Are we in a Biological Singularity?

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Tiama Plop, Jun 21, 2015.

  1. #1 Tiama Plop, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2015
    Just some free-writing [​IMG]
     
    Hope you enjoy
     
     

    Thoughts?

     
  2. #2 yurigadaisukida, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2015
    Basically all you are saying is effectively the singularity started at humanity, not at humans creation of AI

    Its true but pointless because one could argue the entire evolution of the universe is part of the singularity.

    But in this case, singularity has a definition. Its the point at which technology can improve itself faster than humans can improve it.

    I don't really know what to say about the rrest of your post. Its kinda irrelevent to the idea of a singularity

    -yuri
     
  3. #3 Tiama Plop, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2015
     
    Absolutely not.
     
     
    The idea I am presenting is that there was a point at which humans were able to modify themselves faster than genetic adaptation could. Or perhaps a better way to put it, modify their 'situation' faster than genetic adaption could keep up with. Is this not analogous to "the point at which technology can improve itself faster than humans can improve it"? When an information system can modify itself faster than the system that built the system can?
     
  4. #4 yurigadaisukida, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2015
    oh my bad.

    That makes a lot more sense

    So then with the rest of your post, are you basically saying great power bring great responsibility

    -yuri
     
  5. #5 Tiama Plop, Jun 21, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2015
     
    Not so much but close. I would describe the rest of the post more in terms of...
     
    So if we are in a biologically singularity, should we not take a step back and say "Is this wise? Are we sure this is for the best?" Rather than just race for greater and greater 'advancements'.
     
    And perhaps technology may do the same one day.
     
  6. I guess it really depends on if the singularity can show empathy for outsiders.

    If humans and AI can sacrifice a little to allow earth to live for example.

    -yuri
     
  7.  
    What about empathy for itself? We are destroying ourselves, not just the Earth.
     
  8. I'm so vibing with your thoughts.
     
  9. empathy is the ability to feel another beings emotions, and compassion is the ability to cater to them.

    You cannot have empathy for yourself. In your example that's just survival. Will the singularity self destruct? It very well might. I hope not

    -yuri
     
  10.  
    Ok change the word empathy for concern and lets not get into a battle over semantics :)
     
  11. I really wasn't trying to battle semantics.

    I was saying empathy not concern. Its not a potato potato kinda thing.

    All I meant to say was, the singularity is dangerous to non humans unless humans can empathize with non humans.

    Technically humans could whipe oout the majority of life and survive just fine

    -yuri
     
  12. #12 Tiama Plop, Jun 22, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2015
     
    But it is as dangerous to humans too... We have 'advanced' ourselves so quickly and with so very little foresight, that now we are living in a world that our bodies are not designed for, and we are paying the price (cancer rates, obesity, etc.)
     
    Genetic adaptation (which designed the body based on it's ability to survive a very different world) has no chance of catching up with our rate of artificial 'advancement'.
     
    Our 'advancements' themselves may also lead to catastrophe and extinction of the human race. Climate change, eco-system collapse, nuclear war, technological singularity, etc. These are all threats to our existence so why do we ignore them? Maybe the human brain's current evolutionary state doesn't prepare us mentally for the world we now live in and hence why our psyche just neglects and avoids our very possible fate, unable to comprehend things on such a grandiose scale.
     
  13. In our collective societal and moral states? No way in hell. Or no way out.

    Sent from my C6730 using Tapatalk
     
  14. I agree

    Like I said. My thougjts went in another direction

    The reason I used the word empathy is because I was looking at humanity as a threat to animals

    -yuri
     
  15. Interestigf discussion, i dont have much insight or anything to add but im enjoying it.
     
  16. What makes you think humans have the ability to "take a step back"? We were created through evolution which breeds progress and advancement. It's not natural for life to plateau.

    We are causing damage to the earth right now but the greatest human minds are working on pushing technology further to develop clean energy sources.

    Really, the most troubling is military advancements. It's always going to be progressively easier for one person to kill more and more people. That's the strongest reason for humanity needing a shift in consciousness imo. Because eventually we're going to have to trust our neighbors.
     
  17. #17 pickledpie, Jun 23, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 23, 2015
    They are not. The greatest minds are not working on much of anything because the greatness of the human mind is being buried under the dust of an ineffective education system. The natural expression of genius that each person inherently has is being blocked and suppressed. If each individual was seen as a spark of the infinite and divine in their essence and dealt with with whatever capacity best suited their unique and unharnessed genius, then we will see a heaven on earth.
     
  18. I suppose the best way to answer the question of "What makes you think humans have the ability to 'take a step back'?" is to ask what exactly prevents it? I'm not saying its going to happen or anything, in fact I ended the original post with "With the spell that media corporations and governments etc. have the people of earth under it seems very unlikely that we will ever even have a chance. Maybe it really is inevitable, short of extraterrestrial intervention", but does that mean it isn't possible? Actually I think to suggest that we don't have the ability is the type of thinking that would prevent it from happening. In theory, we do have the ability, it just requires a new way of thinking.


    And why is it not natural to plateau? That seems like a very big assumption. Actually, to even imply that for us to plateau is what is needed, is an (in my opinion wrong) assumption. If we were to plateau now, the human race may be gone within a few generations. What we need is to stop blindly pushing forward into the unknown, change the way we live to stop destroying each other and our environment, give the earth time to recover, and then push forward again in a new direction. A direction that is not based around greed, material gains and left-brain thinking like we suffer from now. A direction that is underpinned by emotion, based upon harmony, love and the good of all.
     
  19. Sounds good but it's going to be difficult to change billions of people's perspective simultaneously

    I think it'll be a slower transition, we probably have to wait for some powerful bad apples to die and in the meantime just don't be shitty people and take personal responsibility for being healthy and taking care of our environment.
     
  20. We have to start making the changes within ourselves. I try to embody what i want to see the rest of the world be like, in doing so, it becomes apart of me and i can spread that to others. We dont need to change billions simultaneously, we just need a good domino effect. Ive said it before, the internet and smartphones are and will have a huge impact for the world.
     

Share This Page