PDA

View Full Version : "2045" Strategic Social Initiative



-asalantu-
7th May 2013, 05:20 PM
¡Hi, all!

¿What's your opinions about this subject? ¿Could human beings transfer its conciousness to machines in terms of a full cyborg concept? Seriously, this is a goal for year 2045; and has support of Dalai Lama.

Ref.: http://www.2045.com

Sincerely
Ángel

ButterflyWoman
7th May 2013, 05:31 PM
Sounds like science fiction to me. At this point in time, our efforts at creating artificial intelligence are rudimentary, at best, and the human mind is the most complex computer imaginable, with nearly infinite processing ability and holographic memory space. Heck, they can't even work out how to get a quantum computer to work without being constantly stopped by random passing electrons! And NOBODY, not in neuroscience, psychology, psychiatry, physics, computer science, or any other field, has yet been able to successfully model or even define "consciousness".

I find it difficult to believe that in a little over thirty years our understanding of 1) computer science 2) quantum mechanics 3) consciousness and 4) how the human mind actually works will be advanced enough to pull off something like this.

-asalantu-
7th May 2013, 05:59 PM
Yes, BW, I think like you. But, ¿what about transferring our entire Nervous System to an hightech environment, something like a robot exoskeleton? (this seems to be a first stage goal, if I had understood correctly 2045.com concepts).

Such a robot exoskeleton would have necessary subsystem devoted to nutrients delivery and toxin suppression, of course, since human nervous system mechanics is biologically based yet.

Although connecting to a dialysis system would be another approach in order to reduce sophistication of early models.

My best regards,
Ángel

BDeye
7th May 2013, 06:05 PM
Either way I'd have a go.:D

ButterflyWoman
7th May 2013, 06:13 PM
what about transferring our entire Nervous System to an hightech environment, something like a robot exoskeleton?
It might, in thirty years, be possible to simulate a reasonable facsimile of how the human nervous system works. We can kind of do that now, with some very credible robotics that are able to quite efficiently and cleverly move around just like people do. But a nervous system and consciousness are nowhere near the same thing.

Sinera
7th May 2013, 07:32 PM
This is seen more critically by some (esp. in the 'spiritual field') and has generally been referred to as the "movement" of TRANSHUMANISM.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj_-sBNQKcQ

I've read about it a few weeks ago and actually I find it quite frightening.

Here also two good articles I found back then: one by Nick Bostrom, a Swedish philosopher:

http://www.nickbostrom.com/ethics/values.html

... and another by a German-language "new age / metaphysical" online mag. Sorry that the translation with google might be so lousy but here it is anyway since the article is very good, imv:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sein.de%2Fgesellschaft%2Fzusamm enleben%2F2013%2Ftranshumanismus-die-groesste-gefahr-fuer-die-menschheit.html

I like the conclusion, also with regard to the Dalai Lama who might actually be up to some trick (of course, just a speculation):


Transhumanism is revealed to me as a form of madness, driven by fantasies of omnipotence and the fear of death. Transhumanism will fail due to the reality that he does not want to understand in his materialistic-mechanical picture of the world, what life, what consciousness really is. This life for our science fact is still a complete mystery despite all progress, this life that defies entropy and assumes ever more complex, more conscious forms. Transhumanism is the ultimate dead end of materialism, his grotesquely distorted caricature. But he already has millions of followers - and few people really deal with how many of these developments will affect us directly and promptly soon. As naturally as the smartphone also all future developments will go into normality. Soon, parents will be conservative if they do not let their children use the latest Christmas implant.
It is my hope that the person either mentally matured in time to stop this development, or that other factors, such as environmental or business, they do fortunately impossible. Perhaps transhumanism is the last gasp of materialism might be precisely the findings from this insane attempt to open a new chapter. Presumably, this is the hope of people like the Dalai Lama, who advocates for transhumanism (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://2045.com/dialogue/29819.html&usg=ALkJrhiCwBvzQoPyp6qRDPEQHZ6qCR1tsg) .
- D. Rotter

-asalantu-
7th May 2013, 07:46 PM
But a nervous system and consciousness are nowhere near the same thing.

¿You wants to mean conciousness arises from human body taken as a whole and not as sequel of Nervous System mechanics by itself, gathering sensory data from (and controlling the) body, since NS has grown from womb stage in a continuous development by learning about how to control its body to whose systems is nerve linked?

But if that's the reason, ¿what happens when OBEing? ¿Or OBE is possible only when human being has reformulated its belief system considering living out of its body is possible?

My best regards,

Ángel

BDeye
7th May 2013, 07:53 PM
You know I've heard arguments for and against it. I feel if the individuals who would want to try anything approaching something like this aren't hurting anyone else, let them go for it. If it's a free choice and not forced on anyone cool. Personally I'd go for it but that's just me, and would never try and force a point of view. I understand the shock that some may feel at the prospect. I also understand the double edged nature that some of these prospects have. I reckon I'd still have a go. Still very Huxley (brave new world) feel to it.

Sinera
7th May 2013, 07:55 PM
Still very Huxley (brave new world) feel to it.
Exactly. And since we're already almost at Orwell's 1984 we shouldn't do that one further step up still.
:wink:

BDeye
7th May 2013, 08:05 PM
Both Huxley and Orwell depicted a control of society but from two very different means. I think today we find ourselves more under Huxley method of control ( a control through overabundance, not restriction). I think most of us accept the methods of control because in some way they make our life easier. Cell phones, computers, medical breakthroughs. The horrific truth not concealed, but rather lost in a sea of information. Eh well, plug me in.

GMAN12
7th May 2013, 11:59 PM
I recommend starting IIH now, work on it for 10-15 years for perfection, give your self immortality. Simpler, keeping your own body and no need to be stuck in a piece of metal. At first I was actually into this when I was younger, but since I have been following the path of true initiation, I found out it isn't really that great and as BW said, our minds are way more complex than machines. Think about it, we created them. At the same time, they won't be able to implement everything from a human brain because they have hardly explored consciousness which is my perspective and also I thought of it like a computer. People could have into and have control depleting your will. Better off with plan one because with hard work, you could do what they do 3-4x faster without the need for another body. Besides that, what about people wanting to transplant before they die? Where will all those dead bodies go? Maybe to those who need another body? I don't know. I would opt out because I think it will take away your free will. In the worst case scenario, they have this weapon called EMP which will cause all the robots to die anyways.

ButterflyWoman
8th May 2013, 06:38 AM
¿You wants to mean conciousness arises from human body taken as a whole and not as sequel of Nervous System mechanics by itself, gathering sensory data from (and controlling the) body, since NS has grown from womb stage in a continuous development by learning about how to control its body to whose systems is nerve linked?
They are linked, but the nervous system does not generate consciousness. People can live in a coma, with no sign of any awareness, for decades, with a functioning nervous system, just as one example. Do you honestly think that something as complex as consciousness is just a random side effect of the material body? I certainly don't. I see the body as a manifestation of consciousness, not the other way around.

As for OBE, to me (and others), it's a shifting of individual awareness, simple as that. It's like switching the channel, but it's still the same television. ;)

BDeye
8th May 2013, 07:25 AM
I recommend starting IIH now
I'm going through it at the moment, slowly though I've quite a few books on my plate.

CFTraveler
8th May 2013, 12:16 PM
GMAN said what I thought- if you believe such things are possible, we can already transfer our consciousness to any object. The trick is to get the object to respond as a human body, and I for one don't want to be alive to see that happen. Maybe I'm too conservative that way. The idea of brains in jars (or consciousness trapped in some robotic apparatus) scares the bejesus out of me.

BDeye
8th May 2013, 12:24 PM
Oh no I'm the maverick for a change. My sister is also most upset at my point of view, but again feel it comes down to the right to choose. I think if it were forced on me I'd go the other way.

-asalantu-
8th May 2013, 05:55 PM
¡Hola, CFTraveler!


GMAN said what I thought- if you believe such things are possible, we can already transfer our consciousness to any object. The trick is to get the object to respond as a human body, and I for one don't want to be alive to see that happen. Maybe I'm too conservative that way. The idea of brains in jars (or consciousness trapped in some robotic apparatus) scares the bejesus out of me.

Disculpa que te haga las siguientes preguntas retóricas... ¿A qué le temes? ¿A verte (opcionalmente) privada de un cuerpo susceptible de enfermedades, daños irreparables por accidente, vejez incapacitante, víctima de contaminantes tales como metales pesados, etc.? ¿Te parece más heroico enfrentar todos esos riesgos potenciales, evitables quizá, pero omnipresentes a lo largo de tu vida puesto que en tanto más vives tanto más probable es su sobrevinencia?

Ó, permíteme ser cruel, imagina que alguien muy querido por tí, un familiar próximo quizá, ante el riesgo de perder su vida, ¿le negarías la oportunidad de transferir su conciencia a un sistema dotado de los puertos adecuados de entrada/salida (I/O ports) que permitieran su gobierno?

Porque, ¿hasta qué punto una máquina construida en base a hidrocarburos como tu cuerpo, es superior respecto de otra construida en base a metales, silicio y plástico?

Y si estuvieras ligada a esa otra máquina (mucho más duradera) verías con agrado ser transplantada a otra susceptible de enfermedades y quebrantos diversos, basada en hidrocarburos?

Atenta y respetuosamente...
Ángel

-asalantu-
8th May 2013, 07:57 PM
A pair of threads, related to this one, are:

http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/showthread.php?10881-Extended-longevity-desire&highlight=desire+extended+longevity

http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/showthread.php?10922-Re-Extended-longevity-desire&highlight=desire+extended+longevity

Robert Bruce's conclusions are relevant.

My best regards,
Ángel

CFTraveler
8th May 2013, 08:36 PM
¡Hola, CFTraveler!



Disculpa que te haga las siguientes preguntas retóricas... ¿A qué le temes? ¿A verte (opcionalmente) privada de un cuerpo susceptible de enfermedades, daños irreparables por accidente, vejez incapacitante, víctima de contaminantes tales como metales pesados, etc.? ¿Te parece más heroico enfrentar todos esos riesgos potenciales, evitables quizá, pero omnipresentes a lo largo de tu vida puesto que en tanto más vives tanto más probable es su sobrevinencia?

Ó, permíteme ser cruel, imagina que alguien muy querido por tí, un familiar próximo quizá, ante el riesgo de perder su vida, ¿le negarías la oportunidad de transferir su conciencia a un sistema dotado de los puertos adecuados de entrada/salida (I/O ports) que permitieran su gobierno?

Porque, ¿hasta qué punto una máquina construida en base a hidrocarburos como tu cuerpo, es superior respecto de otra construida en base a metales, silicio y plástico?

Y si estuvieras ligada a esa otra máquina (mucho más duradera) verías con agrado ser transplantada a otra susceptible de enfermedades y quebrantos diversos, basada en hidrocarburos?

Atenta y respetuosamente...
Ángel

Querido Ángel, no le tengo miedo a cambiar de cuerpo si es mi decisión. Lo que me da miedo es que de la misma forma que pueden inventar algo parecido que funcione, puedan inventar una forma de obligar a que alguien esté atado a una maquinaria sin poder desconectarse o morir, si es lo que quiere hacer. Eso es lo que temo, perder el derecho a morir si esa es mi decisión.

GMAN12
9th May 2013, 01:55 AM
I have read that answer to the question you have Asalantu, but the point is, being put into a robot is most likely with our technology, a downgrade. All that you can learn will be easily learned, true, but an artificial brain is different from an organic brain. That is like a GMO compared to an organic seed. What is the difference? The other one was made perfect and one was made to become perfect. Also the one genetically mutated had other toxic things in it. It is just like that. You also won't be able to project anywhere with an artificial brain which in actuality, you will be dead and that artificial mind will be there. The memory you will not gain from travels to the astral or other places. He says the longer we live, the wiser we get, but that pertains to being in a regular body. You need to go through those trials and stuff. Franz Bardon once cured a girl of Tuberculosis, but he had to give it back to her because it was part of her karma. You cannot escape fate and eventually it will catch up to you. You can however change fate, but through a robot, you cannot recite kabbalah because you probably won't be able to hit notes naturally like a human body can.

-asalantu-
9th May 2013, 05:12 AM
¡Hola, CFTraveler!


Querido Ángel, no le tengo miedo a cambiar de cuerpo si es mi decisión. Lo que me da miedo es que de la misma forma que pueden inventar algo parecido que funcione, puedan inventar una forma de obligar a que alguien esté atado a una maquinaria sin poder desconectarse o morir, si es lo que quiere hacer. Eso es lo que temo, perder el derecho a morir si esa es mi decisión.

Te entiendo.

Un riesgo del progreso tecnológico es la creación de nuevos (y más sutiles/eficientes/diabólicos) métodos de tortura.

Pero... ¿hasta qué punto pueden interferir con la expresión material de nuestros deseos? En particular, el deseo de morir. Habría que plantear muy seriamente ese derecho; pero todo lo que puede ser planteado, puede ser replanteado y suprimido.

Mi punto de vista particular, es que esta iniciativa tiene una alta verosimilitud de éxito. Después de todo, a un ser humano se le pueden amputar las piernas, los brazos, el sistema digestivo, el aparato reproductor, los pulmones, el urinario, los ojos, remover los oídos, aunque todas estas operaciones nunca han sido hechas todas sobre un único individuo.

Reemplazando los miembros así suprimidos por equivalentes (y potenciados) biomecánicos artificiales, a menos de un shock irreversible, el humano así tratado podría recuperar su funcionalidad y, tal vez, hasta lograr los propósitos psico/espirituales que tratamos en el sitio de Robert Bruce.

No veo, como Butterfly Woman, tan inalcanzable la creación de un medio artificial que sirva de soporte de la mente. Después de todo, Robert Bruce, ve a al cerebro como un transceptor (transceiver), y, quizá la solución al problema de la muerte vendría dado por el corte del intercambio bidireccional entre el espíritu y el cuerpo así procesado. Me refiero al tradicionalmente denominado "Cordón de Plata" (http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/content.php?194-Part-2). En ese caso, nuestro Higher Self tendría la última palabra.

Atenta y respetuosamente...
Ángel

ButterflyWoman
9th May 2013, 06:01 AM
Oh no I'm the maverick for a change.
Oh yes! :)

Just as a side note, I've always been unwilling to just take other peoples' word for things, even as a child (this was part of the friction with my mother that led to our eventual estrangement, actually; I wouldn't just go along with whatever nonsense she tried to foist on me). As my attachments to the material world have lessened and dissolved, my natural tendency to be a strange thinker with a weird POV has only increased. However, these days I'm much less likely to be assertive about my POV, while historically, I could be very much like a dog with a bone in trying to convince people of... whatever it was I thought I was going to convinced them of, I guess (really, I was trying to justify my direct experience, and now I see very well that this is a fool's goal and then some). I will share, sometimes, and I don't especially care if people agree with me or if they think I'm a lunatic or whatever, but mostly, it just seems like discussion is something I do for entertainment and pleasure rather than any real need to do it. From that perspective, which I actually find I like, there is no need to assert anything or get upset about whether people "believe" me or not, or whether they even understand a damned thing I'm saying.

I'm sharing this as a general sort of observation and for some sort of, oh, you know, planting seeds that might grow into something interesting for someone. And because I felt like it. :)

-asalantu-
9th May 2013, 11:24 AM
¡Hi, CFTraveler!

Robert Bruce, at http://www.astraldynamics.com.au/showthread.php?1260-An-Article-by-Robert-Bruce, says:

"Also, one of the most noticeable things that happens is that during raised kundalini state, ones higher self manifests very strongly through you. You virtually become your higher self, but still retain your human personality. Bathed in the sacred Aummm, ones connection to God is extremely noticeable and real."

So, death is allowed once you desire that.

My best regards,
Ángel