Happy Atheist Forum

Hey I was just pondering random things today.

How about this comparison...

Evolution is to intelligence as intelligence is to AI.


Havent thought about it a whole lot. But I was just thinkin about how we have evolved to the point that we dont really need evolution anymore, as a species. How 'it' trying to prefect itself essentially destroyed our need of it in us.

In a similar way, do you think it could be compared to our intelligence vs artificial intelligence?

Well kinda sorta. I'm pretty much tryin to sound real deep. heh

But I thought it was kind of a interesting idea at the least. Oh whoops. Shoulda put it in philosophy.

Quote from: "tacoma_kyle"Oh whoops. Shoulda put it in philosophy.

fixed

Quote from: "tacoma_kyle"Hey I was just pondering random things today.

...Havent thought about it a whole lot. But I was just thinkin about how we have evolved to the point that we dont really need evolution anymore, as a species. ...

I disagree.  There are plenty of ways humans could be "better".  

A blogger I like said that maybe autism is a step in the evolutionary process.  It could lead to increased brain function or ESP.  I'm not saying I agree with this, but it is an interesting viewpoint.

There are plenty of things I would change about myself if I could spontaneously evolve...starting with making gray hair and pimples mutually exclusive.    

How can you say we don't need evolution when men don't have real multiple orgasms yet?!

But seriously, there's a lot that could be improved. What if humans could live in space? What if we could withstand temperatures ranging from near absolute zero to thousands of degrees. Imagine being able to live underwater. Imagine being able to see the entire EM spectrum. Imagine dying at the ripe age of 12,000 years old. Imagine being born able to speak, read, write, etc. through genetic memory.

There's really no limit to where we could go. That's what science fiction is all about, really: exploring the possibilities of our own untapped destiny.

It's unfortunate, but doubtful that new improvements will happen.

In order for evolution to continue to improve the human race, we'll have to allow the "Selection" part of natural selection to happen again.  As long as we intervene and let medicine alter our survival rate (past breeding age, that is), then we've effectively stopped evolution for ourselves.

That doesn't mean we can't take matters into our own hands.

I for one would love to have a wireless uplink to the net and some extra memory installed.  Maybe even a camera/mic installed in my forehead.

Uberman?
JoeActor

I try to keep evolution going by only dating women who are absolutely brilliant. If I ever meet a woman with gills, I'll try to seduce her too.

Quote from: "Willravel"I try to keep evolution going by only dating women who are absolutely brilliant. If I ever meet a woman with gills, I'll try to seduce her too.

Oh, man!  She sounds hot!  Me likey... well, except the part about drowning the first time I go back to her place...

Quote from: "joeactor"I for one would love to have a wireless uplink to the net and some extra memory installed.  Maybe even a camera/mic installed in my forehead.

We are the Borgs, resistance is futile  ;)) .

It's the responsibility of the intelligent to fight counter-evolution. I wasn't joking when I said that I only date brilliant women. I also only date athletic women. It's nothing personal to women who aren't brilliant and athletic, they're wonderful. I just see that it's important for us as a species.

I myself am pretty well educated (B.A. in psych from Santa Clara and I'll be applying to Boalt Law in about 12 months) and I keep myself in tip top shape. So don't worry I'm not asking for anything I can't deliver myself.

Yes, I've pondered this before. Christians often use the argument of why evolution stopped. But evolution moves so slowly and the changes so insignificant from generation to generation, evolution, now appears pointless. I mean, think how far humanity has come in 10,000 years, We've gone from the invention of the garden hoe, to the space shuttle. Technology progresses at an exponential rate, evolution is left int he dust. And speaking of technologies, what great technological advances have come out of Christianity?

Quote from: "ShimShamSam"And speaking of technologies, what great technological advances have come out of Christianity?

Are you kidding?  Let's see, there's the rack, thumbscrews, the iron maiden, and let's not forget tithing...

I'm not sure you can point to any religion as inspiring technology.  Believers?  Sure.  But religion... no.

Except maybe Christian Scientists or Scientology (tin cans anyone?)

JoeActor

Quote from: "MommaSquid"There are plenty of things I would change about myself if I could spontaneously evolve...starting with making gray hair and pimples mutually exclusive.

Good idea.  I'll opt for a longer liver.....
 

As I have expressed in other posts, I take a more or less dissenting view to those here on the issue of human evolution, aka. transhumanism (though these concepts are not necessarily the same thing). My skepticism on this issue comes from my deeply held conviction that the only measure of 'human progress' that matters is how much freedom people have (to avoid cultural or political bias this could be weighed against the freedoms people believe they reasonably ought to or ought not to have, or, to put it another way, progress could be objectively measured by how content people are with the status quo at any given point in history). Not the technology they have access to, not the strength of the economy, not the length of the average lifespan, not even the pleasures they might seek, since each individual is entitled to hold their own view as to what constitutes a good life or one worth living. The belief that history is somehow leading the human race on the path to something grander is one of the great myths of modernity. The price we payed for it was 20th Century communism, but who knows what other evils we will suffer for it in the future.

To get back to the topic at hand: the question has been alluded to in this thread as to whether we should let evolution take its course in humans. First, an important point: evolution does not produce 'better' things, it produces changes to things that are required for their continued survival. Human beings tend to value survival, yet beyond this underlying assumption, questions of ethics are vastly more complex than merely identifying that which improves the overall survival of a species. Hence, let me emphatically state, I do not think there is any merit in deriving an ethical position from our observations of natural selection, much less applying one. Above all there are no rights in natural selection, no guarantees and no justice for the weak. I could never endorse Social Darwinism, period.

In evolutionary terms the survival of the human race is not at stake. We might well bring ourselves to the brink of extinction sometime in the forseeable future, but that is an entirely different concern. What about the ability of individual humans to surive? I think we doing quite well in this regard, but I suppose it depends on your point of view. At present a great many people in developed nations are quite capable of surviving to old age, and though there are hurdles to our longevity that we can overcome in the future through advances in medicine, I for one do not want to live forever. Most people if they thought hard about this would agree.

Instead what is usually meant by improving the human race is finding ways to make ourselves more capable of realising our desires. The problem is, the easier it is to realise our desires and the faster and more 'convenient' this process becomes, the less fulfilling life becomes. In life it is certainly true that the process is the point, or the journey is the destination, or however you wish to express it. Much of the enjoyment we take in human activity is derived from the fact that we aren't readily able to get what we want, at least not in any immidiate sense.

It's a case of 'be careful what you wish for, you might just get it'.

I guess also, in general, I don't feel I ought to owe any grand allegiance to my 'species', just as I don't feel I ought to owe any allegiance to a 'race' or a 'nation'. They just happen to be accidents of my birth. I do what I can to treat others morally but I don't feel any moral compulsion to keep human evolution in mind when choosing a mate. Of course, what unconscious drives nature forces upon me remain largely beyond my control, but as I pointed out earlier, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and we should think long and hard before we snatch the reigns from nature's hands, so to speak... we may end up more fulfilled...

PJ, the reigns are already snatched. Just look at Paris Hitlon. She should have been devoured by a predator long ago. She will likely be impregnated by another idiot and create idiot offspring, who are also of low moral fiber and are incapable of contributing to society.

While I don't really have an allegiance with any nation, I do recognize the drive to continue the species is a part of me. That drive includes a sexual and emotional attraction to strong, smart, moral women with whom I will reproduce. The compulsion is innate, not moral, but I do consciously recognize said compulsion. Pretending that it's a happy accident ignores an important part of one's self. The drive to protect the species not only by mating but by mating with a woman that has genes that would benefit the species is part of who I am.

Anyone remember a few years back, over on the east coast there were large quantities of fish that were essentially getting closer to becoming single sexed. WHats it called when you can reproduce individually, like worms? ANyhow some fish were developing both sides of fertilizations process, parts of anyhow. But it wasn't fully functioning. I think it was females that were.


Then the news continued to blame it on water contaminants.


When I saw it I was thinkin evolution maybe. But regardless if it was the by-product of soap or somethin look at the reaction. Somethin changes, don't let it change. Don't let new species develop, don't let old species die. Thats what I got outta. Not sayin I favor extermination of deer, but if they are killed off by a abundance of funky lizards or somethin thats different.

You know Will, for some reason you are reminding me of that movie set 'Species.' Seen it? It is pretty much the worst series of movies of all time lol. But there are a lot of topless babes in it so its cool. Maybe not your type heh.

But it did follow some relatively basic principles of how a species will survive, which was interesting.

But there is some human/alien hybrid babe that wants to reproduce and scientists are trying to stop 'her' and she trys to fuck every 'suitable' (not sick, diseased and so on) male.

Natasha Henstridge topless? Yeah, I've seen it.

Look at it this way, though:
- Most people are more attracted to thin people than fat people, even without hollywood
- Most people are attracted to people who are intelligent
- Many people are attracted to people in power
- Many people are attracted to athletes
- Most men love women with large breasts and "child-bearing hips", both of which suggest fertility
- Most women like men with lean muscular butts, which also suggests fertility (I can go into greater detail on this one if anyone doesn't get the connection)
- Symmetrical facial features are generally considered attractive

It's hardly something unique to me. I think most people do exactly what I do, but may not be conscious to why.

Quote from: "pjkeeley"As I have expressed in other posts, I take a more or less dissenting view to those here on the issue of human evolution, aka. transhumanism (though these concepts are not necessarily the same thing).
To get back to the topic at hand: the question has been alluded to in this thread as to whether we should let evolution take its course in humans. First, an important point: evolution does not produce 'better' things, it produces changes to things that are required for their continued survival. Human beings tend to value survival, yet beyond this underlying assumption, questions of ethics are vastly more complex than merely identifying that which improves the overall survival of a species. Hence, let me emphatically state, I do not think there is any merit in deriving an ethical position from our observations of natural selection, much less applying one. Above all there are no rights in natural selection, no guarantees and no justice for the weak. I could never endorse Social Darwinism, period.

In evolutionary terms the survival of the human race is not at stake.

Some good points, PJ. One question, regarding the bolded sentence (bolding mine) in relation to everything you said right up to it. After all you said about evolution not leading to anything (which is quite true), and the paragraph in copied here from you, how is it that you are able to determine that in evolutionary terms, the human race is not at stake?

Do you know something about how we will evolve that the rest of humanity is unaware of? ;-)

Clue us in, man!

I'm being somewhat facetious obviously, but I am curious about that statement and want to know if you could clarify and/or expand the thought.

Quotehow is it that you are able to determine that in evolutionary terms, the human race is not at stake?

Simple, I based that statement on the assumption that the evolution of homo sapiens has stopped or slowed as many people suggest. Supposing this to be true, I don't think it would make any difference to our survival; if we're still around in a couple of hundred million years there still wouldn't be a creature on Earth capable of overcoming humankind and our mastery of technology. As long as human beings have such a huge intelligence in comparison to other animals, we won't be rendered extinct by them, only by ourselves. That is what I mean when I say our survival is not threatened in evolutionary terms.

I do like your philosophy, but resent your statement that we as a species are done evolving. After we've gotten rid of the appendix, ectopic pregnancy, and wisdom teeth, THEN we're done with evolution at which point we start growing more penises. Hahaha!