Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.



Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:


Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view




whats new at ieet

Everyone loves a genetically modified mosquito – right?

Are We Ready for Designer Babies?

The End of Religion: Technology and the Future

Multifunctional fibers communicate with the brain

The Power of Pull

Yes, Obama “Won Twice” – as a Progressive. Deal With It, Everybody.


ieet books

How “God” Works: A Logical Inquiry on Faith
Author
Marshall Brain


comments

CygnusX1 on 'The End of Religion: Technology and the Future' (Jan 25, 2015)

Rick Searle on 'The End of Religion: Technology and the Future' (Jan 24, 2015)

jasoncstone on 'The End of Religion: Technology and the Future' (Jan 24, 2015)

SharZ on 'Problems with Defining an Existential Risk' (Jan 24, 2015)

Lincoln Cannon on 'The End of Religion: Technology and the Future' (Jan 24, 2015)

philosophytorres on 'Problems with Defining an Existential Risk' (Jan 23, 2015)

Knotanumber on 'Religion’s Dirty Dozen—12 Really Bad Religious Ideas That Have Made the World Worse' (Jan 23, 2015)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



JET

Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month


Bad luck and cancer – did the media get it wrong?
Jan 3, 2015
(18199) Hits
(4) Comments

#8: Future of love and sex: monogamy no longer the default, say experts
Dec 28, 2014
(11557) Hits
(0) Comments

#9: Creating sentient machines with ‘deep learning’ AI technology
Dec 28, 2014
(8925) Hits
(0) Comments

#6: Living for 1,000 years: an ‘out of this world’ future awaits us
Dec 30, 2014
(8493) Hits
(1) Comments



Comment on this entry

Humanity becomes technology


Dick Pelletier


Ethical Technology

January 05, 2013

Humanity’s merge with its technology, which began shortly after the taming of fire, is still happening today. Many predict that the fine-tuning of our DNA-based biology through stem cell and genetic research will spark a powerful nanotech revolution that promises to redesign and rebuild our bodies and the environment, pushing the limits of today’s understanding of life and the world we live in.


...

Complete entry


COMMENTS



Posted by SHaGGGz  on  01/05  at  09:28 PM

Augmenting or replacing our flesh with artificial nanomaterials will not automagically eliminate concerns over sickness, accidents, or unwanted death. The circumstances for these will change, along with opening up whole new vistas for our fellow cybermonkeys to try to take our electrofood.





Posted by Dick Pelletier  on  01/06  at  08:01 AM

@SHaGGGz,

I see a more positive future unfolding. Do I view events with more optimism? Yes I do.





Posted by b.  on  01/07  at  12:17 PM

I appreciate the first sentence which clearly shows humanities relationship to technology as long and continuous. Still, I don’t think it goes far enough. Saying that “Humanity Becomes Technology” implies it has not happened yet, which seems to conflict with the first sentence. “Humanity Becoming Technology” could be better, but sets up an artificial dichotomy between humanity and technology, which I think is false. There is no humanity if there is no technology (of course I’m agreeing with you that fire is a technology, and I would argue so is language), and there is no human-centred technology if there is no humanity. (There is non-human technology, as in non-human animals using tools optimized for specific tasks.) It has been argued that our very biological evolution has already been shaped by our technology.

For example: We are bipedal, but in order to be bipedal we need to have narrow pelvises, if we have narrow pelvises we have to deliver infants that are not developed enough to survive on their own (can’t even hold onto their mothers like infant monkeys). We can only survive as a species if our infants survive, so we must carry and protect them. How can we do that? Invent the sling to hold our infants without interfering with gathering and moving. Thus our evolution is already strictly tied to our technology. We would not have made it this far without our technology, nor would we be the biological creatures we are today.

I don’t think the division between us and technology is tenable, we are hopelessly integrated into our technology, and perhaps we have been so for as long as we have aware of ourselves as human (or longer). I don’t think any of these discussions can really move forward without taking the unity of technology and humanity as a starting point.





Posted by Dick Pelletier  on  01/07  at  02:08 PM

@B.,

Very well said.






Add your comment here:


Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | AFRICAN FUTURES PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376