The sustainability of transhumanism

[NearBr0ken]

The GFN report:  http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/Global_Footprint_Network_2009_annual_report.pdf

According to the 2009 Global Footprint Network report:

Humanity is simply demanding more from nature than it can provide. The effects of this imbalance are reaching every corner of our natural world, from species extinctions and water and food shortages, to disappearing forests and depleted fisheries.

These problems are occuring now while the entire population of Earth is still only baseline (unmodified) human.  Assuming the resources necessary for a single posthuman individual will be greater than those necessary for a single baseline individual, it seems that resources are simply too scarce to allow every one of the six billion and more people on Earth to pursue the posthuman condition.

Some transhumanists predict the end of scarcity; but the current economic, social, and political relationships rooted in scarcity we can only speculate how and when that will happen if it is indeed possible.

Thoughts?

[DropLogic]

The Earth will have no problem getting rid of that which harms it. Agent Smith's description of us was quite apt.  One thing humans are exceedingly good at however is survival.  We've proved that over our 4 million year existence.   The problem with homo sapiens sapiens is that we never change our ways until the absolute last second.  We wait until there is no other option except to change.  Had the library at Alexandria survived, and the Christian dark ages never occurred, I'm positive we would have had all this shit figured out by now....and I'd probably be living on Titan, or playing badminton on Luna...

[Tank]

The Earth will have no problem getting rid of that which harms it. Agent Smith's description of us was quite apt.  One thing humans are exceedingly good at however is survival.  We've proved that over our 4 million year existence.   The problem with homo sapiens sapiens is that we never change our ways until the absolute last second.  We wait until there is no other option except to change.  Had the library at Alexandria survived, and the Christian dark ages never occurred, I'm positive we would have had all this shit figured out by now....and I'd probably be living on Titan, or playing badminton on Luna...

Re the underlined. Two words, Easter Island. We didn't change our minds then as we cut down the last tree and worshipped false Gods.

[DropLogic]

The Earth will have no problem getting rid of that which harms it. Agent Smith's description of us was quite apt.  One thing humans are exceedingly good at however is survival.  We've proved that over our 4 million year existence.   The problem with homo sapiens sapiens is that we never change our ways until the absolute last second.  We wait until there is no other option except to change.  Had the library at Alexandria survived, and the Christian dark ages never occurred, I'm positive we would have had all this shit figured out by now....and I'd probably be living on Titan, or playing badminton on Luna...

Re the underlined. Two words, Easter Island. We didn't change our minds then as we cut down the last tree and worshipped false Gods.

I think we have progressed beyond those days...or perhaps you are correct, except that Earth has come to represent Easter Island, and it's too large for us to see the problem.  
That's just it though isn't it...we can see the problem, yet continue doing almost nothing about it.  Sigh.  

[Tank]

I think we have progressed beyond those days...or perhaps you are correct, except that Earth has come to represent Easter Island, and it's too large for us to see the problem.  
That's just it though isn't it...we can see the problem, yet continue doing almost nothing about it.  Sigh.  

The trouble is all humans are selfish, foolish, short sighted and greedy to a greater or lesser extent and that varies with circumstance. I don't think humanity has sufficient collective will to save itself from a catastrophe. Humans probably will survive the crash as we are adaptable, resilient and have the ability to manipulate our environment that allows us to survive in almost any conditions. The biggest issue would be a change in gaseous carbon dioxide so great that it would turn the atmosphere toxic.

[DropLogic]

I think we have progressed beyond those days...or perhaps you are correct, except that Earth has come to represent Easter Island, and it's too large for us to see the problem.  
That's just it though isn't it...we can see the problem, yet continue doing almost nothing about it.  Sigh.  

The trouble is all humans are selfish, foolish, short sighted and greedy to a greater or lesser extent and that varies with circumstance. I don't think humanity has sufficient collective will to save itself from a catastrophe. Humans probably will survive the crash as we are adaptable, resilient and have the ability to manipulate our environment that allows us to survive in almost any conditions. The biggest issue would be a change in gaseous carbon dioxide so great that it would turn the atmosphere toxic.

How close are we to that threshold?  I know the massive pockets of methane at the bottom of the oceans are of great concern.  Come to think of it, we're really setting up the dominoes of our demise.

[Jats]

Interesting, a repost then...

"...I just think we need some kind of miracle, a new wave of thinking sweeping the nations.....oh yeah, only in the movies, or is it, are we so locked into a global economy, a system we can not change, could we make this existence green, by voting Green, would it make a difference or catapult us to somewhere else, worse. No one else it seems, is doing anything about it, and, anyway, is it possible to demonstrate dissatisfaction or is that seen as action against the state nowadays, so to Vote then, Na it will never happen..." and Jats goes back to watching the football then "... but some-things gotta change..."

[Tank]

I think we have progressed beyond those days...or perhaps you are correct, except that Earth has come to represent Easter Island, and it's too large for us to see the problem.  
That's just it though isn't it...we can see the problem, yet continue doing almost nothing about it.  Sigh.  

[NearBr0ken]

I blame evolution for our short-sightedness, but it's also a good thing.  If we were always worried about the infinite probabilities of the future we might not survive today or tomorrow and our future survival doesn't affect evolution now.  Evolution works when we survive "the now."

A great book about the crash, sustainability, and cultural insanity is Derrick Jensen's book Endgame.  I've read most of it and it changed my opinion on a lot of things.  Get a copy, or go to his website for excerpts.

[penfold]

The trouble is all humans are selfish, foolish, short sighted and greedy to a greater or lesser extent and that varies with circumstance. I don't think humanity has sufficient collective will to save itself from a catastrophe. Humans probably will survive the crash as we are adaptable, resilient and have the ability to manipulate our environment that allows us to survive in almost any conditions. The biggest issue would be a change in gaseous carbon dioxide so great that it would turn the atmosphere toxic.

Wow, that's a negative outlook. In my life I have found geniune thoughtlessness a rarity; most people have compassion. Maybe its not much to start on, but together we can do almost anything. After all; despite the blood, shit and mud; we made it this far.

These problems are occuring now while the entire population of Earth is still only baseline (unmodified) human. Assuming the resources necessary for a single posthuman individual will be greater than those necessary for a single baseline individual, it seems that resources are simply too scarce to allow every one of the six billion and more people on Earth to pursue the posthuman condition.

I always fear I am pushing out of my depth on the H+ issue. I lack even a basic understanding of genetics or neurology. But it has always struck me that change is gradual. Often passing by unnoticed. For example, think of the silicone revolution, in that sense we have already become posthuman, we have dramatically extended our cognitive space. Our little computers, now so ubiquitous to us, we can use them to calculate, socially network, call up information, problem solve etc... Even my sodding mobile phone can access wikipedia.

What is of note is that, so far, there is much of the world denied adequate access to this. The voracious economic system which allows us to have our gadgets exclude prosperity from much of the world (what, interestingly, we call the “third” world â€" damn we're smug) . So yes, I think you are correct in your analysis; the 'posthuman' will be progressively resource draining, and at it will be at the exclusion of others.

Interesting topic, thanks for the OP.

peace

[dloubet]

Since we don't actually know what direction transhumanism will take or how far it might go, it's quite possible that it will allow us to largely divorce ourselves from the need for scarce resources. If you're a tiny computronium sphere in orbit around the earth using nothing but sunlight to power yourself, what resources are you squandering? If you've altered yourself to grow roots and subsist entirely like a plant, what damage are you causing? If virtual environments become indistinguishable from the real thing, then physical travel becomes largely unnecessary with a vast savings to our energy expenditures. There are lots of ways that technology can actually free up resources.

It's not all doom and gloom.

[Tank]

Since we don't actually know what direction transhumanism will take or how far it might go, it's quite possible that it will allow us to largely divorce ourselves from the need for scarce resources. If you're a tiny computronium sphere in orbit around the earth using nothing but sunlight to power yourself, what resources are you squandering? If you've altered yourself to grow roots and subsist entirely like a plant, what damage are you causing? If virtual environments become indistinguishable from the real thing, then physical travel becomes largely unnecessary with a vast savings to our energy expenditures. There are lots of ways that technology can actually free up resources.

It's not all doom and gloom.

What proportion of humans would become transhuman, 0.000014%? That would be a million people. What would happen to the rest? They would still be alive and reproducing.

The sad thing is that world over population could possibly be cured in just one generation  

[Sophus]

The Earth will have no problem getting rid of that which harms it. Agent Smith's description of us was quite apt.  One thing humans are exceedingly good at however is survival.  We've proved that over our 4 million year existence.   The problem with homo sapiens sapiens is that we never change our ways until the absolute last second.  We wait until there is no other option except to change.  Had the library at Alexandria survived, and the Christian dark ages never occurred, I'm positive we would have had all this shit figured out by now....and I'd probably be living on Titan, or playing badminton on Luna...

Re the underlined. Two words, Easter Island. We didn't change our minds then as we cut down the last tree and worshipped false Gods.

That's just a theory though. It's possible they were conquered by the Spanish.

This discussion about not acting until it's almost too late makes me think of that bad remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still.

[TheWilliam]

I blame evolution for our short-sightedness, but it's also a good thing.  If we were always worried about the infinite probabilities of the future we might not survive today or tomorrow and our future survival doesn't affect evolution now.  Evolution works when we survive "the now."

A great book about the crash, sustainability, and cultural insanity is Derrick Jensen's book Endgame.  I've read most of it and it changed my opinion on a lot of things.  Get a copy, or go to his website for excerpts.

I get what you're talking about.

If something major happens, a lot of us will die and those that live, and breed on won't make the mistakes of the ones before them.............

.......pending who survives.

[The Magic Pudding]

I don't know if transhumans would place more demand on the earth.
I'm more concerned about current humans keeping the Earth hospitable.
Human population has troubled me since I was a kid.

I could never condemn China for its one child policy.
What were they supposed to do, breed and let hunger and disease do the dirty work?
There were no unguarded continents left to take their overflow.

People tell us we will benefit from higher population, I don't believe them.
In some cities pollution was in some ways reduced, but with rapid growth they are again getting worse.
Pro growth advocates point to India, and say our population is nothing, well India is my idea of hell.

Ratzinger no doubt looks at things differently, but I see a world with more people and no orangutans as incredibly sad.