Gender Studies With Dr. Frankenstein
Written by Reed Perry Posted in Uncategorized
“What do you want to be when you grow up?” The schoolteacher of the near future asks her students. “A Man? A Woman? Intersex? What about Otherkin?” Any flesh can be conformed to your will with the right application of psychiatric drugs, hormones, amputations, and transplants. Of course, a body aligned with a malformed spirit would be just as malformed.
“I’m pre-op trans-racial,” said a white, teenage boy with a backwards hat propped on his buzzed head, slouching in saggy jeans as he waits in an affirmative-action office.
After the Human Centipede Act of 2017, all poly-morphic-coprofages had their identity transition surgery covered by Medicaid. So far, dozens of marginalized individuals who identify as Human Centipede have been surgically reassigned. “They” are now “it.”
This is satirical, but satire in a land where “Brangelina” insists their child is not a “she” or a “he” but a “they.” In a spreading mania, a wave of identity panics has rippled across Western society. Everyone is claiming they’re something they’re not. It’s the Great Identity Crisis of the 21st Century. This may be classified as some kind of mass-psychosis, a dangerous hysteria, were it not packaged in an ideology of systematic cultural acquisition.
This is the age of Bradley Chelsea Manning, Bruce Jenner, where Octomom won’t get a paternity test, and Thomas Beatie, a legally recognized “man,” is working on his 4th pregnancy. The stage has been set by postmodern social deconstruction, all things being displaced, all mankind is “pre-op.”
The fundamental limitations of human biology are being redefined with technology, which often means: the elaborate use of a scalpel. This is first-wave transhumanism. It’s gruesome and feeds off instability in the human soul. Little of it would be possible if the ideological pollution of liberalism hadn’t caused progressive political-climate change, and the resultant mass-extinctions of religions and traditions.
It’s a disturbing place, not for the faint of heart, where Dr. Frankenstein performs best. He is an admired liberal postmodernist. Dr. Frankenstein says that dialectical boundaries such as female/male and even dead/alive are just “social constructs.” These are archaic ideas we can approach anew thanks to “breakthrough technologies,” says the Doctor. The major breakthrough being that values have melted to such a waif that, amoral scientists can easily slice through them.
The Doctor is a tailor of human flesh. He gives us choices in identity reassignment, which involves a lot of cutting. It does, of course, come with a cost of chronic infection, liver-wilting doses of drugs, self-hate, and extremely high rates of suicide.
It’s not the kind of transhumanism Google likes to discuss when it makes massive donations to Ray Kurzweil’s Singularity University. Of course, very little of existing transhumanism, or, technologies that fundamentally alter human biology, are a matter of discussion for the vague utopianism of post-human speculators–the faithful of a theoretical event best modeled as atheist eschatology: the rapture.
The post-human event is a mysterious unformed concept roughly based on the teachings of Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who described the zenith of biological and technological complexification as the Omega Seed, a moment of reunion with God. According to him, the Omega would have to be an actual “personal” intellectual being, not a concept or piece of machinery.
Musk, Gates, and Hawking have all warned about the unpredictable dangers of AI. How we must be ready, before it’s too late. They appear to be cautioning about a specific form of post-human threat–self-aware supercomputers or quantum computing.
But how do we know what the post-human will be? Teilhard de Chardin’s assertion that the post-human would be a consciousness certainly doesn’t restrict us to computer systems. The post-human may assume any vessel, whether it be via surgical modification, virtual reality, computer models of the brain, or VR simulation. I’d suspect some combination of these fields will take shape, which means Dr. Frankenstein will likely remain gainfully employed.
With the transhuman project underway with radical alterations to human anatomy, how is the permissive society prepared to handle such a quandary, or as Musk calls it the demon? Moralizing hasn’t worked very well on first-wave transhumanism.
As Dr. Frankenstein stitches together new genders or creative solutions for the disabled, he has done so in the name of egalitarian “progress.” All these natural limitations on human behavior and biology could be snipped up and stitched to fit progressivism. Women can be “in charge” of their sexual organs with fetal abortions, IVF, and hormonal drug implants. The clinical setting legitimized grave acts of immorality, in the same way lethal injection establishes medical theatre around good ol-fashioned executions. Body dysmorphic disorders could be legitimized with extensive surgeries redesigning genitals accompanying a pharmacopeia of treatments. Frankenstein’s politico-clinical experiments were largely forced on the public, only deemed acceptable after decades of accelerating cultural slash and burn–the extermination of an entire living system of mores.
Yet in the journey to render the biology these zealots found so oppressive, Frankenstein science finds itself looming over egalitarian ideology with the technical means to obliterate it. I’m not referring to genetic mapping, which was largely pioneered by pharmaceutical corporations and Frankenfood brands, yet holds enormous promise for HBD. I’m not referring to human physical enhancement with implants, which provide obvious “inequalities” to those who can afford them. Nor am I referring to the engineered super-man that may emerge as the physical manifestation of singularity.
I refer to the radical operation Dr. Frankenstein is conducting on the human soul. In the absence of God, progressives have no resource with which to oppose this new potential hierarchy.
To rebuild someone’s body to conform to their identity or spirit, or to resurrect the dead, perhaps suspending consciousness indefinitely in an intelligent virtual-reality simulacra (artificial heaven?), or to genetically engineer a super-man into existence–when are we not talking about theology?
Never, because God lost, remember? The churches are emptying. He’s dead. I resentfully admit Christianity is the enterprise of mega-mall televangelists and a few scattered hermit-denominations of true believers. We don’t have time to browse the clearance shelves at Catholicism, Inc. But trans-humanism wants to play God. It’s like a step-father for the human-race, but it doesn’t really want to have anything to do with the human-race and all that moral baggage. It wants to transcend it, step right over it.
Whatever amalgam of artificial flesh, human parts, and simulacra it incorporates, we know it will be non-human. But it will be derived from the human interpretation of consciousness, which is flawed. I know many intelligent people who act irrationally. Considering how poorly humans get along, and how I’d still rather be on the human end of the food-chain than where any animal exists, it seems obvious that this is not something anyone would want around. It becomes a matter of simply how badly you don’t want it around.
Paradoxically, post-human advocates often claim to seek a cure for death, yet the post-human event is the kind of happening that most people do not want, but still view as inevitable, similar to death itself.
Nihilist pop-philosopher Eugene Thacker brings deconstructionism into its inoperable death-spiral, a black-hole in which any expression of human judgment be condemned as an unreliable alien aberration, thought processes themselves an inexplicable dimension of life as irrational horror.
“Scientists estimate that approximately ninety percent of the cells in the human body belong to non-human organisms (bacteria, fungi, and a whole bestiary of other organisms). Why shouldn’t this also be the case for human thought as well?” from: In The Dust of This Planet.
Thacker’s mission is to add volume to the idea that thought is not human. We’re just biochemical pollywogs. Exotic phenomena. We were invasive toads devouring their own spawn when some violent fractal process took us into its discriminate pattern, and, after several trillion cold-blooded murders, evolved us into Kindle readers who buy Thacker’s book.
I want to embrace his line of thinking as far as it includes humans in a World subject to the laws of nature, which liberals refuse to do with HBD or human sexuality, but I have to reject it because it so distantly exiles mankind from his own consciousness.
The structural binary Thacker terminates is the dualism of man/nature. To him, not only is man not the ruler of nature, he’s not even in charge of himself. Man’s thoughts are just a “bestiary of other organisms”–an interesting way of describing a product of evolution.
Without entering an impossible discourse on free will and causation, lets isolate the idea of mankind as a “bestiary of other organisms.” This is very pagan, even animistic. Even though the author is a known atheist, he comes with a catalogue of knowledge in Christianity and the occult. This dehumanizing term about the creatures within men feels like the content of an admonishing sermon. But Thacker’s intention is to dispense with morality.
Thacker wishes to dissolve the duality of man/nature. But in his cosmology we already live in a world without humans. It’s a world where men are just a “bestiary of other organisms” deposited in this nominally “human” tissue. This is Thacker’s post-human World.
Although Thacker’s ideas rest deeply in postmodernism and pop-culture he too appears to adhere to the Nietzschean view that humans are simply the link between the primordial animal-man that came before civilization, and whatever unimaginable post-human will rise from its ruins.
This thing is amassing steadily. The approach of the post-human is not merely found in news about the frequent revelations of research departments, its momentum is pulsing via the structural reorganization of society, the obsolescence of aspects of our humanity, and then the planned obsolescence of humanity itself. It’s like we’re training the new-hires who will replace us at work, but in this case, the replacements aren’t human.
The office-park is dead. Forget about the high-tech careers. Automation and computerized robotics are replacing the fast-food workers, the sweat-shops, the telemarketers, the graphic designers, the accountants, engineers, etc, etc. Millions of careers will be eliminated by robotics and software. Some major corporations may even become automated on an executive level, as is already underway with a growing suite of management-level jobs.
We can expect a parallel parade of little horrors to shuffle from the fields of genetic engineering and body modification. Freaks of nature will be unleashed. DNA patent specialists will be busy.
I’m not making a Luddite argument here. We need to be straightforward about all the social impacts of applied tech, especially as a causeway between postmodernism and transhumanism.
Contrary to many survivalists’ vision of the collapse of liberal societies as a top-down techno-social breakdown, social atomization arises from the increasing sovereignty of high technology, and contributes to the feedback loop of antisocial cultural degeneration, causing more dependence on superficial technology, thus alienation.
Automation and computerized robotics are an essential part of the post-human progression, but communications may be a more significant dimension in the up-and-coming Internet of things. Direct person-to-person contact, perhaps the most human need aside from air, becomes less and less common as we’re insulated in digital cocoons, assimilated.
Corporate ethicists are writing the eulogy for human participation in all aspects of life.
If one child is engineered for superior intelligence, along with genes designed to eliminate the possibility of an entire horde of inheritable diseases and cancers, how can we possibly claim this “human” is “equal” to all others? Biotech is post-human and post-egalitarian, in the Blade-Runner sense and the Superman sense.
Anticipating the singularity, the “neo-sapien,” or the post-human world is the ultimate in planned obsolescence. Thus far, the pattern toward this future has yielded a few blessings sprinkled over a freak-show of KFC lab-chickens, genital-mutilating trannies, enslaving cubicle-farms, and vivisection factories run by pharmaceutical corporations. I legitimately feel sorrow for all of them.
Forgotten is the fact that nearly every alteration of our bond with nature results in an alteration of morality. In the case of the transgendered, altering their physical being brought on the final collapse of sexual norms along with a slew of other ancient standards. As with the pill, the consensus was, if science would allow it, then it was right. But the consensus is consistently wrong.
Kurzweil, and most others discussing the singularity don’t want to discuss Dr. Frankenstein’s trans-humanism, the trans-humanism we are actually observing unfold. They want the clean high-tech Jetsons version of eternal life, with uploaded skills or smooth non-invasive gizmos, harmoniously merged intelligences. Again, its still unclear what the post-human even means at this point. Kurzweil’s bent is toward an absurdly optimistic expectation of applied tech.
“By the 2020s, most diseases will go away as nanobots become smarter than current medical technology. Normal human eating can be replaced by nanosystems.” – Grandiose statement from Kurzweil’s website.
What’s to say that indefinitely extending human life in Kurzweil’s vision of a biomechanical perpetual-motion machine, wouldn’t also manifest the same suicidal abnormalities exhibited in the extreme body dysmorphic-disorders of Frankenstein science? Perhaps the aging/dying process is embedded in the arch of the human soul. Sure, we can prevent a middle-aged individual from dying due to a curable disease, but adding decades onto the end of life could result in hollow shells only technically living. Many elderly people I’ve known are spacey, jaded, not just due to wear on their bodies, but the trials of life, the good times and the bad times. Experience can become deeply alienating, memories more dream-distant with every added year.
A dimension of this is the relativity of time. To a 4-year old, planning a few days ahead seems like forever, because a year is 1/4th of its life. To a 150 year-old, days may pass like minutes, all due to the subjectivity of their lived experience.
Of course, we should examine the desire to evolve via Kurzweilian immortality by asking: what does it solve? Death is a primal fear we are no longer trained to control and confront. Everything we learn in life advances on a course of maturation, the terminus of which is death. The final lesson is in the mystery of death, when a person exits this reality. Whatever your opinion about what occurs after that point is irrelevant–we all die.
Perhaps the only truth of egalitarianism exists at the barrier between life and death. To violate the boundary of death with “indefinite extension of life” is to nullify the only indisputably universal aspect of the human life experience–that our common fate remains the same. I’m ignoring basic body functions like breathing and shitting because mortality is the defining unit of the existence of life.
“Six feet of Earth make all men equal.”
The post-human is an attempt to be God. Anyone familiar with the Bible or European mythology can tell us what our ancestors learned about men who tamper with sacred forces of nature.
Just as the Amish decided to freeze their society at a late 19th-century technological level, many in neoreaction seem to prefer a forced withdrawal from technological liberalism to a more restricted code of lifestyle technologies. Such a code need not be as broad as the Amish, but meant to guide a more gradual pace of social and eugenic development as opposed to the radically liberal tech of the post-human project. But like the Amish, such a scheme seems hopelessly romantic, equal to imprisoning oneself in a virtual-reality fantasy as post-humanity consumes civilization.
One of the innumerable alternatives to this scenario is the supercomputing dictatorship, in which the human race gradually resigns as masters of their own destiny, surrendering to some form of technocratic governance software that will do with us as programmed. Regardless of the jokes and immense hypothetical discussions around this topic, there is a steady policy drift in its direction, as politicians increasingly speak of “global governance” as a neutral term stripped of identities or agendas, reliant only on protocols. Police departments utilize predictive statistical software. Global financial markets are also entering increased computer automation. Extending this further, you have a civilization placed on auto-pilot, or a super-dictator engineered by the people it rules. This is the kind of civilization-scale automation featured in the film Dr. Strangelove.
The post-human era is poised to obliterate both the progressive lie of egalitarianism awhile vindicating the moral and logical critique of the neoreactionary. It’s a bitter validation.
Now we have Dr. Frankenstein at work, but who is next, Dr. Moreau? We could play trans until the planet looks like a Hieronymous Bosch painting. Dr. Frankenstein can just play jazz with his scalpels and stem-cells, resurrecting or transmogrifying every oddity of life to reach that point of infinite novelty.
Living in the midst of first-wave transhumanism, I can hardly wait to see what the next groundswells will bring. But if this event, the final post-human event, is their Second Coming, the reunion with God, then when it arrives will it flow from an all-knowing cosmic light of eternal love? Or will it lumber in, an undead quilt of scavenged human skin, a hermaphroditic, cybernetic chimera of misplaced power?
This amoral deathless dream is subject for the new theologian, because the surgery on the human race is well underway, and I fear “the demon” Musk warns us not to summon may resemble something less like the Christ, and more like His opposite, if current events are at all instructional.
Interesting. I’d never heard of either Kurzweil or Thacker. Kurzweil is a futurist of the old school. Reminds me of Buckminster Fuller.
While looking up Thacker online I came across this at Parsons School of Art, “DISRUPTING PRIVILEGE THROUGH AUGMENTED REALITY”, a lecture by an academic artsy type I’m all too familiar with. These people come out of Dada, a movement started in Zurich during WWI. They hung out at Cabaret Voltaire, a music hall operated by the German Hugo Ball, near the cafe frequented by Lenin. Jean Arp wrote that his aim was “to destroy the rationalist swindle for man and incorporate him again humbly in nature.” If you want to read original sources you can find them in Herschel Chipp’s, Theories of Modern Art. Dada was rebranded in the 50s as Fluxus.
75% of modern progressivism, or as they like to call it, post-modernism, is Dada. The rest is identity group agit-prop. Sometimes you get a twofer as with the previously cited lecture-scolding. They believe in nothing besides their own careers. They certainly have never wanted equality.
Lenin was suspicious and never commissioned a Dadaist. Communism eventually settled on Social Realism. Surrealism grew out of Dada. Surrealists were communists who couldn’t quite make up their minds concerning their commitment to direct action. Nowadays it’s all race and sex, class warfare being passé.
Thacker and his associates are cranking up the rhetorical symbolism using techno jargon to signify status. They are an elite priestly core revolving around emptiness and irony.
Cheers.
Common Filth has said that we live in the era of human experimentation. Everything from embryos with three parents to seeing how homosexual couples do at raising children is a form of human experimentation, with our children as the subjects. How many Frankenstein’s monsters will we create? If the early results from or experiments with single motherhood are any indication, a lot of them.
That we might get Frankenstein — or Satan — instead of the Superman and Christ, is troubling.
Incredible article.
It seems that this post was a day premature. When I got up, I read that the UK has cleared the way for “three parent children.” It seems the post-human is much, much closer than I thought. The ramifications of this are tremendous. It is shocking to me how this is happening without any public discussion whatsoever. Our religious leaders seem utterly indifferent.
They claim this will be done to “prevent inheritable diseases” however, the implications of it are vast. The first question is whether or not we can even consider the products of this experiment to be human. It will undoubtedly be used to enhance people in an attempt to create the “perfect” human. All people have imperfections. That is the human condition as determined by God.
It is highly likely that a genetically engineered post-human chimera designed with experimental super-intelligence or resistance to most known diseases will be created within the next few years. It happened without anyone even noticing. I would like to know what Musk thinks about this. As I wrote, a genetically engineered intelligence also qualifies as an “AI.”
It is at times like this, reading things like that coming out of the UK, that I come to two conclusions that have such an impact on me, I feel an almost physical anger.
1) I am incapable of empathizing with these people. The adherents of Modernity have gone to depths not plumbed by the Canaanites. As well as suffering from what can only be diagnosed as a morally nullifying psychosis, the ‘atheist class’ that is talked about in the prediction of the Kali Yuga are just spiritually evil. There isn’t another way to describe it, something has blackened their souls and the fact that it is so widespread and dramatic indicates a metaphysical nature to me, and that is very scary. When I see the headlines ‘leftist magazine shot up by Islamic radicals’, I just cannot muster the same emotions as in the past. I have more empathy for the one Jordanian pilot burned alive than all the satirists of Charlie Hebdo combined. The West really is just that evil. I want to see Modern Western Civilization wiped from the earth.
2) I re-double my commitment. Three-parent babies?! Whenever any Reactionary feels like not bothering with this, just look at what our enemy is doing. These are people worth fighting and worth removing from human existence. The suffering they have perpetrated is incalculable and their crimes against nature and nature’s God are beyond a moral event horizon.
And you are just in pointing out the total deafening silence of religious leaders. I don’t expect anything from the corrupt state-run Anglican church. That’s a joke. But you would have thought the Pope would say something meaningful. Western Europe is ostensibly his neck of the religious woods. Every time the silence is deafening, I feel we need a totally new crop of religious leaders. The current ones aren’t even approaching adequate.
Wotan, you’re ignorant. If duels were legal I’d feel a very strong urge to invite you to a morning duel and then fill you with lead – best cure for stupid there is. So bear with me and I’ll explain why Pope is not blowing his top over this:
The three-parent babies have so far invariably been done to enable people with defective mitochondria have healthy babies. Husband, wife want to have a kid but there’s risk that it’d have faulty mitochondria and thus various problematic conditions, which is where the third parent comes in and provides working mitochondria.
There’s no other reason for three-parent babies, because IIRC there is no other complete DNA in the cell apart from nuclear and mitochondrial.
And what exactly is even wrong with tinkering with human DNA? If humanity is ever to achieve something, people have to be improved as generally they’re incredibly stupid, forgetful and timid. Not to mention ugly. In case you haven’t noticed, humanity is completely hobbled by the Peter Principle as applied to technological civilization.
The only alternative is breeding but that’s something that is even less politically tenable and more repulsive to everyone than genetic engineering. I’m pretty sure that even mild policies such as requiring every child after the third one to be ‘fathered’ by someone with extremely good genes are impossible.
Not to mention it’d take millenia to achieve anything that way.
Meanwhile genetic engineering could produce in a couple of centuries a society in which John von Neumann would not feel out of place. We can’t even imagine what a people like that could achieve.
Sounds dangerously like liberal utopianism. Let us try to ‘improve’ man!
“If humanity is ever to achieve something”
What are you trying to ‘achieve’? Man is fine for earthly existence as he is, were he uncorrupted by anti-Traditional forces and governments. It is precisely this idea that man has a ‘problem’ that humanity must solve that has birthed Modernity and the endless revolutions to throw off every perceived limitation. Man must be chained by authority, even if it be the authority of his own flesh. Trying to break these shackles in a test tube is no different from the ‘Enlightenment’ bullcrap that dissolved Traditional government. If Robespierre puts on a lab coat, he is still Robespierre.
Aberrations from the ordained order, ‘intersex’ or otherwise are to be treated as disordered. Allowing such things to become mainstream is corrosive. Everything in its place, the Traditional order is a divine machine.
Me, personally, not much, but there’s a lot of people who’d like for humanity to achieve stuff like, I dunno, indefinite lifespan and consequent possibility of galactic exploration and colonization, fully automated manufacturing, much greater access to energy and so on. All of which require smarter people, and as nature has not seen it fit to provision us with enough smart people, well, why, we’ll just have to make sure there’s more.
Basically what we humans have been doing on Earth except on a bigger scale. And that requires some changes, at the very least much longer lifespans, no cancer and less stupid.
Of course, best to hedge one’s bets and that’s where luddites like you come in.
You’re one of those types who during mankind’s early sojourns on the savannah argued with great fervor that we should’ve stayed in the trees.
Basically, I think you’re wrong. You’re arguing for societal and technological stasis. Which, in the context of life is a death sentence. Unless you’re going up you’re going down, and staying in place is going down as it just ensures something’s gonna get you.
Revolutions and all that crap are mistakes, sure, but as a Manhattan project scientist observed : if you’re not making mistakes you are not doing your work.
Also: mankind has a problem and that problem is Peter principle. Each higher stage of social organisation and technological development is more demanding on the base population. As societies and technology become more complex people who evolve way slower become less and less suited for these new developments.
And that’s why it’s all so shitty now, and why it’d be a good idea to use genetic engineering to raise the average intelligence up way up.
(Yawn)
Why care? Trans-whatever are something like 1/10000 of a population. There’s some intersex people, but again, statistical noise. Everyone else either is firmly secure in their gender identity or doesn’t give a shit about it.
Even if you keep kids in gender confusion they figure the shit out instinctively in almost all cases. David Reimer, John Money, rings a bell?
There are of course people with BDD and such, you can see the shit they get up to on the internets. Splitting their cocks lengthwise, because…? Reasons, I guess.
But unless you posit some kind of this BM crap spreading as fashion, it’s unlikely to be a major future problem. It’s way more demanding and expensive than mere clothes. Hipsters on food stamps are unlikely to be able to afford aesthetic bio-mods.
______________
Umm..what?
You are aware that a post-operative MTF transsexual may be only distinguishable from a women with AIS through the means of a lab-test or very close examination for surgical scarring? Men have been fucking women with XY chromosomes since, well, the time the androgen-insensitivity genes appeared.
Nature by itself furnishes us with as many or more ‘women’ with XY chromosomes as the entire LGBT movement.
Unsurprisingly, these natural XY women are prettier than the artificial ones and outwardly indistinguishable from XX women except that of course they can’t menstruate or get pregnant. They look and behave like women, though 2x likely to be lesbians.
Also…
People have been mutilating themselves for various reasons since time immemorial. My favorite self-mutilators though are the Skoptsy, the Russian sect which believed that sexual lust was so bad it warranted castrating men and cutting off women’s breasts and clitorises and only people thus changed could truly aspire to holiness. And they did all that crap without anesthesia or painkillers. Now that’s dedication to one’s religious beliefs!
_____________
Transhumanism, as preached by Kurzweil is a crock of shit, and everyone with half a brain knows it.
So, I’m not quite sure what is it exactly you are worried about? Artificial intelligent organisms? Too damned complicated to engineer. Man-animal hybrids? Ditto, and what use would they be? Gov’t owned cyborgs? What use would they be – gov’t already has SWAT teams, and IMO, massive gov’t surveillance supercomputers that know you better than your mother are way scarier than a division of Robocops or J.C.Dentons.
There is stuff to be worried about, say, someone engineering a virus which would say, remove the capacity for guilt from the infected. Or turn people obedient, whatever.
And generally everything is scary about psychoactive viruses, especially if they were virulent and not big, vulnerable viruses like HIV.
Such things are no doubt going to be amenable to tweaks. Besides, what does it matter how far time passes if the same amount of stuff gets done in the meantime?
Who’d pay for it?
Any civilization self-absorbed enough to indulge in that kind of pointless art projects would be outcompeted by one which would use transhumanism smartly – to make people more powerful by making them faster, smarter, connected, whatever.
This bullshit is pretty much a Western thing. What enables it is the silly fetish for such crocks of shit as individuality and self-expression… etc. No one’s that special.
“The West really is just that evil. I want to see Modern Western Civilization wiped from the earth.”
Taking Alinsky tactics to a whole another level, eh, “Mark”. Label a group other than yourself as evil, justify their existence is immoral and unholy, and proceed with plans to eliminate that group. Basically, you are attempting to replace one ruling class with another ruling class.
So, Mark, would you therefore consider therefore yourself a member of this aristocracy, the neo-elitists, that you proudly champion? Again, inform this fine audience why ought people willingly give up their liberties to this particular group (again, who exactly are these leaders again? You know, their names and attributes)? How do YOU know what is best for ME and US?
(Yawn)
“Why care?” – That’s an interesting question. Right now I’m going to apply it to your comment, which was really damn long for someone who “doesn’t care.” A little piece of Internet – communication advice… people will take you much more seriously if the first thing you write to them doesn’t involve something about wanting to “fill them with lead.” A bit discrediting. I can tell you are someone who commented here bringing a lot of baggage.
I’m going to assume you are either gay/tranny or you did a “gender studies” class during your liberal arts degree and now believe all these little acronyms or made-up factoids (obvious tranny-babble) up make you an authority.
Well, we don’t care. You probably aren’t even capable of “getting it” because your mind/body/soul are most likely badly disfigured. I hope you find peace from what torments you. My prayers.
Gay or tranny? (rofl)
No. I just have a compulsive habit of reading weird shit, which is how I know about stuff like AIS or the Reimer case. I mean, it’s just perverse right, reading about how an effort to prove that gender is socially constructed backfired and left a prominent scientist with a huge egg on his face. And a corpse. I’m surprised you never heard of it.
What made-up factoids?
Look it up, don’t be lazy. XY women, exist. If there’s a Creator, he’s a dick, as all of them have nervous systems which are pretty much female and thus are often devastated when told they won’t be able to have children. Same for the Skoptsy.
You don’t even get that I’m basically on your side. Truly, one can only despair.
Oh, you misunderstood me. Firstly, I’d have liked to invite that Citadel guy to a duel. Was not that irked with you.
And yeah, by ‘why care’ I meant not that I don’t care (well, I don’t, as the stuff you’re worried about is mostly BS) but that I was expressing an opinion that you, Reed Perry, are worried about all the wrong things. Except for the gov’t by protocol and supercomputing dictatorship of course. The other scenarios you are worried about presuppose the existence of unlimited resources and political will to do or allow stuff that is just too icky for the average person to contemplate for reasons of basic human biology. So, not gonna happen unless some utter psycho somehow becomes permanent planetary overlord. That’s likely, no?
Also, yeah, you’re pretty much wrong. Posthumanism isn’t an attempt to ‘make a god’. That’s impossible because ‘God’ is an incoherent and self-contradictory concept. Furthermore, the powers traditionally ascribed to God are (mostly) a physical impossibility, and thus cannot be achieved.
It’s merely an attempt to obtain more capabilites for mankind. Same as starting to use iron, or taming the horse or instituting laws, or developing the steam engine. All of these were violations of the natural order of things.
Sure, trannies and BM freaks and whatever are disgusting*, but there’s a very easy solution for that: don’t watch news and don’t consume media. Both very healthy choices. I wish I was strong enough never to read another news headline in my life.
But really, it’s like a non-problem to me. There’s much bigger problems, like what the fuck are we going to do with the 1.5 billion Africans in 2090 or so?
*though, to me, trannies, unless they’re hateful like say, that Wu creature, ones just seem sad, most often. Maybe the ones that end up looking passably good can have decent lives, but the others, it seems to they made a huge mistake. So, yeah, they make me sad, mostly.
The BM freaks though. Those are really something. Fucking your own body into something unnatural for weird reasons is just .. perverse.
I’m a bit confused. Can’t comment on all this, but I would like to clarify that I do not think the posthuman future is necessarily driven by people who want to “create a god.” Some of them want to be a god and live “indefinitely” or take on transhuman abilities. However, as I wrote, the majority of the posthuman project is simply the alienation of civilization from any moral axis (specifically in regards to technology) and the gradual obsolescence of much of the human race and human activities such as building families, enforcing sexual standards, raising children, etc. Those things are as human as breathing in my opinion. Some abnormality you find with a chromosomal disorder has nothing to do with that.
I don’t think it’s the majority.
Sure, there are people who may think that is a good idea, however, there are many who don’t.
Furthermore, the fundamental nature of intelligent life requires family, or family-like structures, so getting rid of it would be stupid, as it has worked fine so far.
There might be other alternatives that can work, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with trying those out. Nothing wrong with experimentation.
The majority of people enamored with transhumanism are just window-licking wankers who are of no real use to it. Personally, I don’t expect much out of it for precisely the same reason, and because people are by nature overly-optimistic, and anyone unfamiliar with technology is bound to underestimate the complexity of it.
Whatever actually happens will be up to the financial backers of the various research projects, and to the engineers and scientists involved.
Okay, first of all challenging someone to a ‘duel’ on the internet indicates the intelligence level of a thirteen year old who thinks life is some kind of video game.
“That’s impossible because ‘God’ is an incoherent and self-contradictory concept. Furthermore, the powers traditionally ascribed to God are (mostly) a physical impossibility, and thus cannot be achieved.”
*sigh* Similar idiocy was being spouted on Radish recently. Unfortunately, the Reddit-level internet infidel community sometimes swarms over to the Reactionary right and typically ends up trolling with some oft-quoting of Richard Dawkins and other such clownish snakeoil salesmen.
Look, you are anti-Traditional. Your utopian liberal fantasies of genetically altered supermen who colonize the galaxy reads like a bad science fiction novel, and its cute and all, but they are no different from the usual liberal fantasies of equality and universal suffrage and ending poverty and all of the nations of the earth coming together to hold hands and be one global collective.
“the posthuman project is simply the alienation of civilization from any moral axis (specifically in regards to technology) and the gradual obsolescence of much of the human race and human activities such as building families, enforcing sexual standards, raising children, etc. Those things are as human as breathing in my opinion.”
Precisely. And abolishing humanity has been the liberal end-game from day one, whatever guise you wrap it up in. You have no moral axis and so you are lost in space, rambling through the utopian mindset. I’m sorry to break it to you, but you are going to die one day. No scientist is going to save you from that. Best to start living in the real world before you wake up to find your entire life was wasted dreaming of a human-built paradise. The Reactionary does not dream of paradise. He doesn’t seek to make everyone happy. He seeks that which is stable, sure, just, and in accordance with nature and nature’s God. And it doesn’t matter if your dreams get smashed along the way
Now, I’m sure you’d love to ‘fill me with lead’ or make another reference to Wotan (… seriously… Wotan?). But much like other commenters of such infantile demeanor, you’re just not in the right place. There is a place for your commentary perhaps on the official Star Trek forum, but this is Reactionary politics and philosophy. Wise up.
I love the exchange. Keep civil, boys. I don’t want to take out the hammer of Wotan.
No problem at all, Hadley. I don’t have anything more to say to this traveler.
Heh.
No, I don’t believe the world is a videogame. It’s a game though.
Even Christians see it as a game. Do the correct things and you get eternal life, do the wrong things and you get eternal torture.
Did I say it was utopian? No.
Though you must have some kind of cognitive deficit. If you really believe your kind of people, that is, standard h.sapiens is going to have any say in a world where everyone else is about twice as smart.
You probably don’t know that the Chinese are sequencing genomes of various mathematically gifted individuals right now. It’s very much possible that in forty years time the science and engineering is going to be mature enough so that first seriously genetically modified children are born.
This is all possible and it is going to happen, because whoever pioneers it is going to enjoy great advantages.
And you can’t do a thing about it.
Just because I don’t subscribe to your particular kind of biblical morality does not mean I don’t have any moral standards.
But I don’t expect you to understand, nor am I going to waste our time explaining.
Just curious, but aren’t you worried that these super-smart people won’t think of even more evil things to do than us dumber ones?
“Your utopian liberal fantasies of genetically altered supermen who colonize the galaxy reads like a bad science fiction novel, and its cute and all, but they are no different from the usual liberal fantasies of equality and universal suffrage and ending poverty and all of the nations of the earth coming together to hold hands and be one global collective.”
As opposed to your desire to have kings and nobles usurp power and control the masses for their own ends? How is YOUR fantasy any different, Mark?
Straightforward questions—Are YOU yourself a member of this aristocracy, the neo-elitists, that you proudly champion? Why ought people willingly give up their liberties to this particular group (again, who exactly are these leaders again? You know, their names and attributes)? How do YOU know what is best for ME and US?
“He seeks that which is stable, sure, just, and in accordance with nature and nature’s God.”
Patently false. You are no different than any other huckster who claims their political ideology will “save the world from extinction”.
“And it doesn’t matter if your dreams get smashed along the way”
Exactly why the liberty of the human race is directly threatened by this abomination known as the “Dark Enlightenment”.
Recent Posts
Facebook
Post-Anathema
08/30/15
Friends
The Future Primaeval
Henry Dampier
Mitrailleuse
A House With No Child
Sydney Trads
Recent Comments
Archives