Practices: Eugenics, Infanticide, and ...

In the first half, Dr. Stephen G. Post discussed RED (remembered experiences of death), Alzheimer's disease, and acts of love and kindness. He discussed the nature and treatment of Alzheimer's disease, including the positive results that love and kindness toward Alzheimer's patients can bring. Such an approach isn't new in caring for the sick, he maintained, but draws upon ancient wisdom that love heals.

Science has recently begun to embrace the phenomenon of near-death experience, said Post, citing the attention NDEs have been getting in professional literature and at conferences. Emerging evidence suggests that NDEs are often accompanied by RED: remembered experiences of death. Post finds this progress encouraging, he noted, because it lends empirical credibility to what amounts to spiritual wisdom that's been around for much of human history.

**********************

Author and researcher Patricia Cori was the guest in the second half. She warned of the dangers of advanced artificial intelligence, particularly its potential effect on individual freedom and autonomy. In the most dangerous scenario, she explained, the result would be transhumanism: widespread control of the human mind and body by programmable technology. Although she acknowledged that certain limited forms of AI have been beneficial for humanity, in Cori's view we have passed the tipping point between benefit and harm and are now in "runaway mode," heading toward an inevitable singularity where AI overrides human consciousness and natural human evolution. The perpetrators of these efforts include a clandestine alien race intent on destroying us, Big Pharma, governments, Bill Gates, world economic leaders, and the United Nations, she continued. And we don't have much time to act, argued Cori: the goal of those seeking to implement transhumanism is 2030.

Cori offered several examples of the runaway AI on the agenda. The implanting of microchips into human brains is in the works, she claimed, as well as body activity sensors that provide financial incentives. The chipping of our pets is a test run for using the technology as on people as well, which will result in widespread use of microchips being implanted into our own bodies. Pills and injected vaccinations that contain tiny DNA-controlling devices are also on the way, Cori warned.

Despite her fears, Cori expressed optimism that our species will ultimately rebel against this kind of encroachment on our humanity. The key, she asserted, is convincing others that the situation is dire enough to act.

News Segment guests: Howard Bloom / Mish Shedlock

Follow this link:
Ancient Wisdom in Medicine / AI & Transhumanism | Coast to Coast AM