Daily Archives: August 25, 2022

What is transhumanism?

(1) The intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally improving the human condition through applied reason, especially by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.

(2) The study of the ramifications, promises, and potential dangers of technologies that will enable us to overcome fundamental human limitations, and the related study of the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies.

The Philosophy of Transhumanism

Transhumanist FAQ

Developed in the mid-1990s and published in 1998, the Transhumanist FAQ became a formal document through the inspirational work of transhumanists, including Alexander Chislenko, Max More, Anders Sandberg, Natasha Vita-More, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Arjen Kamphius, and many others. Over the years, this FAQ has been updated to provide a substantial account of transhumanism. Humanity+, also known as WTA, adopted the FAQ in 2001 and Nick Bostrom added substantial information about future scenarios. The Transhumanist FAQ 3.0, as revised by the continued efforts of many transhumanists.

The Transhumanist Manifesto

Written by Natasha Vita-More 1993 and revised in 1998 (v.2), 2008 (v.3), and 2020 (v.4), and based on the earliest manifesto Transhuman Statement, which was published in 1983.

The Transhumanist Declaration

Originally crafted in 1998 by an international group of authors: Doug Baily, Anders Sandberg, Gustavo Alves, Max More, Holger Wagner, Natasha Vita-More, Eugene Leitl, Bernie Staring, David Pearce, Bill Fantegrossi, den Otter, Ralf Fletcher, Tom Morrow, Alexander Chislenko, Lee Daniel Crocker, Darren Reynolds, Keith Elis, Thom Quinn, Mikhail Sverdlov, Arjen Kamphuis, Shane Spaulding, and Nick Bostrom. This Transhumanist Declaration has been modified over the years by several authors and organizations. It was adopted by the Humanity+ Board in March, 2009.

Read more from the original source:
Transhumanism Humanity+

Freedom of form means the freedom to physically become whatever you want. No matter what drives you, be it transhumanism, species dysphoria, recovery from injury, futurism, or a desire to transform, the technology to safely restore or alter your body should be available for everyone.

This freedom ranges from sufficiently restoring function to patients after injury, to gender and/or species identity affirmation treatments, to individuals who get tattoos or body art, simply getting hair cuts or putting on makeup, or even body hackers pushing beyond normal biological function.

At the Freedom of Form Foundation, we have a long-term focus on ambitious, full-body changes to fit ones personality and sense of identity. Were especially excited about species affirmation research despite community passion surrounding the subject, it is vastly underrepresented in the biomedical sector. We stand wholeheartedly with the rights of individuals to choose how they interact with the world, including how they appear, and we are doing everything in our power to accommodate and accelerate freedom of form.

Our vision and strategy

Read the original post:
Become your true self - Freedom of Form Foundation

I have spent the last two months in Japan, mostly in Thoku, the northernmost region of the main island, Honsh. During this time, I was working on a couple of different projects including ghost weddings,* mummies,** and the use of androids in Buddhist temples.*** I have already mentioned each of these three phenomena separately in previous essays for this column. Today, I would like to explore what these three phenomena can teach us about the worldview of Buddhism. I know it sounds bewildering, but these three phenomena share a few deep similarities. The former two express considerations about an afterlife and the notion of immaterial spirits, the latter two assign buddhahood, or at least bodhisattvahood, to seemingly inanimate and insentient beings. And while some, if not all of them, seem to be at odds with Buddhism, all the phenomena that I will talk about here: mukasari ema (pictures of ghost weddings) and hanayome ningy (doll effigies of ghost brides); sokushinbutsu (the bodies of monks who mummified themselves); and Mindar, an android representation of Kannon (Guanyin) Bodhisattva; are enshrined in Buddhist temples in Japan. What fascinates me about all three of these phenomena is that they reflect specific and interesting considerations about the nature of consciousness and what it means to be human.

Two temples in Tend City in Yamagata Prefecture, Jakush-ji and Kurotori Kannon, are famous for their dedication to Kannon Bodhisattvaboth are part of the Thoku version of the 33-temple pilgrimage in honor of Kannon Bodhisattvaand as temples that enshrine mukasari ema. Risshakuji in Yamadera and Kawakura Sai no Kawara Jizoson (Kurokawas Jizo Bodhisattva on the bank of the river Sai) in Aomori Prefecture enshrine hanayome ningy. In both cases, the spirits of people who have departed without being married are married to a ghost. The temples mentioned here belong to the St, Tendai, and Shingon schools of Buddhism. So they are a cross-sectarian phenomena.

This year, I further explored the process of making these postmortem wedding pictures and the memorial ritual (kuy) by means of which they are enshrined in a designated Buddhist temple. The Buddhist temples are not involved in the production of the mukasari ema or hanayome ningy, but merely perform the memorial rituals and provide a space for these objects of memory and commemoration.

I spoke with one of the few remaining professional artists who paint these postmortem wedding pictures. She said that she communed with the dead and clearly believed in the survival of an immaterial spirit after physical death. To her, humans, ghosts, and gods all possess the same kind of spirit. She believes that these spirits stay in our world after death, move to the other world (the Pure Land), and/or are reincarnated. None of these options is permanent. Philosopher Carl Becker of Kyoto University embraces a similar worldview.

Two other trips took me to the western part of Yamagata Prefecture, where I visited Dainichib and Nangaku-ji in Tsuruoka City and Kaik-ji in Sakata City. Each of these temples enshrines one or, in the case of Kaik-ji, two sokushinbutsu. The documentary Mummies that Made Themselves (available on YouTube) explains the phenomenon and process of self-mummification in some detail. Through hard discipline and a special diet over the course of 37 yearsmostly in the area of Ydonosana handful of practitioners (shugysha) in the Edo period (16031868) are said to have cultivated their bodies to such a degree that they did not decompose. The mummies of Tetsumonkai and Shinnykai in Chren-ji and Dainichib, respectively, allegedly still possess all their internal organs. In my conversations with the head priest of Chren-ji (in 2016), the temple curator of Kaik-ji (2019), and the vice priest of Kaik-ji (2022), I learned about the belief that these mummified monks are not dead per se but continue to cultivate Buddhist practice and have causal efficacy insofar as they can perform miracles. In response to my questions as to whether these mummified practitioners are conscious, I was told that they do not have ego-centric everyday consciousnessmy formulationbut rather sit in deep contemplation akin to the so-called bodhicitta (mind of enlightenment).

Another set of trips took me to Kdai-ji in Kyoto, which enshrines Mindar, a representation of Kannon Bodhisattva. According to Mahyna Buddhist beliefs, Kannon Bodhisattva can take on any form (see chapter 25 of the Lotus Stra) this expression includes androids. Similarly, it can include any sentient or insentient being having buddha-nature**** and even becoming a buddha. Ven. Got Tensh at Kdai-ji explained that Mindar is designed to help people overcome suffering and manifests Kannon Bodhisattva. However, Mindar is neither conscious nor able to attain buddhahood. He compared Mindar to a talking Buddha statue. In my conversation with him as well as in Mindars Dharma talk, which he scripted, Ven. Got emphasized that while Mindar is selfless (muga) and embodies emptiness (k) to some degree, his selflessness and emptiness differs significantly from that of the Buddha insofar as he is unable to experience suffering. Most of all, Mindar constitutes a skillful means (hben).

So what can we learn from these excursions/explorations? What is consciousness? It seems that we human beings are not only impermanent (mujteki), selfless (mugateki), and subject to suffering (ku) but also not entirely reducible to our bodies. However, more than the answer to this question, my trips and conversations revealed some central insights into how we learn about consciousness. As Evan Thompson has remarked, the study of consciousness is unique in that it features a subject, consciousness, studying itself, consciousness. This unique predicament of consciousness studies creates a fundamental conundrum. It also has important implications for understanding the phenomena discussed in this essay.

If we shake our heads at people who claim that they commune with spirits, are affected by mummies, or assign divinity to androids or other AI, it is because those experiences are subjective and not communicable. The difficulty is that all our positions are formulated from a first-person perspective even as we struggle to achieve a third-person perspective that is universally true. The truth, however, lies somewhere in between, in the relationship between persons and minds, and necessitates a second-person perspective. For some people, this implies a relationship to ghosts, mummies, and/or robots; for me it requires the relationship to and dialogue with people who claim to have had these experiences. As much as I hope it to be true, my position is not a priori superior to those of others but has to be negotiated in a multilogue with numerous positions and minds. Ultimately, this requires, as I have argued elsewhere, a fourth-person perspective.****** This, of course, cannot be worked out in a 1,000-word article or a single-author essay.******* Such a project is best visualized in the Huayan image of Indras net. This is what my conversations this summer have taught me.

* Buddhist Death Rituals: For the Living Not for the Dead (BDG)

** How to Face Death Pilgrimages and Death Rituals in Japanese Buddhism (BDG)

*** Does Artificial Intelligence Have Buddha-nature (BDG)

**** T 2223.61.0011.

***** T 2299.70.300.

****** Kopf 2021.

******* I have suggested such a method elsewhere (Kopf 2022).

Kopf, Gereon. 2021. How to Make Philosophy of Religion Relevant for the Future, essay in the series Is there a Future of the Philosophy of Religion, published on Philosophy of Religion: big question philosophy for scholars and students hosted by Boston University (https://philosophyofreligion.org/?p=525634#more-525634).

Kopf, Gereon. 2022. The Theory and Praxis of the Multi-Entry Approach, in Philosophy of Religion Around the World: A Critical Approach, eds. Nathan Loewen & Agnieszka Rostalska (Bloomsbury Academics).

Taish shinsh daizky [The Japanese Edition of the Chinese Version of the Buddhist Canon], ed. by Junjir Takakusu and Kaigyoku Watanabe (Tokyo: Taish Shinsh Daizky Kankkai. 1961).

What or Who Is a Buddha?Does Artificial Intelligence have Buddha-nature?The Problem with GhostsDharma and Artificial Intelligence: Further ConsiderationsScaling Intelligence in an AI-dominated Future Cyberpunk: The Human Condition amid High-tech Alienation and Urban Dystopia To Keep or Not to Keep? Mortality, Humanity, and TranshumanismTangut Twilight: Living Buddhism in the City of Ghosts Taxing the Robots and Other Externalities Tocharian Lives and Loves: Haunting Mummies and their Buddhist Descendants

Visit link:
Ghosts, Mummies, and Robots in Buddhism - Buddhistdoor Global

Of course, youre not supposed to know this. Youre not supposed to know that youre being mind-controlled, right now, by a self-replicating mutagenic xeno-substance that was initially sold to us as the key to the future. So the proof of its existence is hidden in the only place it can be hidden. Its hidden in science fiction.

This year alone, black goothe science-fictional name for the science-factual graphene oxidehas seeped its way into not one but two sci-fi shows, Severance and Westworld. Three if you count Stranger Things, where it was sighted in earlier seasons. These sightings and intertextual seepagessublimations, clearly, of real-world tormentsare too consistent to be coincidental. They are signs that cannot be ignored.

Start with Westworld, whose latest season finds the robots in complete control of humankind. This they accomplished, the robot-in-chief indicates, using a combination of flies, parasites, and, yes, black goo. We see vats of the stuff in a hidden lair, glistening sickly. It seems to be the medium in which the parasites are growna callback to the first major appearance of black goo in the canon, the OG, the Original Goo itself: the Purity virus in The X-Files.

Middle of season 3, you remember. French salvagers discover an alien vessel deep in the ocean and mysteriously die, but a diving suit belonging to one of them is covered, Mulder discovers, in some kind of oil. (Black goo is variously referred to as black oil, black cancer, black bile, black blood, etc. All the same stuff.) Is it possible the oil is, as he later puts it, a medium used by alien creatures to body-jump? Thats as far as Westworlds callback takes it: black-goo-as-medium. But X-Files knows the whole truth. Thanks to science-minded Scully, we learn in season 5 that the body-snatcher is some sort of vermiform organism that gets attached to the pineal gland. Translation: Black goo isnt just medium. Its also monster.

Sometimes, the victims of black engooment in X-Files survive, so long as the stuff safely, if violently, self-ejects from eyes and mouth. Not so much the victims in the Alien franchise, which constitutes the goos best-known modern manifestation. As one of the franchises tie-in video games puts it: Any living thing that comes into direct contact with the black gooknown technically, in this universe, as Chemical A0-3959X.91-15will either die horribly, give birth to monsters, or become a monster themselves. You see a lot of this oozy, unrecoverable infection in Prometheus. Also in Rakka, a little-known short film by Neill Blomkamp, where Sigourney Weaver leads a last hurrah in 2020 Texas against alien colonizers equipped with black-goo weaponry that can somehow both control minds and obliterate buildings.

Obviously, the sci-fi record isnt perfectly clear on the workings of black goo; it is, by its nature, impossible to grasp. In Miyazaki movies, it tends to be ecologically terrorizing; in Luc Bessons Lucy, its some sort of sparkly transhumanist supercomputing thing. (Perhaps not so coincidentally, Scarlet Johansson, Lucys Lucy, also stars in Under the Skin, as an alien who drowns and eats men in a sea of black goo.) In Severance, its more metaphorical, a visual symbol for the ways in which separate realities bleed into and out of each other. Same goes for Stranger Things, where its a kind of interdimensional trespasser. The specifics, though, are somewhat beside the point. The medium is the metaphor is the monster is the message, and the message is this: Whatever black goo is, its alien, everywhere, and the source of all evil on the planet.

Read more here:
The Biggest Threat to Humanity? Black Goo - WIRED

This week, an attempt was made to murder Russian intellectual (and Ukraine war advocate) Alexander Dugin. Because of a last minute mix-up, his daughter Darya was killed instead. Outrage over this killing has been muted. No doubt some are secretly gloating, even though this attack on a thinker close to Vladimir Putin is likely to escalate the Russia-Ukraine war and make it even uglier.

But then, the fates of Ukrainian civilians have never mattered much to those in the West who want to turn that country into a decade-long quagmire to kill and maim as many Russians as possible.

I havent studied Alexander Dugins work. He seems like an unsavory sort, an illiberal Russian imperialist on the order of the Catholic Integralists Ive been critiquing over the past nine years. Hes apparently a collectivist-nationalist. He sees a hive-like Russia, with Orthodoxy replacing Communism, as the only live alternative to the deadly Woke ideology thats poisoning the West.

You know, the agenda preached by all our elites, our government, our universities, and an ever-increasing number of churches. It entails abortion on demand through nine months of pregnancy, castrating kids, disarming citizens. It calls for forcibly vaccinating us all, and indoctrinating everyone with hatred of their ancestors and culture. Also destroying small business and the energy industry, eliminating the use of cash, and subjecting the whole economy to a quasi-Marxist social justice agenda.

We call this liberal democracy. And by golly, were pouring billions into defending it in the unspeakably corrupt one-party state that is todays Ukraine.

Friends assure me that what Alexander Dugin favors is even worse than all that, and I believe them. I guess.

But its also completely irrelevant. Should we as a society endorse the assassination of intellectuals who are not part of any government, because we consider their ideas dangerous? Even if we can make a case that those ideas have contributed to fomenting an ongoing war? Or if those ideas outrage everything we consider sacred? Lets think through the implications here.

Suppose you propose, as I do, a rule against assassinating non-combatants, no matter how unsavory. The first objection youre likely to encounter is the obvious one. So you wouldnt kill baby Hitler?

The answer is no. I wouldnt kill a baby. Nor would I go back (if I could) and kill Hitler in his filthy Vienna garret. There is a point at which I think Hitler would have been fair game for assassination: Any time after the Beer Hall Putsch, when he violently tried to overthrow his countrys legal government. At that point he became a terrorist of the kind that deserves a drone strike, or a well-placed bullet by a British secret agent.

But not before.

The U.S. government routinely targets Islamist leaders directly linked to terrorist violence. We do not target mere theologians, however, or intellectuals whose teachings might justify violence. Insofar as our rogue regime still adheres to this policy, it is obeying the laws of war.

Nor do I think Salman Rushdie deserves assassination attempts, though hundreds of millions of Muslims think he does. Rushdie criticized their prophet, whom they consider sinless despite his life of warfare, kidnapping, massacres and sexual slavery.

I wouldnt approve of assassinating anti-Christian activists like Richard Dawkins, either. Nor even Jose Bergoglio who as pope is currently destroying my own Catholic church, which he will have the power to do until he dies. Nobody whos not a direct part of inflicting violence is a legitimate target for violence.

Its much more tempting to consider assassinating haters of the human species like Yuval Harari, a profoundly dangerous, power-hungry transhumanist, who recently said that most of the human population might as well die off to leave more room for elite people like himself, enhanced with biotechnology. Hariri is known for saying the quiet part out loud; for instance, regarding COVID vaccines:

COVID is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimize, total biometric surveillance. If we want to stop this epidemic we need to not just monitor people, we need to monitor what is happening underneath their skin.

Or global hegemons like Bill Gates, George Soros, and Klaus Schwab, wielding enormous resources, using them to undermine governments, promote abortion, control private citizens, and generally promote a monstrous post-human future.

But if we get to kill their intellectuals, the other side gets to kill ours. A world where men like Soros are dodging bullets would be one where Franklin Graham, Samuel Alito, and Steve Bannon are targeted, too. Assassinating people for their ideas is a sure way to start a horrific cycle of violence. It would be to strangle free debate, intellectual interchange, and everything else we value as heirs of the West.

Here, then, Id like to have a word with American neocons who are quietly disappointed that the strike on Alexander Dugin quite possibly by those heroes in the Ukrainian government did not succeed. Many of these same neocons have their fingerprints all over the U.S. war in Iraq, which was much more obviously unjustified, more fraudulently based, than Putins attack on Ukraine. It wasnt on a neighboring country trying to join a hostile military alliance. Instead we attacked a weak, faraway nation our government falsely suspected of developing chemical weapons. It unleashed total chaos, a genocide of Christians, and more than 600,000 deaths, according to Lancet magazine.

Should the thinkers who pushed the Iraq war be subject to the Alexander Dugin treatment? Here I speak of people from William Kristol and David Frum to Max Boot and Jonah Goldberg, and many more. The answer is clearly no. I dont want such people targeted, however deadly their ideas. But if they endorse a world where civilians with warmongering agendas are fair game for car bombs they might not like the outcome.

John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or co-author of ten books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. He is co-author with Jason Jones of God, Guns, & the Government.

View original post here:
You Cant Back the Murder of Alexander Dugin Then Whine About Salman Rushdie Or Attacks on American Neocons - The Stream

Our Thursday edition of the best Android game and app deals is now live with everything up for the taking down below the fold. Those offers are joining huge deals on the Motorola Edge+ smartphone and Googles latest Nest cameras from $80, but for now its all about the Google Play app discounts. Highlights from this afternoons collection include titles like Codex of Victory, Scalak, Reminder Pro, Pocket Academy, and more. Hit the jump for a complete look at todays best Android app deals.

Todays Android hardware deals are headlined by up to $500 off the Motorola Edge+ smartphone and ongoing price drops on OnePlus 10 Pro with a Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 chip. Just make sure you scope out all of todays deals on Googles latest Nest cameras from $80 as well as PNYs 128GB Premier-X V30 microSD card, the 8Bitdo Sn30 Pro with Android clip for Xbox cloud gaming, and everything in todays smartphone accessories roundup.

Codex of Victory features an extensive story-driven, single-player campaign that tasks you with building and commanding a hi-tech army of drone vehicles, tanks and robots.The campaign offers an exciting mix of real-time base building, global strategic planning and turn-based combat. Traveling between planets and territories, your sole task is to stop the Augments a weird race of transhuman cyborgs driven by a desire to liberate ordinary humans from the limitations of their wholly organic bodies.

Subscribe to the 9to5Toys YouTube Channel for all of the latest videos, reviews, and more!

Go here to see the original:
Android app deals of the day: Codex of Victory, Scalak, Reminder Pro, more - 9to5Toys