Comments on: The Meta-Human Condition http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:09:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Anthony http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-681835 Anthony Sat, 14 Jan 2012 22:34:39 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-681835 #1 This point seems to imply that freewill hasn't existed, doesn't exist, and never will exist. I mean, we do have a choice of whether or not we want to suffer, here on Earth, for the rest of our lives. Nevertheless, our "life stories" can be greatly affected by our childhood experiences, without a doubt. In some cases, our life stories can be totally predetermined by our childhood experiences. However, that's not to say we can't begin the recovery process of it all. We do have a choice; we can blame one another, and even blame ourselves, or we can take responsibility by owning up to our own shit. Frankly, it all depends on the individual. Any real change usually begins on an individual level. Nobody, except you, can solve your problems... #3 This point seems like an exaggeration, as somebody here in the comments has already mentioned. #4 It really doesn't matter, but I thought I'd point out that the mythology of many major religions is, in fact, eerily similar. #1 This point seems to imply that freewill hasn’t existed, doesn’t exist, and never will exist. I mean, we do have a choice of whether or not we want to suffer, here on Earth, for the rest of our lives. Nevertheless, our “life stories” can be greatly affected by our childhood experiences, without a doubt. In some cases, our life stories can be totally predetermined by our childhood experiences. However, that’s not to say we can’t begin the recovery process of it all. We do have a choice; we can blame one another, and even blame ourselves, or we can take responsibility by owning up to our own shit. Frankly, it all depends on the individual. Any real change usually begins on an individual level. Nobody, except you, can solve your problems…

#3 This point seems like an exaggeration, as somebody here in the comments has already mentioned.

#4 It really doesn’t matter, but I thought I’d point out that the mythology of many major religions is, in fact, eerily similar.

]]> By: What is the human condition? | The Prime Directive http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-676556 What is the human condition? | The Prime Directive Thu, 12 Jan 2012 03:27:00 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-676556 [...] of Overcoming Bias, makes a level-headed assessment of what the human condition really is. My point, instead, is to make an observation about the [...] [...] of Overcoming Bias, makes a level-headed assessment of what the human condition really is. My point, instead, is to make an observation about the [...]

]]> By: Francois Tremblay http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-479415 Francois Tremblay Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:24:57 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-479415 i find it interesting that you've arrived at all these (entirely true) conclusions about the human condition, but you don't mention antinatalism. Is that a deliberate omission, or are you against antinatalism? If the latter, what possible justification could you muster for bringing about new human lives? i find it interesting that you’ve arrived at all these (entirely true) conclusions about the human condition, but you don’t mention antinatalism. Is that a deliberate omission, or are you against antinatalism? If the latter, what possible justification could you muster for bringing about new human lives?

]]> By: Lightwave http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389506 Lightwave Fri, 02 Jan 2009 10:50:41 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389506 Beverley, what misunderstanding is that? What's your objection to #5? Beverley, what misunderstanding is that? What’s your objection to #5?

]]> By: Beverley Eyre http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389505 Beverley Eyre Fri, 02 Jan 2009 09:47:08 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389505 Actually, #5 reveals a deep misunderstanding of the nature of evolving systems, especially living systems. Actually, #5 reveals a deep misunderstanding of the nature of evolving systems, especially living systems.

]]> By: cow_2001 http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389504 cow_2001 Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:51:41 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389504 I met a traveller from an antique land Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand, Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things, The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed. And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains: round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, The lone and level sands stretch far away. OZYMANDIAS by Percy B. Shelley. I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock’d them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

OZYMANDIAS
by Percy B. Shelley.

]]> By: jim http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389503 jim Wed, 31 Dec 2008 07:50:00 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389503 Oops! Apologies for the duplicate posting. Oops! Apologies for the duplicate posting.

]]> By: jim http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389502 jim Wed, 31 Dec 2008 07:47:25 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389502 What are the terrible aspects of life we're talking about here? Disease. Mental illness. Starvation. Maiming. Plus any other kinds of suffering one can think of. Pretty much everyone is affected by some of these, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, since this stuff isn't dealt out evenly, we find ourselves in the position of feeling 'lucky' that we're better off than some of our fellow humans who've gotten the short end of the stick. And of course, everybody dies, which isn't generally regarded as a good thing. So, there seems to be this transhumanist vision of an approaching utopia somewhere out there on the horizon. I'll admit, it's pretty easy for someone like me to write that off as a wishthinking fantasy; but as far as evidence for such a thing goes, I think history is on my side so far. And I'm talking about the entire history of life on this planet. But let's accept that in, say, a thousand years, we've eliminated suffering. First of all, is there any guarantee things will stay that way? Doubtful. But there's something more serious to contemplate, and that's that we're willing to waste generations of people-and here, I'm talking about the percentage that's doomed to misery simply by the luck of the draw- for a vision of a possible paradise inhabited by people who don't even exist yet, a paradise that none of the visionaries will ever see. What are we talking here? Imaginary immortality by proxy? Moreover, if these future denizens were never born, we wouldn't have to worry about providing them a paradise in the first place! The tragi-comic irony is apparent, I think. On the other hand, if we stopped breeding tomorrow, all of us would exist until we ceased existing, just like it always is anyway. But the upshot is that the source of our worries, i.e. the quality of the future for imaginary generations which don't actually exist, would vanish. Human suffering would vanish in a generation, and untold billions would be spared. A negative utopia, if you will, signed, sealed and delivered, if we could just rid ourselves of these notions of vicarious immortality. What are the terrible aspects of life we’re talking about here? Disease. Mental illness. Starvation. Maiming. Plus any other kinds of suffering one can think of. Pretty much everyone is affected by some of these, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, since this stuff isn’t dealt out evenly, we find ourselves in the position of feeling ‘lucky’ that we’re better off than some of our fellow humans who’ve gotten the short end of the stick. And of course, everybody dies, which isn’t generally regarded as a good thing.

So, there seems to be this transhumanist vision of an approaching utopia somewhere out there on the horizon. I’ll admit, it’s pretty easy for someone like me to write that off as a wishthinking fantasy; but as far as evidence for such a thing goes, I think history is on my side so far. And I’m talking about the entire history of life on this planet.

But let’s accept that in, say, a thousand years, we’ve eliminated suffering. First of all, is there any guarantee things will stay that way? Doubtful. But there’s something more serious to contemplate, and that’s that we’re willing to waste generations of people-and here, I’m talking about the percentage that’s doomed to misery simply by the luck of the draw- for a vision of a possible paradise inhabited by people who don’t even exist yet, a paradise that none of the visionaries will ever see. What are we talking here? Imaginary immortality by proxy? Moreover, if these future denizens were never born, we wouldn’t have to worry about providing them a paradise in the first place! The tragi-comic irony is apparent, I think.

On the other hand, if we stopped breeding tomorrow, all of us would exist until we ceased existing, just like it always is anyway. But the upshot is that the source of our worries, i.e. the quality of the future for imaginary generations which don’t actually exist, would vanish. Human suffering would vanish in a generation, and untold billions would be spared. A negative utopia, if you will, signed, sealed and delivered, if we could just rid ourselves of these notions of vicarious immortality.

]]> By: jim http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389501 jim Wed, 31 Dec 2008 07:39:52 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389501 What are the terrible aspects of life we're talking about here? Disease. Mental illness. Starvation. Maiming. Plus any other kinds of suffering one can think of. Pretty much everyone is affected by some of these, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, since this stuff isn't dealt out evenly, we find ourselves in the position of feeling 'lucky' that we're better off than some of our fellow humans who've gotten the short end of the stick. And of course, everybody dies, which isn't generally regarded as a good thing. So, there seems to be this transhumanist vision of an approaching utopia somewhere out there on the horizon. I'll admit, it's pretty easy for someone like me to write that off as a wishthinking fantasy; but as far as evidence for such a thing goes, I think history is on my side so far. And I'm talking about the entire history of life on this planet. But let's accept that in, say, a thousand years, we've eliminated suffering. First of all, is there any guarantee things will stay that way? Doubtful. But there's something more serious to contemplate, and that's that we're willing to waste generations of people-and here, I'm talking about the percentage that's doomed to misery simply by the luck of the draw- for a vision of a possible paradise inhabited by people who don't even exist yet, a paradise that none of the visionaries will ever see. What are we talking here? Imaginary immortality by proxy? Moreover, if these future denizens were never born, we wouldn't have to worry about providing them a paradise in the first place! The tragi-comic irony is apparent, I think. On the other hand, if we stopped breeding tomorrow, all of us would exist until we ceased existing, just like it always is anyway. But the upshot is that the source of our worries, i.e. the quality of the future for imaginary generations which don't actually exist, would vanish. Human suffering would vanish in a generation, and untold billions would be spared. A negative utopia, if you will, signed, sealed and delivered, if we could just rid ourselves of these notions of vicarious immortality. What are the terrible aspects of life we’re talking about here? Disease. Mental illness. Starvation. Maiming. Plus any other kinds of suffering one can think of. Pretty much everyone is affected by some of these, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, since this stuff isn’t dealt out evenly, we find ourselves in the position of feeling ‘lucky’ that we’re better off than some of our fellow humans who’ve gotten the short end of the stick. And of course, everybody dies, which isn’t generally regarded as a good thing.

So, there seems to be this transhumanist vision of an approaching utopia somewhere out there on the horizon. I’ll admit, it’s pretty easy for someone like me to write that off as a wishthinking fantasy; but as far as evidence for such a thing goes, I think history is on my side so far. And I’m talking about the entire history of life on this planet.

But let’s accept that in, say, a thousand years, we’ve eliminated suffering. First of all, is there any guarantee things will stay that way? Doubtful. But there’s something more serious to contemplate, and that’s that we’re willing to waste generations of people-and here, I’m talking about the percentage that’s doomed to misery simply by the luck of the draw- for a vision of a possible paradise inhabited by people who don’t even exist yet, a paradise that none of the visionaries will ever see. What are we talking here? Imaginary immortality by proxy? Moreover, if these future denizens were never born, we wouldn’t have to worry about providing them a paradise in the first place! The tragi-comic irony is apparent, I think.

On the other hand, if we stopped breeding tomorrow, all of us would exist until we ceased existing, just like it always is anyway. But the upshot is that the source of our worries, i.e. the quality of the future for imaginary generations which don’t actually exist, would vanish. Human suffering would vanish in a generation, and untold billions would be spared. A negative utopia, if you will, signed, sealed and delivered, if we could just rid ourselves of these notions of vicarious immortality.

]]> By: Squishy Thing http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/12/the-metahuman-condition.html#comment-389500 Squishy Thing Wed, 31 Dec 2008 02:50:30 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/12/the-meta-human-condition.html#comment-389500 Why does this lump of matter even think it is "human"? Why don't we just naturally consider ourselves as general optimization processes, minds, sentiences, that just happen to be instantiated in a funny, squishy form? Why does this lump of matter even think it is “human”? Why don’t we just naturally consider ourselves as general optimization processes, minds, sentiences, that just happen to be instantiated in a funny, squishy form?

]]>