5 ms·

I disagree. Human beings as you say are products of their circumstances and one circumstance that seems very pervasive is technology. We are no longer fully hu

I disagree. Human beings as you say are products of their circumstances and one circumstance that seems very pervasive is technology. We are no longer fully human beings. Technology had changed what it is to be human even in Huxley's time; nowadays I wonder has AI already taken over? The prevalence of computer run algorithms in human beings decision making seems to imply it has started at least.

artificial 6y ago
AI gets bandied about these days. Would stoplights fall under AI?
- Johnjonjoan 6y ago
  Sure. I wouldn't say the decisions they influence affect our humanity a great deal though.
cj 6y ago
Technology has definitely changed what it is to be human. But I don’t think that means what we are today is less human than before. Technology is a very powerful tool we created. But so was the “invention” of the wheel.
- Johnjonjoan 6y ago
  I think the more that technology influences our decisions the less human we become in our actions. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing but that we are definitely diluting our humanism with other stuff.
- controversy 6y ago
  “To be human” is a soft phrase. What does that mean? It appears to assume an standard. The purpose of that appears to be to pull a no true Scotsman.
  - jschwartzi 6y ago
    Just because something is soft it's not necessarily invalid. I would argue the phrase means that you experience certain emotional reactions when around other people. You are capable of putting yourself in the shoes of another person and relating to them. And you respond in kind with the emotional reactions of your friends and family members. And additionally I would add the requirement that you also consider how those other people would react to what you are about to do. I know those aren't scientifically definable notions, but if I've learned anything in the past 10 years its that science isn't the only way to say interesting things about the human experience. It's just what most educated people reach for.
danans 6y ago
> We are no longer fully human beings This gets thrown about quite a bit without defining what "fully human" means. Given that it is a superlative, does it mean "free from the pressures of modern technological society"? Then it must also mean giving up the benefits of modern technological society, right? There are few true primitivists out there, and for many today it is a sort of technology enabled lifestyle business. I know because I'm an avid watcher of many of their YouTube channels. > Technology had changed what it is to be human even in Huxley's time; nowadays I wonder has AI already taken over? Technology has always done this. That's not to say all technology is a net benefit. We should absolutely as a society scrutinize and regulate the use of some tech, but to cast it all as dehumanizing in the essentialist manner using the ever poorly defined "full human" as a foil seems highly reductive.
- Johnjonjoan 6y ago
  I didn't mean to imply that all technology is "dehumanising" but I'd argue that most if not all that influences you has done something to your humanity/technology balance. Fully human being is very hard to explain. According to my knowledge of Huxley is that it's someone who has essentially reached an ego state that has certain values(life, beauty, suffering). All is each which is all. I think if you haven't really dug into Huxley this could be confusing but fully human being is a specific thing.
  - danans 6y ago
    > Fully human being is very hard to explain. According to my knowledge of Huxley is that it's someone who has essentially reached an ego state that has certain values(life, beauty, suffering). All is each which is all. Defining fully human as being in the nihilistic ego-destroyed state where differentiation between the Self and all existence is nullified is another fictional ideal. Huxley himself borrowed from eastern philosophy of Vedanta, of which Huxley was a student. It's a deeply interesting path of thought to go down as an individual, but it shouldn't be mistaken as a prescription for how to be fully human in society a practical way, or a principle around which to configure society.
    - 6y ago
roywiggins 6y ago
There's a good argument that technology, specifically control of fire, probably made us human in the first place by allowing us access to cooked food, which we became physically dependent on. Our biology was probably significantly influenced by early technology.
- Johnjonjoan 6y ago
  Of course technology made us who we are today.
  - starfallg 6y ago
    For better or worse, and there is no guarantee either way for the further, also.

artificial 6y ago

AI gets bandied about these days. Would stoplights fall under AI?

Johnjonjoan 6y ago
Sure. I wouldn't say the decisions they influence affect our humanity a great deal though.

cj 6y ago

Technology has definitely changed what it is to be human. But I don’t think that means what we are today is less human than before. Technology is a very powerful tool we created. But so was the “invention” of the wheel.

Johnjonjoan 6y ago
I think the more that technology influences our decisions the less human we become in our actions. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing but that we are definitely diluting our humanism with other stuff.
controversy 6y ago
“To be human” is a soft phrase. What does that mean? It appears to assume an standard. The purpose of that appears to be to pull a no true Scotsman.
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  Just because something is soft it's not necessarily invalid. I would argue the phrase means that you experience certain emotional reactions when around other people. You are capable of putting yourself in the shoes of another person and relating to them. And you respond in kind with the emotional reactions of your friends and family members. And additionally I would add the requirement that you also consider how those other people would react to what you are about to do. I know those aren't scientifically definable notions, but if I've learned anything in the past 10 years its that science isn't the only way to say interesting things about the human experience. It's just what most educated people reach for.

danans 6y ago

> We are no longer fully human beings This gets thrown about quite a bit without defining what "fully human" means. Given that it is a superlative, does it mean "free from the pressures of modern technological society"? Then it must also mean giving up the benefits of modern technological society, right? There are few true primitivists out there, and for many today it is a sort of technology enabled lifestyle business. I know because I'm an avid watcher of many of their YouTube channels. > Technology had changed what it is to be human even in Huxley's time; nowadays I wonder has AI already taken over? Technology has always done this. That's not to say all technology is a net benefit. We should absolutely as a society scrutinize and regulate the use of some tech, but to cast it all as dehumanizing in the essentialist manner using the ever poorly defined "full human" as a foil seems highly reductive.

Johnjonjoan 6y ago
I didn't mean to imply that all technology is "dehumanising" but I'd argue that most if not all that influences you has done something to your humanity/technology balance. Fully human being is very hard to explain. According to my knowledge of Huxley is that it's someone who has essentially reached an ego state that has certain values(life, beauty, suffering). All is each which is all. I think if you haven't really dug into Huxley this could be confusing but fully human being is a specific thing.
- danans 6y ago
  > Fully human being is very hard to explain. According to my knowledge of Huxley is that it's someone who has essentially reached an ego state that has certain values(life, beauty, suffering). All is each which is all. Defining fully human as being in the nihilistic ego-destroyed state where differentiation between the Self and all existence is nullified is another fictional ideal. Huxley himself borrowed from eastern philosophy of Vedanta, of which Huxley was a student. It's a deeply interesting path of thought to go down as an individual, but it shouldn't be mistaken as a prescription for how to be fully human in society a practical way, or a principle around which to configure society.
  - 6y ago

roywiggins 6y ago

There's a good argument that technology, specifically control of fire, probably made us human in the first place by allowing us access to cooked food, which we became physically dependent on. Our biology was probably significantly influenced by early technology.

Johnjonjoan 6y ago
Of course technology made us who we are today.
- starfallg 6y ago
  For better or worse, and there is no guarantee either way for the further, also.