Agnostic.com

11 10

If you have an interest in Population issues, in Longevity issues, in Ecology and Climate Change, in fact in the future, this will interest you. Nothing he says is new, but the approach is novel in that a lot of this type of thinking is socially suppressed.
[getpocket.com]

Allamanda 8 July 6
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

11 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

"...we can’t think capitalism is the end of history. We will need rules to constrain the dark sides of our nature. The market is not going to solve our biggest problems."

Indeed! Thank you for this share.

0

Much is socially suppressed. My big problem is that so many see it and yet agree with it in ways that continue this suppression of facts and truth.

0

I have no doubts that genetic engineering will eventually become as popular as plastic surgery, if not more so. I would consider transhumanism as a far more important thing though, because when humans can completely connect up to computers, there is very likely to be a huge paradigm shift . . . . we are talking about switching on an extremely powerful, extremely fast (exponentially faster than the pee-brains we have now) and about as purely logical part (of the future brain) that will revolutionize practically everything, so much so that there will be some extremely serious contention between those who do and those who do not. If humans are to survive, transhumanism absolutely must be embraced . . . . . all it takes is a glance back at all of the ignorant blunders humans have made in the last 8,000 years to see that if we stay on our current path we are doomed.
Additionally, humans, for the last 5000+ years have not been so good a predicting the end results of some of their actions. Everything hinges on what makes humans stronger, more logical, and more able to change that. Humans today are not only horrible at trying to predict the future, but also horrible at acting in a way that anticipates the future and prepares for it. I do not think artificial intelligence is dangerous to man as many people claim it is . . . . . I would choose it over repeating the same old mistakes over and over again, as humans have done for as long as they have existed. If I were some immortal who waged bets with some other immortal, I would wager against humans ultimately surviving. The universe is not teleological, many species have ceased to exist, and humans are well-positioned to follow down that same path.

1

Great article. Thanks for sharing!
I agree with him for the most part. If we can genetically engineer babies so that they have a happier life, we should. What is "happier" though? Is it genetic fitness? Or is it something more esoteric which goes beyond our biological nature? I think it is a good discussion to have, but I am not sure we will ever have a definite answer. Ultimately, these questions are resolved as they always are - the strong impose their will on the weak.

0

I agree with him, we as humans are the big elephant in the room.

0

More discussion about theses issues is needed. And less objections based on "religious morality". We have seen religions object to every scientific advance in this area. Time to have some common sense.

0

Interesting and worthwhile.

2

"Reasoned argument?" According to whose sense of reason? His 'reasoning' simply means better humans which will mean more polarization but no idea of how overpopulation will affect any and all ideas of future life. I was a board member of ZPG but after that crashed because they sold out to industry I joined Negative Population Growth NPG [npg.org] and also Overpopulation Project [overpopulation-project.com]

Thanks for the links. This sparked my interest and I ended up joining a related facebook group, Overpopulation Awareness Group.

@thislife That's a new one for me. I will have to look it up. Thanks.

0

I find myself in agreement with most of his views and I think we need more people like him to counter the hysterical religious right and their imposition of their pseudo morals based on the belief in a creator. Human intelligence and the ability to genetically engineer human and other life forms has long outstripped the biblical notions of an infallible god whose creations cannot be altered ...even when they are defective, and end of life must be endured even when all meaningful quality has been stripped out. We need to have serious debate around these issues and not have them shut down because they are too difficult for people to grapple with.

2

I don't agree with much of what he says. I think he is just trying to be controversial. eg Thomas Hobbes statement is known to be nonsense and to use the phrase "playing god" is a bit silly.
An interesting comment by a senior member of WWF. " Since inception we haven't managed to protect a single animal species. We would have been better spending all the money on condoms"

@Allamanda Where would we discuss them? I feel the environmental group is the best place. When I first joined agnostic.com overpopulation was given as a theme to discuss. However, as you are well aware there are issues many find problematic.

@Allamanda Of course and you do know I will submit comments wherever it is posted.

@Allamanda not entirely convinced we are overpopped anyway tbh

@Allamanda Eugenics is a definite no no. It has connotations of the Nazis and the master race.
Genetic engineering in the UK is limited to a few animals and definitely not in humans.
Population control is definitely required but it should be carried out by social engineering not genetic engineering.
To take all this to an extreme level, wealthy people would engineer more attractive and intelligent children thus creating more inequality in the world.

@bbyrd009 Any species that over rides the local carrying capacity is considered overpopulated. We passed that mark decades ago. Thousands of scientist have testified to that fact.

I will be interested in seeing new some approaches. The biggest impediment to stabilizing the human population comes from the pro-growth industry. I just read this morning the first law of sustainability is that sustainable growth is an oxymoron.

@Allamanda Debate !. What debate ?. Where are your words of wisdom then ?. Savalescu prattles on about "playing god" an archaic term as long disused in science as the term "act of god" is in the courtroom. At least in a civilised country it is πŸ™‚.
Having ultra sound scans and possibly aborting a foetus with serious physical deformities is not eugenics because it is almost certain that if the child lived it would not breed anyway.
Eugenics is abhorrent and would not be entertained in a civilised society
So a later day Dr Frankenstein wants to create perfect humans who would live forever when the average life span in a country like the USA is reducing due to lifestyle choices.
Pie in the sky but he has to justify his large salary and govt grants by pandering to the fantasies of a few super rich individuals. Those still alive anyway and not those who have died and had their bodies cryogenically preserved in the futile hope that medical science will bring them back to life and let them live on ad infinitum

@JackPedigo yet the pop keeps going up?

@bbyrd009 And so do the problems not just for humanity but other non-human species as well. There is a reason this is termed the Anthropocene and it is not based on good things.

0

I said "you are elohim"
πŸ˜€

anyway, havent finished the article yet, but ty

@Allamanda that was Yah, speaking of us i guess basically
but it searches, too πŸ™‚

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:512713
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.