4 ms·

Science has been enhancing humans for a very long time. Cellphones extend my ability to research before taking a decision. Current drugs has addressed a lot of

by xlayn 10y ago

Science has been enhancing humans for a very long time. Cellphones extend my ability to research before taking a decision. Current drugs has addressed a lot of human ailments; from pain to AIDS. Vaccines have took away a lot of deadly diseases. Last but not least we have a 35+ years life expectancy. Edit: As bogus as it is, also IQ has been increased.

bordercases 10y ago
So IQ is not bogus when it proves your point, but is bogus when it doesn't. Got it. (Bite the IQ bullet or don't; going half way and then flip-flopping back and forth is intellectually dishonest.) Additionally: "enhancement" seems like a bit of a bucket word. There are only a surface similarities between cellphones and AIDS cures, in that they help people. I mean, vaguely speaking, you're pushing the bounds of what humans are able to do; recall information more effectively, live longer, maybe fight disease. But then you end up broadening the category to "all technologies serve as enhancements" and vice versa, which stops describing the specific information that causes some people to be uncomfortable when they hear "enhancement". I would want to know what connotations about the word enhancement produce a split between the religious vs non-religious, and the spiritual vs the non-spiritual (the two are independent but correlated dimensions, believe me.) In this article the argument has been framed around "meddling with nature" which itself is kind of limiting the discourse. There's probably more to it.
- sp332 10y ago
  IQ isn't as good a measure of "general intelligence" as it claims to be, but it still measures some aspect of cognitive ability.
Retra 10y ago
That life expectancy boost is largely due to infant survival rates. (That's the problem with measuring averages.) Most people who've lived to be 25+ have continued to live long lives.

by xlayn 10y ago

bordercases 10y ago

So IQ is not bogus when it proves your point, but is bogus when it doesn't. Got it. (Bite the IQ bullet or don't; going half way and then flip-flopping back and forth is intellectually dishonest.) Additionally: "enhancement" seems like a bit of a bucket word. There are only a surface similarities between cellphones and AIDS cures, in that they help people. I mean, vaguely speaking, you're pushing the bounds of what humans are able to do; recall information more effectively, live longer, maybe fight disease. But then you end up broadening the category to "all technologies serve as enhancements" and vice versa, which stops describing the specific information that causes some people to be uncomfortable when they hear "enhancement". I would want to know what connotations about the word enhancement produce a split between the religious vs non-religious, and the spiritual vs the non-spiritual (the two are independent but correlated dimensions, believe me.) In this article the argument has been framed around "meddling with nature" which itself is kind of limiting the discourse. There's probably more to it.

sp332 10y ago
IQ isn't as good a measure of "general intelligence" as it claims to be, but it still measures some aspect of cognitive ability.

Retra 10y ago

That life expectancy boost is largely due to infant survival rates. (That's the problem with measuring averages.) Most people who've lived to be 25+ have continued to live long lives.