Transhumanist don’t think about playing God, because religion is a subjective interpretation of our very existence
Interviewer: If i understand you well, designing the future of the body, the skin well, the whole human being, is a new form of art. Here is a quote from you: “When we think of the arts, it is necessary to stretch our imaginations to a time when humanity will steer evolution. We are at the precipice of navigating this course now”. Was God, or what we call God, an artist? Do transhumanist artists plan to become “like Gods”?
I learned early on that they are many different interpretations of religion throughout the world. Western man of Gods is not necessarily the only views. There are a lot of different traditions of the future and the past. I lived with the Navajo Indians, I was in the Amazon jungle, I traveled many places and studied different methods of appreciating life though prayer and mediations. And I put that all together! So think about a Christian, a Jew or a Muslim, an atheist or an agnostic doesn’t really make sense to me. Because all those systems believe that they are absolutely correct! That really freaked me out: how do they know, have they been there? So to answer your question: the universe is a pretty magnificent body of matter. How it started, we do not know. We think it was a big bang, that’s the latest theory from what we know at this point of time. i do not see any place in a religious God in that. Certainly, from a religious point of view, one would esteem that God would be a magnificent artist in designing humans and in designing all life forms. Another interpretation would be that the cosmos is a great artist in creating in the universe. I am more interested in the universe and what came out of that and life evolving. Do transhumanists plan to become like God? I hope not because I think it’s an authoritarian view that is all right and all perfect and I don’t think being all right and all perfect is transhumanist. Because if you are perfect, there is not room for improvements! But if you look at it in the other way, it could be like playing God in extending life, building new bodies, designing life extension. But I do not see it as being God, I see as being a species that know it has to do something or else. Meaning that if there is a Singularity and superintelligence does outperform human intelligence, we will have no choice. We will have to upgrade ourselves and become smarter. That is the issue of extinction risk. We have to protect our specie, that’s our responsibility. This is the ethic or transhumanism.
We are still the masters of our fate. Rational thinking, even assisted by any conceivable electronic computors, cannot predict the future. All it can do is to map out the probability space as it appears at the present and which will be different tomorrow when one of the infinity of possible states will have materialized. Technological and social inventions are broadening this probability space all the time; it is now incomparably larger than it was before the industrial revolution—for good or for evil.
The future cannot be predicted, but futures can be invented.
It was man’s ability to invent which has made human society what it is. The mental processes of inventions are still mysterious. They are rational but not logical, that is to say, not deductive.
Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an ‘intelligence explosion’, and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control.
Social media has given everyone a virtual megaphone to broadcast every thought, along with the means to filter out any contrary view [...] The result is a creeping sense of isolation and emptiness, which leads people to swipe, tap, and click all the more. Digital distraction keeps the mind occupied but does little to nurture it, much less cultivate depth of feeling, which requires the resonance of another’s voice within our very bones and psyches.
Moravec's paradox is the observation by artificial intelligence and robotics researchers that, contrary to traditional assumptions, reasoning (which is high-level in humans) requires very little ...
Almost always the men who achieve these fundamental inventions of a new paradigm have been either very young or very new to the field whose paradigm they change. And perhaps that point need not have been made explicit, for obviously these are the men who, being little committed by prior practice to the traditional rules of normal science, are particularly likely to see that those rules no longer define a playable game and to conceive another set that can replace them.