Human Evolution and Becoming Different

[Maharg67]

What do you think we might become in future, if we survive? Could we ascend as some kind of psychic spiritual beings? Could we unify with some kind of secondary mind as 'one as many as one'. Could we become super immortals stressing individuality? Or will we go the cybernetic path becoming cyborgs or such?

 

I have read/seen all of these possibilities with science fiction and scientific speculation, even in general documentary on social and technological trends. I also had a look at these ideas, and others, while I was studying at university. I am still considering matters but I do hope that humanity improves and that we better our situation and our world. Perhaps I am being overly optimistic but that is me.

 

I am also aware that any of the possibilities, that I have selected, could turn out to be a disaster for humanity, for the world.

 

What do you thin?. Please feel welcome to suggest your own possibilities.

[mizdarby]

Based on current medical trends, I voted option 3 Cybernetics as a liable future for mankind. We already use artificial body parts as a matter of course, eg pacemakers prosthetics etc, and with the ever increasing power of computing technology (and i believe nanotechnology) it would not be a huge stretch of the imagination, to envision people having more complex body part replacements, with the inevitable end point of cybernetic technology.

I voted option 4 as my preferred evolutionary traint, the idea of becoming a purely energy based lifeform is quite appealing to me, although I tend to think of such evolutionary traints to be implausible.

[Marxist ßastard]

I also had a look at these ideas, and others, while I was studying at university.

I hope and pray you weren't a biology major.

[dunmermaiden]

I think humans will always be about warring with each other because we do not like or understand or are tolorant of differences in people.

I think humans will become extinct if they do not learn to live in harmony with other creatures that populate this world including insects Humans need to learn that they require rainforests to produce the oxygen they breathe opposed to chopping them down. That they need to make room for the other creatures because without them they will starve and this planet will become as mars if things do not change.

 

Humans need to learn to tamper with genetics yet because in doing so they will wind up seriously damaging themselves and the delicate ecology around them. They need to learn that to live some of them must die - the planet does not expand to fit the population the populations must adjust to fit the planet.

 

They need to understand it is not a human right to overpopulate this world and destroy it. They need to learn to get along with each other and not be greedy for wealth. Over fishing is killing the oceans along with waste being poured into it.

 

Humans need to learn not to throw their poop where they also hunt for food. It is disgusting that humans eat their food from the same water that their severage flows into. - are the only animals that eat from where they poop.

 

They need to learn to overcome the instinct to war with nations different than their own that have different ways that do not fit what they perchieve as being good.

 

They need to learn that they cannot eat their money and once the last fish has been eatten and the last grain of wheat picked and the last cow slaughtered that these creatures are gone forever and that they will die without them.

 

They must also learn that they were never made to be immortal and that prolonging their lives will only cause much suffering and starvation.

 

Alas though they will never see because they do not wish to see that in their so called advanced pc society it will result in the starvation of millions accross the globe if they do not change the way their society works now

 

What do I see as humans future? I see devestation, humans will destroy themselves along with the planet.

 

Are humans mature? No, they are small children that bicker and fight one another and do not realise that instead of fighting eachother they could band together and create a really big sandcastle instead of whacking down eachothers sandcastles.

 

We have a long way to go before we can even begin to think we are great.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Maharg67]

Thanks for the good general feedback.

 

Marxist Bastard, my topic is not based on any particular study I did at uni but no, I was not a biology major though I did study some aspects of biology, ecosystems, environmental impact etc.

 

This topic is more based on concepts I picked up in general scientific speculation and science fiction.

 

I also question just how much we do know about biology. I studied the history of scientific development and its amazing how many times what we know has been basically turned on its head with one, or more, scientific breakthroughs.

 

This is just a friendly debate topic. Please, positive feedback only!

[tredmillion]

There are many routes human could take, and many they should take, but as long as the world remains as it is i cant see any of them happening.

 

future wise, technologically speaking we are nearly cyborgs, implantable electronics are on the horizon, things such as google glass and myriad other augmented reality projects are not far from becoming easily available, this will lead to not just 1 of the possible futures you suggest, but 2, with great technology it will become easier and easier for us to communicate with eachother, where i see this eventually leading is to having implants directly in your brain that would allow you to "telepathically" talk to friends and such like, having an extra awareness of what they are doing, things like timetables and such like being uploaded and shared on a form of cloud computing, this would result in all of us having a certain level of shared consciousness and increased awareness, whilst at the same time being more focused on the technological cyborg side of things.

 

but as humans we are all individuals and all have our own preferences. i fully expect to see fracturing of various groups in the far future, some turning to technology to become more advanced, others turning to genetic modification or even changing themselves to the point of being something unrecognisable as humans becoming post humans if you will.

 

i guess another side to an idea like this is where do you draw the line between biology and technology? if we begin to reprogram our own immune systems or genetically engineer new bacteria to aid our health and wellbeing, even using virus's to shorten telomeres and increase lifespan, as these things would be obviously engineered is it technology or biology? something like a nanobot would be easier to categorise as it would work off robotic principles, but if we start to use more biological materials we would blur the line.

 

end of the day the world needs some serious reform especially in terms of nations and governments, we have the founding technologies and resources to realise our technological dreams within 5-10 years, its just a matter of focusing humanity as an entire species toward a singular goal, as a race we need to focus on furthering ourselves, bettering ourselves and to progress in all things.

[Maharg67]

One problem about predicting the future is unforeseeable scientific developments and other influential events. Back in the mid 19th Century the dominant technology was steam engines. They drove trains, trams, cranes, trucks, tractors, conveyer belts, later steam cars and much else that would surprise many people today. Yet now, in the early 20th Century, steam engines drive trains in some parts of the world and that is it except for some odd examples like steamboats run four tourism. Who, back then, when steam was king would have predicted that the internal combustion engine would become so dominant in world affairs or electrics from telephones to refrigerators and lights. Then there is electronics, radar, sonar, X-rays and rockets including the one that sent humans into space. Not even the most gifted thinkers, of science fiction, predicted the impact of personal computers or mobile phones or the internet.

 

The irony is that fission reactor power stations, driven ships, are actually exotic steam engines so in a way steam power continues to be very important and considered modern.

 

When it comes to people the problems of prediction are more difficult. It is often assumed that people have remained basically the same through out the ages but this idea has become increasingly challenged by historical and other studies. Yes, there were similarities but there were important differences as well. Technologies effect people's behavior as does prosperity and other conditions.

 

Another big problem with prediction is how technological changes effect our outlook on life, our aspirations and our capacities to change our world and ourselves. Who has heard of genetic drift, that genes can go between lifeforms, for example effecting crops growing away from another crop. Genetic drift was only discovered by accident when such non GE crops were investigated growing in a place fairly close to GE crops; in that case it was tomato plants. The discovery has deeply challenged many views on biology, on genetics, on the evolution of life. It has also brought up that certain changes once thought impossible, in evolutionary terms, might just be possible. As our knowledge base expands, old certainties are threatened and new concepts arise. Perhaps one day a unified humanity, or super humans, will arise because biology turns out to be far more intricate and complicated than we now assume it to be.

 

Just a thought to help push the debate so, please, positive feedback only!

 

PS: I studied such matters in university.

Edited November 17, 2012 by Maharg67

[Nintii]

Seeing that I don't follow the theory (and it's still only a theory) of evoltion (though I once did), I don't see the

human race going anywhere in terms of "evolving" into anything.

Though I do believe that technology will play a major role in our "advancement".

Technology will most definitely shape the way we behave, our values, ideologies, belief systems, customs

and cultures ... and if that's evolutionary well then ok, so we will evolve.

 

Honestly though I think that we are going to ultimately become a drug dependant species ... human advancement

is business and someone out there is going to cash in.

If and this is a very big "if", if we are going to move forward then in all likelyhood we could end up with a

Blade Runner type of culture but we'll never reach that far.

I still have a problem with us reaching that level of artificial intelligence.

 

I'm thinking that maybe a Surrogates (Bruce Willis) type of thing is more achievable though.

[Ghogiel]

Seeing that I don't follow the theory (and it's still only a theory) of evoltion

 

Evolution happens. That is a fact. The theory of evolution by natural selection is just an explanation of how that works.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Ghogiel

[Nintii]

@ Ghogiel ... your quote

 

"Evolution happens. That is a fact. The theory of evolution by natural selection is just an explanation of how that works".

 

..............................................................................................................................................................................................

 

 

There are so many gateways to choose from to respond to this, not to mention the time it would take ... but quite frankly

I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so.

 

However, in my kind of brief response, I will say this, firstly, as far as terms of definition are concerned, namely

Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution, I believe in the former but NOT in the latter.

 

Micro-evolution ... I believe in change within a DNA code within a species. For example, hair, skin or eye color etc., that which would help a species to adapt and to survive ... this fits in perfectly with Darwin's idea of "the survival of

the fittest".

I have no problem with this.

 

Macro-evolution ... one reproducing species changing into another reproducing species ... example ... a fish turning

into an amphibian a frog into a bird ... you get the picture. Here is where we part ways.

 

Lastly, you can believe what you want, I'm not interested in trying to change your mind, though I will ask you one

question ... what ever happened to open enquiry ?

You'd think that with all the supposed information that evolutionists have that they would have no problems

defending what they believe.

But they do.

Many, and I really mean many an evolutionist who has put their faith in Naturalism, will, even in the face of blatant

scientific evidence to the contrary, or that which would scientifically challenge what they believe, would rather

scramble to defend their beloved theory to than accept anything to the contrary.

The rule of thumb is this ... if it doesnt fit with what we have already accepted, no matter the evidence, instead of us

accepting it we will either; A ... deny it or B ... ignore it or C ... throw something into the mix and twist it to conform to

what we believe rather than what the evidence in front of us is saying.

 

Ok, enough said, so bash this all you want, I'm cool with that, but I would suggest expanding your reading and

studies, there is nothing wrong with actually looking at the evidence that you would normally oppose from an

enquiring and scientific standpoint.

If you knew me you'd realise one thing, I dont care to much for hype, or believing things just because others do, I

don't follow trends, ideas, philosophies, religions etc., just because that's what my friends, clubs, great grandad

or community believes or follows.

No, I have a very enquiring mind and I like to check things thoroughly for myself, and base my values and belief

systems on that.

 

I hope you don'tmind if I don't respond but the subject is way to vast for a simplistic treatment.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Nintii