This is very hard for people to wrap their minds around. And some of those versions of you could be directly linked to other uploaded minds, with direct access to each other’s thoughts. And the one in the computer world could in principle be copied any number of times, until there are millions of you. If you copied your mind and uploaded it onto a computer, there’d be two of you, one in the real world and one in the computer world, living through separate experiences. This wonderful bit of fantasy is total nonsense and was invented to solve a narrative problem in story telling. And you have to get yourself back out of the computer to return to the “real” world. One of the strangest quirks of the mind-uploading mythos is the notion that if you upload yourself into a computer, your “real” self in the “real” world disappears. In his envisioned world, individuality is no longer a term that has any meaning: He argues that most peopled in high-tech environments live in a virtual world already so it would make little difference whether those we interact with in our human-made heaven are living persons or the sims of deceased ones. Michael Graziano, “ What happens if your mind lives for ever on the internet?” at The Guardian It’s this kind of idealised afterlife that people have in mind, when they think about the benefits of mind uploading. Families could have Christmas dinner with sim Grandma joining in on video conference, the tablet screen propped up at the end of the table – presuming she has time for her bio family any more, given the rich possibilities in the simulated playground.
#Transhumanism agenda software
What does he think uploading minds to software would feel like?Īt the simplest level, mind uploading would preserve people in an indefinite afterlife.
That point of view-transhumanism-is big in Silicon Valley. We could thus postpone death indefinitely and perhaps achieve immortality. I argue that the existence of Christian cyborgs who know no natural death has no impact on the Christian hope of immortality in the presence of God.Because Graziano (right), the author of Rethinking Consciousness, thinks that consciousness is both randomly evolved and purely physical, he also thinks that humans can develop machinery to model it. I end with a brief case study that analyses the theological implications of the idea of immortal Christian cyborgs. In fact, given certain plausible moral assumptions, Christians should endorse a moderate enhancement of human nature. Once this point is clarified, I argue that Christians can in principle fully endorse the transhumanist agenda because there is nothing in Christian faith that is in contradiction to it. In a forthcoming piece Göcke examines the relationship between compassion generally, and transhumanist enhancements.Ībstract: Should or shouldn’t Christians endorse the transhumanist agenda of changing human nature in ways fitting to one’s needs? To answer this question, we first have to be clear on what precisely the thesis of transhumanism entails that we are going to evaluate. In this paper Professor Göcke discusses the implications of Christian ethics for transhumanism. DLCC Fellow Professor Benedikt Göcke’s research for the DLCC on the ethics of transhumanism has recently been published in leading philosophy of religion journal, Faith and Philosophy.
0 kommentar(er)
