Is more technology the answer?

Now who's preaching.

I'm getting sick of your, "I'm sick of your ideologies", Oliver.

You never addressed increasing complexity in distribution of resources, that I said was apart of our inability to keep up ourselves (which is why we'd need to change). That's at least one of the reasons we'd change. I said our perspectives would change as we wise up. Transhumans wouldn't see things the way normal humans would. As I said we wouldn't be human, but also we'd be changing all the time. Chauvinism, violence, all completely useless, and thus eradicated as the source of those things is self-righteousness in a way. We'd be more capable, but less cocky.

so no comment on the unequal distribution of new technology?

Originally posted by Dolos
Now who's preaching.

I'm getting sick of your, "I'm sick of your ideologies", Oliver.

You never addressed increasing complexity in distribution of resources, that I said was apart of our inability to keep up ourselves (which is why we'd need to change). That's at least one of the reasons we'd change. I said our perspectives would change as we wise up. Transhumans wouldn't see things the way normal humans would. As I said we wouldn't be human, but also we'd be changing all the time. Chauvinism, violence, all completely useless, and thus eradicated as the source of those things is self-righteousness in a way. We'd be more capable, but less cocky.

Okay, so, my understanding of your position is that it's essentially:

"(1) We're stuck in a ditch, we're too dumb and clumsy to get out. We need to become transhuman. (3) We're transhuman. Huzzah!"

And no, I didn't forget the (2), you did.

Transhumans = Vulcans. I think this is what Dolos is saying.

Not human anymore. Check

See things differently than humans. Check

Above petty emotions and ideals. Check

/proved

Is the notion of something better than a human, behaving and accomplishing more than a human can, a hard case to make?

Am I in the wrong here?

Our civilization is becoming exceedingly perplex, and all we're doing is multiplying, it's not that we're dumb and stupid or whatever. Or maybe we are if you look at it from a certain point of view. 😛

Originally posted by Dolos
Is the notion of something that's better than human being better than human, a hard case to make?

Am I in the wrong here?

Is better subjective? Some people think it would be better if humans lived like stone age tribes, simpler lives free of mass marketing, global politics, processed foods and the Gundam Style (or whatever the current 15 min wonder is).

Me, hunter.

Oliver, spiritual leader

Omega, inventor

You, berry picker

It'd be great.

Originally posted by Robtard
Is better subjective? Some people think it would be better if humans lived like stone age tribes, simpler lives free of mass marketing, global politics, processed foods and the Gundam Style (or whatever the current 15 min wonder is).

Me, hunter.

Oliver, spiritual leader

Omega, inventor

You, berry picker

It'd be great.

Originally posted by Robtard
Is better subjective? Some people think it would be better if humans lived like stone age tribes, simpler lives free of mass marketing, global politics, processed foods and the Gundam Style (or whatever the current 15 min wonder is).

Me, hunter.

Oliver, spiritual leader

Omega, inventor

You, berry picker

It'd be great.

😂

I guess that's the thing, isn't it?

The berry picker has more incentive for change, more drive for the radical future than the others. It's dangerous waters, but what does a berry picker have to lose? It's kinda like that verse in Mathew about the meek.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Can I be the tribe drunk who gets wasted on fermented berries?

Are you Irish?

Originally posted by Dolos
😂

I guess that's the thing, isn't it?

The berry picker has more incentive for change, more drive for the radical future than the others. It's dangerous waters, but what does a berry picker have to lose? It's kinda like that verse in Mathew about the meek.

Don't be so dismissive of your role. The tribe needs berries, as it can't live off meat alone. They provide fiber, antioxidants and vitamins. You have an important role and it's not any less important than the others tribal roles.

Look at it this way, how would I go out hunting for meat and hides, how would Oliver spiritually lead us on the right path and how would Omega invent new useful technologies like an entendo-stick which allows you to pick those hard to reach berries if we're vitamin deficient and all backed up from a diet of just meat?

Originally posted by Robtard
Don't be so dismissive of your role. The tribe needs berries, as it can't live off meat alone. They provide fiber, antioxidants and vitamins. You have an important role and it's not any less important than the others tribal roles.

Look at it this way, how would I go out hunting for meat and hides, how would Oliver spiritually lead us on the right path and how would Omega invent new useful technologies like an entendo-stick which allows you to pick those hard to reach berries if we're vitamin deficient and all backed up from a diet of just meat?

You forgot we're not in that situation anymore. The situation we face is very different, my berry picker example merely insinuates a menial member of a society of a species that is in no threat of dying out, a species that is overpopulating.

This is our reality now, we're no longer in that situation. You don't decide what time you get, you decide what to do with the time that is given to you.

@Rob: I kind of see my role and ON's role switched, but good list. uhuh

Originally posted by Dolos
Is the notion of something better than a human, behaving and accomplishing more than a human can, a hard case to make?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
@Rob: I kind of see my role and ON's role switched, but good list. uhuh

For this sentence to make sense, you'd need to add something between 'can,' and 'a hard case to make'

Yes, but then it would be a run on sentence would it not?

That sentence is pretty much ****ed.

Originally posted by Dolos
Yes, but then it would be a run on sentence would it not?

That sentence is pretty much ****ed.

Run-on sentences often equals brilliance ala James Joyce and stream of consciousness writing. [/grammar nazi]

I haven't read as much Joyce as some of my friends have, but I think he made his own rules that he followed consistently, as many writers do.

Anyway /offtopic.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Run-on sentences often equals brilliance ala James Joyce and stream of consciousness writing. [/grammar nazi]

Well then, "Is the notion of something better than a human, behaving better than any human would behave or accomplishing more than a human could ever accomplish, a hard case to make?"

My English teacher had me condense my sentences, omitting information, grading me poorly for them being too long. Basically, my writing wasn't down to earth enough for anyone who'd be reading it. I was never planning on becoming a writer who sells books, but a writer who explains his ideas regardless of whether or not a certain demographic is patient enough to work through my complex sentences.

Originally posted by Dolos
Well then, "Is the notion of something better than a human, behaving better than any human would behave or accomplishing more than a human could ever accomplish, a hard case to make?"

My English teacher had me condense my sentences, omitting information, grading me poorly for them being too long. Basically, my writing wasn't down to earth enough for anyone who'd be reading it. I was never planning on becoming a writer who sells books, but a writer who explains his ideas regardless of whether or not a certain demographic is patient enough to work through my complex sentences.

It's not that your sentence is too complex, it's that it doesn't make sense because it's flawed on a fundamental level.

A shorter illustration of the problem: "But really, isn't the shoe?"

That sentence is missing its argument. (Disclaimer for grammar vultures: I realize I might be misusing the word argument here in a grammatical context, I'm too lazy to do the research at the moment)

I think the issue is that you assume certain changes to human nature will be implemented by the technological remaking of humanity simply because you view them as desirable, not because they are anymore likely than a continuation or worsening of our aggressive and competitive behaviors.

think of the following: who is going to develop, own, distribute, control and impelement the tech for these changes (assuming they're possible)? what are their interests? who will have access to these changes? what are their interests?

dont wanna be a pedant, but your english teacher is right. your sentences too often read like they've been written by a random text generator at first glance and take way too much effort to decode once you try, though I'll admit they're not the total gibberish I once thought they were. the problem is that you seem to have developed some weird semantics of your own influenced by sci-fi. you attribute unconventional meanings to lots of terms and this is really tiresome for the reader.

He almost writes like a longwinded Dadaist.