but what necessity is for us being here even just once? — TiredThinker

The million dollar question. Life can be rewarding with all its positive moments and experiences, though I and many religions call it something of the opposite. A journey or perhaps even penalty as opposed to a destination or reward. Of course, one may simply call this a kind of metaphysical pessimism.

Why are we seemingly so much more intelligent than the next animal well beyond what is needed to thrive? — TiredThinker

I don't see many animals 'thriving' by typical definition of the word.. some take longer to get eaten or otherwise suffer horrible deaths in the harshness of the elements but other than that.. unless you want to count animals so tiny their suffering is either nonobservable or subconsciously dismissable/non-occurring other than "wow look how many they are, they must be thriving."

And what does our existence accomplish? Don't we merely convert food into other chemicals? — TiredThinker

From an atheistic viewpoint (ie. the idea we're nothing more than animals developed as a result of random, chaotic systems for no real purpose whatsoever) there's really not too many options to pick from is there? I'm sure we do other things. Agriculture and permanent civilizations seem to be unique. Sure bees pollinate flowers and beavers build dams but that's hardly on par.

A little tongue-in-cheek but who knows maybe we are here to serve the other animals with our advanced abilities. No joke either that's what some people dedicate their lives to lol. To live each day under the philosophy that the purpose of one's life is to look after and benefit life in general is just as good and profound a purpose as any now isn't it. "My purpose is to give meaning to the meaningless and purpose to the purposeless". Now if you don't go around scamming everyone in the process, that sounds like a good person in my book. Any book really.

Can't microorganisms do that just as well, maybe better? — TiredThinker

What is life? Many serious philosophers and related thinkers accept the idea that a machine can be "alive" that is to say have consciousness. May sound silly but it's a theme of many movies and people have written entire theses on the idea. A more general consensus would be an organic being that breathes and thinks. But, a ventilator with an advanced AI technically does this minus the organic part.. which in theory is possible. So one might wish to add self-awareness or self-recognition to the criteria. But what about lesser animals of much less capability that are indisputably alive? Say birds, squirrels, slugs, etc.

So what 'master criteria' can there be for what is 'alive' and what is 'not alive'?

My humble theory is that the planet itself is alive and is a living being. Does it breathe? Yep. Does it have a biologic system that undergoes cellular functions to restore or otherwise affect all conceivable areas of its makeup? Yep. Does it think? Well what is advanced thought in humans? Some say it's just a bunch of cells and neurons firing responsively in learned configurations and patterns thus powering something incredible, a fully functioning organism. What if we humans and other organisms are the cells or microorganisms and the planet is the real being?

Is the question of afterlife permanently intertwined with the question of our purpose and self awareness? In my view we are painfully insufficient at pretty much everything. Our mind alone must be the point? — TiredThinker

Probably. Of course even more probable than that is that these fine folks are simply trying to avoid paying their taxes. 'Religiously', of course. :grin:

You are an atheist, friend. Whether closeted or flouted, it is one and the same. You will never see the big picture in your current state of beliefs. Tell me. Do you really think you knew the world as it was when you were 6? What about when you were 12? Or 20? Or now? The answer has always been the same. A resounding yes. Why do you limit yourself to further knowledge and potential. The answer is the same as why you did when you were 6. Ignorance. Pray some. In sincerity. I dare you.

Should prospective parents be encouraged to mitigate the suffering their experimentation creates? — David Pearce

Within reason, sure. I'm sure you can understand and perhaps even respect your opposition calling - not your motives but your attempt to actualize them - this, "transhumanism" as an abominable "Pandora's Box". There is already gene editing and there's been a fierce backlash against it. You yourself said one should be careful and thoroughly and exhaustively account and acknowledge the potential risks. Example, say one is able to make one not need food or water anymore, being able to live for an entire decade. This would cut carbon emissions, animal slaughter, and squalid living conditions worldwide by an unimaginable amount. This is good. Now imagine if that person becomes trapped in a cave. A normal person would eventually starve to death after a month or so. Thus relieving their suffering. A transhuman in this case would live and suffer in their cavernous prison for 10 years. This is bad. The examples only get more extreme. Torture by political powers or criminals, for example. The body shutting down after deprivation or enough trauma is a blessing not a curse, I dare say.

Or should pain-ridden Darwinian malware be encouraged to proliferate indefinitely in its existing guise? — David Pearce

David.. I've always encouraged one should, at least consider the idea of, separating the art from the artist, as far as philosophies and other creative works. But in this example it's simply not the case. Everything you perceive, have perceived, and ever will perceive is the byproduct and result of "Darwinian malware" .. all your ideas, beliefs, motivations, and suggestions are of the same as well. Life sucks. You wish to make it better. That's admirable. However. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" .. and no that doesn't mean what others think it does. More of a Pandora's Box, better the devil you know, such and such is a double-edged sword, one step forward two steps back, etc..

@David Pearce

sorry for the double post just for the "@" reminder notification thingy.

So. The real question is, David. Will you use your wealth and influence to purchase a large enough area where, your own and this is the most important, your own offspring can participate in these trials and we all can watch from a distance and see how they fare over time? This I believe, is a vital step in others accepting what seems.. just so odd lol.

I know the basic question has been asked many time and in different ways but what I would like to hear and discuss from others the why of religion or more exactly why do humans have the belief that there is some entity or entities outside of their own species that have influence and determination of their being something after the physical death of a human. — David S

Well it's quite simple young David. Not so far from the fact we appear to have our own resident god here. One who claims to know that which is not currently known. This is what you imply is it not? You pose the question "why could anything I do not know possibly exist?" .. well there are two answers. One is offensive. And the other is as written.

I don't understand what this has to do with this thread. — T Clark

This thread, yet not especially the OP, is as Disturbed coined a "Land of Confusion" it would seem.

If not, why is it acceptable for white people? — T Clark

Maybe it's not. Go change the world instead of expecting others to change it for you if it's that important to you. Man "some people" are lazy af. Think everyone is just created to do things for them.

Yet it would matter not. Unless this person exists among us and is mortal.

In more simple terms, kind of a student-teacher relationship. It depends what they ask you to do. Or more importantly, what will or will not happen as a result of failing to do so.

To most it would be (not by one's own acknowledgement but by pure fact) what is gathered by the senses being immediately interpreted by the mind and little more. There is remembrance, there is foresight. But none the less confined to the workings of one's own mind.

For me, it is anything but this.

UBI and open borders and free immigration do not mix. Because eventually nobody will do anything (at first), expecting others to do so for various reasons, and currency will devalue. We live in an open society. Eventually nobody will want to do anything, why toil all day in the hot sun or worse frigid arid land if not all to reap what I sow all for myself? To help a neighbor? Sure, that's understandable. Now multiply that by a world population of 8 billion.. it becomes kind of demanding. Unrealistic even.

Or even not, everyone gets more, so I will charge more. Because someone else somewhere up the line will do the same, for what I need, and now it costs me more.

There is little difference between UBI and just marking up the current currency to be twice it's value. It will cost me twice as much, so I will charge twice as much. Just keeps the poor poorer and the rich richer.

There's more room for inequality if I have to pay $250 for a weeks worth of groceries instead of 25 cents, like it used to be (slight exaggeration). Honestly the only blame is the criminals and counterfeiters. It's more about open education, rather lack of mandated raising of children. People steal, people pay for it. Not the people who steal of course. And enter law enforcement. Who need to be paid as well. Criminals. We all know one. But no one wants to do anything about it. And so the cycle will continue. Or will it?

Are we questioning about whether or not some omniscient being responsible for punishment will punish our ignorance? If so, the lack of faith, though incredibly understandable, would seem to preclude what is asked.

Yeah but you look at Europe and it's kinda like.. hm. Hard to even pick a side when you really know things. Terrible all around. Who killed who and who was really Messiah and who wasn't. I mean, I can do things that equate me to a divine being but so can the most lowly modern trickster to a society of ignorant cavemen. I'm not saying it's not a big deal just.. it gets kind of annoying when people try to make it as such. Maybe. It's tough being new and trying to present yourself as valid. Poor example. Being a kid and trying to stand next to your parents as an adult when.. you did nothing or even a net loss to what was expected. People take out their stress in unique ways. We'll all just have to wait and see.

Though it's probably all a distraction. Evil is real, false spirits and prophets on their way out who..in an at first hilarious yet in the end truly sad fashion believe they can take others with them. But who knows really.

Some theories or systems of belief that are inherently lacking or otherwise missing something another inherently has can often be implemented in a more effective or successful way as far as desired results and eventual outcome. Not always. One man's version, interpretation or best or "intended" approach to a philosophy, school of thought, or even if not especially a religion is not always the same as that of another. Doesn't have to mean anyone is more right or wrong, though certain dogmas or "prescribed information" are clearly defined.. though semantics and the use of literary devices often blur these lines and create vast amounts of space for debate of even the most absolute of statements.

When one looks at the human condition one finds the human surrounded by problems. In order to cope with these problems the human looks at various solutions promised by ideologies, religions, politics, economics, science, and so forth. — skyblack

And substances. Don't forget the substances. Which can lead to rapid deterioration of the body as well, though both are connected. Life can be pretty annoying when thought about in the wrong ways. Of course some aspects to life are rather non-ambiguous.

Whoever can make the best pitch to get one through the hard times is admired more often than not. At least appreciated.

Why waste Baden's time. Just stop posting. Like it's going to be paid attention to because "it's you" lol.

I would say anyone stating that oppressed minorities cannot be racist are deluded. There are many deluded people though, just move on. Delusions are delusions. You cannot ‘fix’ them directly, you can only suggest and be the best you can and hope by example others ask themselves to question themselves and their hard beliefs/views rather than adhere to what is comforting. — I like sushi

Isn't it just wild how some OPs answer themselves. You may think you're the majority, and you probably are. This guy who likes basketball is basically me though I like baseball, we all like balls. Therefore, we are the majority. This is wonderful. He would kill me (philosophically, perhaps?) at any disagreement but nonetheless, we remain. Unless he kills me. Hurrah for us.

Low key.. some people, who you may wish to identify as.. have been extinct here for many years. But that's racist now isn't it.

Weeping buckets over the fact animals eat each other shouldn't blind you to the complexities of the system you propose fucking with. — counterpunch

Perhaps his belief is that what all three of us are referring to is not a system at all but rather a lack of one. What you call complexities Mr. David refers to as undesirable consequences of a then-necessary system that can and should be remedied, much like child labor or egregious workplace accidents as the result of unsafe labor conditions. They had to occur for there was simply no other option, however when such remedies were made available, any and all people did support them. I believe his theory and mission is far more of a Pandora's Box then the sort of panacea he wishes to promote. Still, terms and motives should fall where they may.

Actually, it says favorite philosopher(s), in the plural sense. Simply one of my favorite that I chose to mention, perhaps considering his passing. You can ignore who you wish whenever you wish, but the actions and ripples they create in the lives of others will assuredly continue to define a life as malleable as yours, it need not restrict, this is your own choice.

No, in practice I could look at an insane post like this, look at their bio, and if they were, say, 17 years old I could happily move on and ignore them entirely. — Maw

You wish to remove or rather have ignorant youth excluded from your experience here, yet, what does a simple selection or option in choice do for anything? Perhaps what you wish to avoid is in fact closer and more part of you than you wish to accept. Young one.

Some people cannot imagine life could be different. Suffering shapes their conception of the human predicament and life itself. — David Pearce

This is my point essentially. Let's not pretend you've never suffered. Without it, you and these "some people" are one and the same. We're just circling back, essentially. What you claim to wish to eliminate not only nurtured you but in fact created you! Sure, as a creation progresses it wishes or desires to eliminate that which hampers its own progression but at what cost?

Other people have tasted paradise and want the world to share their vision. — David Pearce

Again, this "other people" and yourself appear to be one and the same.

Environmentally-based utopian experiments fail. — David Pearce

Of course, any otherwise successful experiment can be interrupted of perhaps halted by a skeptical, perhaps even religious (though they'll never admit it) interlocutor. What of it?

Potentially, elevated pain thresholds, hedonic range and hedonic set-points can underpin a richer personal quality of life for all, but the manifold social, economic and political problems of society are left unaddressed. — David Pearce

Yes, and potentially a currently unproven theory, like yours, and perhaps God, can allow me to fly after jumping off a cliff. These are all in the same bucket of unproven theories. My main question is as follows: what is a "rich" personal quality?

It's not because you are happy and successful for no merit or purpose where others are the same, it's because there is something to stand on so to speak.

The end of suffering will still be the most momentous revolution in the history of sentience. — David Pearce

I don't disagree diametrically however I do disagree tangentially. Let us hearken back to the basics. There is no love without something to hate. No joy without something to annoy. No fun without something to bore. Is this true or false, young David

Let us open our religious books of olde and read from start to finish. Perhaps somewhere therein lies the answer. Something new, something old. Something forged, something formed by whatever forces may be. It all depends. Many things breathe. Few have the desire to use this breath to help that which does not immediately or inevitably help oneself. This is the essence of compassion and true love, the antithesis of which is indifference, which distinguishes man from the animal. Usually.

I believe soul transcends spirit, capitalized or not. Of course, I may be incorrect in my understanding, as may you. I believe the human form has a capacity for spirit that animals may inherently not, of course, beliefs are a dime a dozen these days. Not to tout this as an absolute net positive, there are many bad spirits among us.

And he's wrong because he assumes objective, God given moral facts. — counterpunch

What if God in the contexts of many is not a supernatural being or entity but the simple idea of absoluteness. Do you not assume the role of God in this case by asserting what others assert to be as you interpret it? What makes your particular claim here, which you undoubtedly assert as inarguable and absolute, any different from the idea of a God given moral fact?

After all, if there weren’t something fundamentally wrong with our human default state of consciousness, then would we try so hard to change it? — David Pearce

The grass is always greener on the other side. We want what we can't or at least don't have. Perhaps this is what you refer to? This is what it means to be human. The curse of want and desire. Without this, what differentiates a transhuman from a robot clothed in flesh?

What is not spirit? Your accepted definition will hinge solely upon this. One answer, the one I believe in, is kind of spooky or metaphysical if not simply unrealistic. Religious one could say. In more broader terms, it is what develops from what is not spirit, or rather what is biological. I can get angry or upset because someone attacks me, this is biological. But how I respond to it in my own unique way.. becomes part of who I am. This is my spirit perhaps? "He's in good spirits" or "the kid has spirit" generally refers to personality or energetic motivation, "spunk" some would say.

- delete post if not complete or coherent, am tired-

@David Pearce The following is more of an enthusiastic engagement, that recalls or calls upon several truths you assert in your premise. The very thing you call savage and cruel or even stupid, Darwinian existence, is the thing that formed you and your beliefs, this is nothing other a fact in would seem. So, seeing as Hell creates Heaven it would appear, again from your own statements, what of the following theory.

Ok I remember. I was watching a government ad about the dangers of smoking, some woman lost half her face or something. Alright. So. What if, we endure these horrors, and one day, those who do things that are hazardous to our current biology (smoking, drinking in excess, etc.) continue to do so and yes suffer resulting in a later generation that is no longer subject to the diseases of their predecessors. Meaning, the more we smoke, drink, and yes some will die and suffer horribly, but those who live, will be a generation where they can enjoy the pleasures of smoking and drinking and I suppose for sake of argument other dangerous drugs, without these horrid effects. Isn't the natural system creating transhumans already, per se?

I understand your argument is wishing to skip this altogether, either by simply having no need to indulge in harmful substances for we will already be at bliss. But nevertheless there will always be more bliss to be had, if not is this not a prison your movement attempts to create? People will always seek more pleasure. Will they not?

An adult male generally has.. less room to pass the buck than say a vulnerable young woman or troubled youth does. Especially in the absence of a more dominant or controlling authority figure ie. political leader or international record label promoting songs which genres are known to have a young and reckless demographic.

You sound passionate, David. I've asked this before and perhaps you may feel annoyed even by responding again but let this if nothing else be a rhetorical question.

What interests you? Why is that? Perhaps because there is a problem to be solved. Imagine sitting in a room full of "solved" or completed Rubix cubes. Would you not wish for someone if not even yourself to twist one toward unexpected parameters? I once again challenge you to try this setting for yourself. And perhaps you may see, there is fire and water for a reason.

Wow, can you imagine the boredom of being in a spaceship flying to another galaxy? To see what? — Metaphysician Undercover

"When you observe nature you will learn it is the pleasure of the bee to gather the honey from the flower"

What are we not doing here and now? Earth is a.. vessel of a sort. Perhaps we may be going somewhere, perhaps not. Is the Sun the greatest gravitational body in the Universe? Not by far.

To see what? Is the reveal not the greatest part of the trick? As you said, ignorance is bliss, mystery is the spice of life, and knowledge is Hell. Perhaps?

Being submissive and disguising it as dominance and following and bowing to the attitudes and views of real men who in reality seek your own self-inflicted destruction and punishment and on occasion real women and conforming to a society that claims to be one is exclusively by doing as described.

I know of no reason why the "raw feels" of experience below hedonic zero need conserving. — David Pearce

Honestly, I don't see the problem! — David Pearce

Have you ever suffered, David? Ever noticed or experienced hardship enough to motivate you to do something .. oh apparently you have as this is the purported moral and intellectual basis of this movement of yours. Where would you be without these occurrences? How impactful do you think they were for spurring positive change? Apparently great, if your mission is so dire. So tell me. What motivation, drive, and desire will others expect in your envisioned world? Any drive to even get out of bed? Any at all? Some may argue, this idea damns those confined by it to an even worse fate then the current mitigated Darwinian hell we have (civilized society, manners, rules, occasional decency, etc.). Your response?

When I look upon a blob of clay, I see good; not because I see potential for it to be molded into something good (for it could just as well be molded into something bad) but because a blob of clay is good in and of itself, regardless of what we do to it, or what it might become later. Man is not the measure of all things. — James Riley

This is a good analogy. Hm, what to add? I suppose based on the savage and chaotic environment in which we live (violent collisions of rock and dust creating planets, among other things), perhaps those who remain good are in fact excellent and those who turn bad aren't completely terrible. Hard to say. Depending on whose grave you stand on to speak, of course.

I don't share that view of human nature, and frankly I think attempts at psychoanalyzing complete strangers sooner point towards projection. — Tzeentch

Nor do you have to, for it was already done for you. You can ignore the hand that fed you and is responsible for your existence, but you'll never be free from it. Human history is human history, it is as plain as day to be observed, be it from a textbook or archeology. I make no assertions otherwise. Perhaps you're different, the exception. Oh but when salt pours, you'll be no different than the rest. You wouldn't be here now if so.

Then shame on whoever did that claiming. — Tzeentch

Oh shame is not relevant, that is a human emotion. What is mandated comes from beyond and is not only ever-reaching but everlasting.

I believe what I stated, and this is just an underhanded (and sleep-inducingly old) attempt at framing it as selfishness.

What makes you believe I am so fond of the status quo? — Tzeentch

Human nature. One wants better for themselves. You believe that by toppling the giant greater enjoyment can be had, but perhaps it is protecting you from greater torment and despair. You wouldn't know. This is the folly of men.

I think any claims to another's essential freedom is to be looked down upon and dismissed. One of the few claims for which I think that to be the case. Would you object to this? — Tzeentch

What if your ability to live where, in the manner in which you've become accustomed and act as you please and state what you state is the sole result of claiming the essential freedoms of another? Odds are it was. So, you don't quite believe this, you believe in protecting a familiar status quo that serves you and little more, just another case of looking out for number one. Don't we all I suppose.

Man is born free and without responsibility. Responsibility can only be a result of his own voluntary actions. Responsibility is assumed, and not imposed. — Tzeentch

People have themselves to look out for. Meanwhile you need to eat, drink, have access to shelter, maybe a little entertainment, and social interaction. Who's going to do or provide all that for you if not yourself? Me? Your neighbor? Who will provide for him? And so on. We're not in Eden anymore. We're all slaves to our biology, human needs that must be met with limited resources. Unless you believe in enslavement of others to meet these needs, one would best saddle up and smell the coffee.

There are reasons isolated pockets of civilization are beneficial. Example, if a contagion is released or all-out war unfolds (ie. the place goes down the tubes) at least not everyone has to die or be afflicted by whatever as well. Corruption also, everybody can kind of "watch each other" and call out egregious abuses against those who commit it with no one entity ever being able to so easily or casually "overpower" the collective might of "everyone".

Transparency and accountability, best defense against the tyrannical and beastly abomination that is unrestrained human nature with all it's greed and indifference.

You could write a novel or even a screenplay and hope people take to it. Who knows, they might. Creativity is and has always been in high demand. Though like an old teacher of mine would say "everything that can be done, has been done", his view was that any "new works" are really just rehashes, even if not intentionally and are born from one's own uninfluenced mind.

Surely, the only reason one can object to an individual choosing the path of freedom is because one fears one may lose their hold on him. — Tzeentch

Assuredly, the one and only reason, no other option you dictate and expect or will look down on or dismiss others if not agreed upon. How curious and double-edged this concept is.

Far too often men confuse freedom with abandonment of responsibility, which transmutes to power that will simply be assumed and dominated by those who forgot not these truths.

The claim: aging, death, disease, cognitive infirmity and indeed involuntary suffering of any kind are wrong. A transhumanist civilization of superlongevity, superintelligence and superhappiness can overcome these ancient evils. If we act wisely, then future life will be sublime. — David Pearce

David, thou art a gentleman and a scholar of the highest degree. Here and now that is. Your presence and engagement here is appreciated beyond the words received. I would much enjoy to share a few drinks with you at your preferred pub in your native England, what's left of it that is. That said, if you don't mind, what are your responses to the following criticisms of the words or rather common understandings and generally assumed beliefs behind:

Aging: Is this not proof of progress? Proof of the journey at the destination? A fine wine is aged, and is worth a considerable amount. Perhaps you refer to the physical and biological affects of aging being essentially decreased ability and fortitude. Well, in a race with no timer, why bother to move?

Death: I view death as a necessity in this world, not as you might think however but more of an escape hatch. For example, being trapped in a cave. In such a scenario one would rather starve to death then sit there for eternity. It's complicated, though without death what appreciation would there be for life really, would it not simply be just another prison?

Disease: I'm a firm believer in overpopulation, that things happen for a reason. If I were to be infirmed myself in a clinical setting perhaps I would be encouraged to rethink this, if not revealed as somewhat of a hypocrite. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, and what one brings upon themselves (this is to exclude random cases of illness) one should learn or at least desire to pass on a lesson.

Cognitive infirmity: While I don't have an effectual or "actual" philosophical counterargument or "justification" for as it's a simple biological reality, I'll offer an anecdote. Well a sentence that one can be derived from. There's two water guns, the first ones which casually lose pressure as the tank depletes, and the newer ones (granted from a score ago) that maintain constant pressure (CPS "constant pressure system") until the tank is actually depleted. Which would you prefer?

Involuntary suffering: Welcome to Earth or life. Is it a blessing or curse? A reward or a sentence? Either way we're all going to be here for possibly a while, best do your time. There's no true escape, David. Other than to avoid true eternal bliss.

--

Onto your three supers:

Longevity: Again, I challenge you to be alone or perhaps even with friends (or more realistically mixed company who hold opposing views to yours as this is reality) for an extended period. Everything is fine, no one has to worry about anything, all needs are met, and it's just you and other people. How long could you take it? Until you do this, some may say, accurately I might add, you're just talking or blowing smoke. A non-religious person (ie. when you die, you're dead and cease to exist in any possible, real or imagined form or state of existence) one of course would cleave to this like a frightened lamb in the presence of a pack of wolves.. and this is the only reality that can be proven so is thus understandable, but what if we don't really know all there is to know? Can you not be wrong?

Intelligence: Simply put, they say ignorance is bliss. Perhaps they could be wrong. Perhaps you may be. Let me ask you, what were the best times of your life? I'll wager money that it was discovering new things, emotions, or moments. You know I'm right. What fun is a game you've already beat or a book you've already read compared to one you haven't?

Happiness: What is happiness? Why would one seek or even value peace if one could never pursue or make war? Love if one never knew hate or fun if one never knew boredom? Duality I believe some speak of. They may have it wrong or corrupted but perhaps they don't. What makes you happy David, if you don't mind sharing? What makes you sad? Why is that? If either were removed (incidents, experiences, or knowledge behind said emotions), would you feel the same toward the other?

Again, these are just criticisms meant to prod your response and beliefs on the matter, a response which I am eager to receive. "Just curious", as they say.