Category Archives: Transhumanism

Transhumanism is a futuristic religion that exalts technology as the highest power. The movements goal is to merge man with machine. Their wildest prophecies seem ridiculous at first, until you consider the dizzying advances in bionics, robotics, neuroprosthetics, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, and genetic engineering.

Prominent figures gathered at the TransVision 2021 conference in Madrid over the weekend. Listening to the proceedings online, I heard a broad range of totalizing schemes. There were no Luddites or Amish onstage, but of course, Spain is a long haul for a horse-and-buggy. Besides, no unvaccinated person can legally cross the Spanish border.

Transhumanists hold that the human condition of ignorance, loneliness, sadness, disease, old age, and death can be transcended through improved gadgetry. Many believe tribalism will also be eliminated perhaps through brain implants but this elite clique tends to be so convicted, legacy humans will have no say in the matter.

Their radical ideas are hardly marginal. Transhuman values have been implicitly embraced by the worlds wealthiest technologists. Consider Bill Gates pushing universal jabs, Jeff Bezoss quest for life extension, Elon Musks proposed brain implants, Mark Zuckerbergs forays into the Metaverse, and Eric Schmidts plans for an American technocracy racing against China.

If Big Tech is the established church, transhumanists are Desert Fathers in the wilderness.

Naturally, the dominant tone at TransVision was set by hardcore transhumanists: Max and Natasha More, Jos Cordeiro, David Wood, Jerome Glenn, Phillipe van Nedervelde, Ben Goertzel, Aubrey de Grey, Bill Faloon, and even in his absence, Ray Kurzweil, a top R&D director at Google and founder of Singularity University. Each proponent has a unique angle, but they converge on a shared mythos.

Allowing for variation, transhumanists confess there is no God but the future Computer God. They believe neuroprosthetics will allow communion with this artificial deity. They believe robot companions should be normalized. They believe longevity tech will confer approximate immortality. They believe virtual reality provides a life worth living. Above all, they believe the Singularity is near.

According to the Cult of the Singularity and its prophet, Ray Kurzweil, well see artificial general intelligence by 2029. Unlike narrow algorithms performing specific tasks, AGI will be robust cognition enacted by neural networks, far faster than any human brain.

By 2045 (or 2049), we will hit the Singularity when artificial superintelligence surpasses human intellect to the point we cannot comprehend its output. Purely organic humans will be left in the smart dust. Our only chance for long-term survival is to fuse our minds and bodies with the All-Powerful Machine to become a new posthuman species.

Therefore, our meaning in life is to make sure the future Computer God is benevolent, while we still have time. (In most cases, benevolent is synonymous with lefty globalist.) Todays machine learning systems are prompted by programmers, then trained with our language and behavior via mass data extraction.

As computers advance to superintelligence, the story goes, their output will tilt toward humanitys moral compass. Eventually, this digital deity may colonize distant galaxies turning all usable matter into computerized mind so our actions today might determine the fate of the entire universe.

Im reminded of the subterranean mutants who worshiped the atom bomb in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. Many mammals use tools to survive, but even a chimp knows better than to raise up a stick and call it God.

Back on Earth, the early phase of this scheme is far from heaven. Just as the TV kept Americans pacified and glued to their couches, the digital revolution has profound demoralizing and dehumanizing effects.

To their credit, TransVision invited a handful of critics to ring alarm bells. The ethicist Sara Lumbreras discussed the devastating impact of smartphones and social media on attention span, memory, and self-control. If you can just Google the information, why does it matter? she asked. Because remembering things is the only way that we can use that information for critical thinking and for creative thinking.

Both transhumanists and Luddites see 24/7 reliance on smartphones as an early phase of our symbiosis with machines. For all the convenience gained, many schoolteachers worry that the shift to digital platforms is making kids antisocial and functionally illiterate. An entire generation is being lost to self-pleasure.

Oxford philosopher Anders Sandberg discussed a 1954 experiment in neuroprosthetics. Using electro-stimulation, the scientist James Olds discovered the pleasure center in a rats brain. He wired up numerous rats, enabling them to stimulate themselves by pressing a lever. These rodent wireheads ceased to do anything besides push the lever. One by one, they died with smiles on their faces.

Video games and corporate opioids find us in a similar predicament. Even in the Victorian era, Sandberg explained, intellectuals wondered if humans were already becoming parasites on machines. They connected that to discoveries in biology that parasites quite often seem to be simplified forms of older species [and they thought] we might become some kind of barnacle sitting on the technological infrastructure, slowly losing our brains.

Hence, the Wireheading Myth the narrative that civilization could collapse due to techno-hedonism. Sandberg insisted that while this story isnt completely untrue, it isnt inevitable either. Building real happiness is a really complex thing, but we know we can make it increase.

In conclusion, he wondered, Can we use the transhuman ambition to say I want to be way happier, I want entire societies to be happier. I want my artificial intelligences to go for the true and daimonic good?

Sandberg is an optimist, but not without reservations. He has contemplated the dangers of artificial superintelligence rigorously. This digital entity would be entirely unpredictable to mere human minds, and perhaps uncontrollable. In a real sense, advanced AI is comparable to the development of thermonuclear warheads.

A humorous hypothetical is an AI system that makes paperclips. What if it goes haywire and turns everything on Earth into paperclips, including us? More realistically, what if an advanced AI is programmed to solve climate change, then arrives at the straightforward conclusion that humans must be exterminated?

Sandberg takes these existential risks seriously, but in the end, hes ready to go for it.

The term transhumanism evokes such revulsion, normal people immediately recoil. So the alpha-dog transhumanist Max More a leading figure at Alcor cryonics lab urged the audience to abandon loaded words like immortality in favor of life extension. Meanwhile, 184 deceased customers lay frozen at his facility, some $200,000 in the hole, waiting to be resurrected.

We mortals have more pressing concerns. Discussing the displacement of actual people by robots and artificial intelligence, Jerome Glenn of the Millennium Project was emphatic that artists, media moguls, and entertainers should psychologically prepare the public to accept economic obsolescence.

The loudest alarm was sounded by tech ethicist Nell Watson, an Apple consultant and chairwoman at IEEE. The global health crises are being used as an excuse for greater authoritarianism, she said, shocking everyone awake. [T]his could end up as a Trojan Horse for some kind of social credit-style monitoring system.

Today, its immunity therapies, Watson warned, but in 10 or 15 years, it might be people who reject some kind of brain-computer interface or a financial technology thats linked to biometrics. She worried that transhumanists might become scapegoats for oppressive policies they are not responsible for.

In response, Anders Sandberg took to Twitter to defend vaccine mandates in the workplace. The conference proceeded apace.

As a broad ideology, transhumanism is as relevant for the 21st century as communism was for the 20th century. In the mid-1800s, Karl Marx and his crew were mere socialist intellectuals. By 1923, the Bolsheviks had taken over Russia. By 1949, Mao had taken over China. In our age of all-pervasive technology, entire societies are revolutionized before anyone can grasp the change.

The futurists who gathered in Madrid last weekend along with those preaching technocracy at the World Economic Forum are laying the intellectual groundwork for a fully digitized social order. Today, its the Fourth Industrial Revolution a global paradigm of total transformation embraced by Microsoft, Alibaba, Sony, General Motors, Mozilla, and Salesforce, among many others. Tomorrow, the faithful proclaim, it will be artificial superintelligence, brain implants, and unstoppable killer drones.

The labels dont matter. To the extent that Silicon Valley, the Chinese tech sector, and various quirky start-ups converge on the central goal to merge human beings with digital devices you could say transhumanism is already a ruling ideology. One has only to look past this text and focus on the glowing screen to see their fantasies are becoming reality.

Link:

Transhumanists Gather In Spain To Plan Global Transformation - The Federalist

A Peruvian physician used a crude instrument and began scraping a hole in her patients skull.

The doctor did not use anaesthetic or sterile procedures and most of her patient's shattered upper skull was removed before the surgery was finished. The head wound was a result of a battle between warring tribes. Surprisingly, the operation was a success and the victim survived.

One can only imagine that the hospitals medical review board would be aghast when learning about this unorthodox procedure. Interestingly, this did not happen in a hospital but in a cave. And there were no review boards at the time, as we are talking about trepanation: operations performed in ancient times to treat head wounds, or for mystical reasons.

For millennia, humans have been peering into the skulls of others, interested in the workings of the brain and curious about why our cranium is smaller than those of other mammals. Thankfully, brain surgery is very advanced these days and we do not have to bite on a plank as the local witch doctor opens our skull.

The most recent breakthrough in brain-reading technology is the brain-computer interface. The brain may be regulated by a variety of variables, all of which can be controlled by devices implanted in the neural network.

In the realm of neurotechnology, it represents a new form of technological integration. Smart devices might lead to a cure for serious brain disorders as part of the long-term aim of human improvement known as transhumanism.

Nervous system injuries often irreversible are difficult to treat. However, the answer to some of the problems that people with paralysis or other disabilities confront is likely to be found at the confluence of science and technology.

Nerve-stimulating devices have been created by technologists to aid amputees suffering from phantom limb discomfort. The technique works by stimulating particular neurons and blocking chronic pain with a generator the size of a pacemaker and an electrode.

Neurotechnology-based treatments, which were previously considered science fiction, are rapidly becoming a reality.

The gadget might also be used to treat pain in other chronic diseases, such as post-surgical pain and migraine headaches.

Neurotechnology-based treatments, which were previously considered science fiction, are rapidly becoming a reality.

The field blurs the borders between technology and biology, utilising neurostimulation techniques and brain-machine interfaces. In order to do this, they either record brain impulses and "translate" them into technical control orders, or deliver electrical or visual stimulation to the brain in order to influence it.

Hybrid brain-machine systems are likely to become increasingly common in the future. Numerous neurotech firms, in various phases of development, are trying to do anything from forecasting an athlete's potential, to treating depression.

Scientists predict a big advance in neurotechnology, thanks to the development of ultra-flexible brain-machine interfaces that might reduce the immunological response of the patient.

It has the potential to be a game-changer for many patients, as well as having far-reaching societal consequences.

Brain-interface technology is still in its early stages, but it's vital to investigate ethical issues as devices are created, to ensure they're not harmful. We would not want scientists to create a new gadget and then discover that it has significant ethical implications.

When it comes to neurotechnology, ethical concerns are entrenched not just in the technology or research, but also in society.

Questions like these aren't only for scientists, engineers, or even professional ethicists; they're part of a wider discussion in society over technology's proper applications, the use of personal data, and when patients should be free to decline treatment.

Originally posted here:

Neurotechnology: The brain wired for healthcare - ITWeb

The afterlife is having a moment.

In the past two years, no fewer than three well-publicized books by prominent intellectuals have explored the history and ethics of heaven and hell. While David Bentley Hart sought to challenge the justice of eternal damnation in That All Shall Be Saved and Bart Ehrman argued in Heaven and Hell that Christianity invented its afterlife with scant help from Jesus, Catherine Wolffs new book Beyond is a gentler and more personal journey. In it, she mixes well-written impressionistic summaries of various religious perspectives with personal anecdotes to answer the age-old question of what lies beyond the grave.

Riverhead352p $28

This book is not for anyone who wants to understand what a religious group thinks or believes about the afterlife. For that you will need a small library. It does hold promise, however, for the non-linear reader who wants to dip into a set of beautifully curated vignettes about particular thinkers or topics. For example, if you wanted to learn in roughly three pages what Islam really says about jihad and the seventy-two virgins mentioned in the Quran, Wolff has you covered.

More than anything else, Wolff is a reassuring guide for the spiritually curious Christian. She often relies upon anecdotes and conversations with friends and colleagues, which is not necessarily a weakness, as her coterie is filled with impressive scholars and thought leaders. A talented curator, Wolff has synthesized, organized and summarized these key thinkers and perspectives into easily digestible small chapters.

Though it is not a history of the afterlife, Beyond is chronologically organized. Beginning with Neanderthals and what Wolff calls primitive religion, we learn about shamanic and indigenous beliefs. From there we move to Ancient Religion, the eternally popular theories of the Egyptians and Mesopotamians regarding the afterlife, then on at breakneck speed through Judaism to Christianity, and then Islam. Hinduism and Buddhism find themselves as bedfellows in part six. Part seven melds science, psychedelics, transhumanism and near-death experiences into a tidy final section about our current age.

The scope of the book is audacious but not Promethean, as this is well-trodden ground. The Afterword tells us what Wolff herself knew from the beginning: There are no definitive answers and we should be open to the many potential ways of experiencing the divine. Whether that encounter is through prayer, meditation, ritual or hallucinogenic substances is up to us.

At the heart of this book is an admirable desire to demonstrate that the secular and the spiritual do not have to be sharply divorced from one another. Christians do not have to be afraid of the religious and spiritual inquiries of others. Science is not the proverbial bogeyman. Even the Eleusinian mysteries, banned by the Christian emperor Theodosius I in 392 C.E., are presented as friendly attempts to answer eternal questions. The open, ecumenical spirit of the book is infectious and engaging. The non-Christian, the simply spiritually curious, the cafeteria Catholic and the smorgasbord Lutheran will have much to think and talk about.

While the personal anecdotes that punctuate the work provide refreshment from Wolffs eloquent but rich summaries of various arguments and thinkers, they also dilute the quality of the material. Wolff makes a conscious choice to rely on believers over scholars, but some precision and detail has been lost along the way. Though erudite, the book often lapses into broad generalizations.

I teach classes about life after death every year, and I tell my students that ideas about the afterlife tell us more about the hopes, fears and priorities of those speaking than they do about heaven and hell. In this respect, Wolff is no exception. While she protests that this is not a history, she organizes her discussion of various theories on the afterlife as if it were and has made revealing choices about what to include and when.

For instance, the section on Christianity is almost twice as long as any other section and remains a touchstone throughout the book. (To her credit, Wolff is honest about her Christian bias.) Indigenous religions garner only a few paragraphs at the very beginning of the book alongside a discussion of primal people. We progress in an intellectual ascent toward modern science, bypassing the ancient philosophers who had also asked scientific questions about cosmology and the afterlife.

The truth is that humans of every age have believed that they stood on the cusp of uncovering the secrets to eternal life. We are not so special.

It is perhaps because of this that I selfishly wish that Wolff could have tackled the oppressive structural hierarchies at play in descriptions of the afterlife in a more systematic fashion. While she briefly discusses Muslim theories about the moral inferiority of women, she does not mention the early Christians, some of whom also wondered if women would have to become male to enter the kingdom of God (e.g., Gospel of Thomas 114). Similarly, her brief discussion of Swedenborgs idea of women as heavenly childcare providers does not acknowledge that this expands and mirrors something dark and patriarchal: In the Latin Vision of Ezra, women are condemned for failing to breastfeed the children of strangers.

Gender, disability, race, identity and power have recently been the subject of important books about the afterlife by Meghan Henning and Taylor Petrey. (Full disclosure, I myself have also written about disability and the eradication of identity in heaven.) Ideas about the hereafter can inflict harm as well as provide comfort, so it is disappointing that Wolff does not think about the kinds of lives, experiences and bodies implicitly devalued in her presentation of her own vision of heaven. Though Wolffs book is more of a quest than a historical account, every pilgrim should be aware of the environmental costs they incur on behalf of others in their journey.

Missed opportunities, however, are surely not the fault of Wolffwho writes clearly and has done enormous amounts of researchbut are due to the scope of the project. If the truth of what happens when we die is unknowable, then documenting that truth in 300 pages is impossible. Fortunately, Wolff suggests, we have an eternity to explore its complexities.

Go here to see the original:

The afterlife is having a moment. 'Beyond' will help Christians and nonbelievers alike discuss what lies beyond the grave. - America Magazine

What will the human being be like in 1,000 years? What about 100,000? It is difficult to know, but we may be somewhat different than we are now: evolution is slow but inexorable.

That is of course what a new study by several researchers points out that reveals something curious: more and more humans have an extra artery in the arm.

It is called the satellite artery of the median nerve (or median artery) and is an occasional anatomical variant that usually forms during the first weeks of the fetuss life.

This artery appears in the center of the arm and is responsible for carrying blood to the hands as they grow, but normally it usually regress at eight weeks.

It is then when the normal thing is that stop developing and the other two arteries (ulnar and radial, the latter being the one we use, for example, to detect the pulse) are responsible for this function.

Now a group of researchers has discovered something curious: that extra artery that usually disappears soon it appears more and more frequently in humans.

Anatomy expert Teghan Lucas explained how the prevalence was around 10% in people who were born in the mid-1880s, who compared to 30% in those born at the end of the 20th century, and that supposes a significant increase in a really short period of time if we talk about evolution .

After analyzing 80 limbs from cadavers donated by descendants of people in Australia and Europe, these anatomists discovered that the presence of the artery was becoming more and more frequent. This increase could be the result of gene mutation involved in the development of the median artery or health problems in mothers during pregnancy .

Having that extra artery could lead to more dexterous fingers or stronger forearmsBut it is also true that the presence of this artery in adults poses a greater risk of suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome.

According to these researchers, if this trend continues, most people will have the median artery of the forearm by the year 2100It is not a huge evolutionary difference, but it certainly shows that human beings continue to evolve. And if we do not do it alone, transhumanism will try to make us do it with external elements such as that curious third thumb that someone came up with in 2019.

Via | Science Alert

The rest is here:

more and more humans are born with an extra artery in the arm CVBJ - Central Valley Business Journal

For anthropologist Fanny Parise, the emergence of a hyper-exclusive world in which the virtual replaces reality is a real possibility.

A virtual reality headset on your head, controllers in your hands, and you go away to join friends at the bar. without leaving home. Perhaps in a few years, this gesture will become commonplace in the metaverse: a virtual world in which we can work, go out, find relatives The project sounds crazy but it is being studied in the offices of the largest digital companies in the world. Recently, Mark Zuckerberg announced the formation of a team of 10,000 employees to deal with the construction of such a universe. Made on Facebook.

Fanny Barris, an anthropologist, takes it very seriously. A research associate at the University of Lausanne, observed an acceleration in Digitizing Lifestyles With the Covid-19 crisis and confinement. In other words, real existences willingly or forcibly are moving towards digital more quickly.

Imagine the emergence of new epidemics. Can the alternative equation replace reality, and become our daily life?

It does not seem possible. In anthropology, we work with very extreme scenarios, not to say that the future will be white or black, but because depending on the development of the situation, we will go towards one more than the other.

Currently, we have two prevalent scenarios. The first is technological collapse. The second is where the individual, who is forced to stay at home, will have to push their use of technology even further. During the first confinement, digital technology allowed the continuity of social interactions, for life in society. If successive constraints are put in place in the coming years, the default will provide an opportunity for the continuity of our life in society, for our daily life, when a part of it becomes impossible in material life.

It is also important to consider that other forms of crisis, social or environmental, can democratize the virtual world. On the other hand, this will lead to other problems. If a social crisis arises in material life, how can we ensure peaceful interactions or not in the metaverse? Similarly, in the event of a major climate problem, will digital pollution or server management associated with running the metaverse always be compatible with the new situation?

Live your life in the skin of an avatar, without moving from home In your relationship with yourself and others, that should make some changes, right?

So much. It wont necessarily change the way they interact, but it will lead individuals to ask themselves questions at the beginning of social interaction. Depending on the level of closeness to the person, they will have to decide: do I meet them in physical life or in the metaverse? It is likely that new ways of winning friends and relatives will appear.

For an individual, the metaverse will create an extension of self in default. The whole question would be to find harmony between our different identities. Some, for example, may find themselves caught between a reality they dont like and a virtual world they prefer.

For Mark Zuckerberg, the metaverse will make its users experience a real sense of it Presence On the other hand, more than social networks. Isnt this ambition exaggerated?

I really do not agree. In studies, we see that leaving the virtual assistant or the TV on is enough to create a so-called co-presence. The individual does not have the impression of being alone and accepts the fact of being confined or far from his relatives better. The VR headset will not bring more co-presence. On the other hand, with immersive reality, we will have a greater impact on peoples lives, on the way they adhere to different universes, and different ways of life.

Exactly, does this virtual world risk being the scene of drifts?

One of the questions I would like to ask is: What are we going to do with these metaverses? Will it be a form of transhumanism, which will increase our capabilities? Will it lead to thinking of a new way of living, perhaps more compatible with environmental constraints? Or will it be a duplication of reality?

My concern is that they are preempted by brands or companies. In fact, the problem with the metaverse is that it immerses us in a visible universe that prevents us from getting away. For companies, depending on what they make of it, it will be easier to get us to stick to models of society and political models Who tells us that the universe will be built according to moral reasoning? And not business partnerships? What is interesting is that history repeats itself after the creation of the Internet. Before, we had the idea that it would be a space of freedom, where we could create new ways of interacting. Now it has become a place where material and commercial life is reproduced. We dont invent anything.

Original post:

"My concern is that companies are anticipating the metaverse" - Release - Tech News Inc

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin is on a mission to make humans immortal. Buterin, 27, proposes the idea that aging is an engineering problem.

He is not alone in his combined interest in Bitcoin and biohacking. Famous biomedical aging researcher Aubrey de Grey, Xanadu architect and Agoric chief scientist Mark Miller, Bitcoin Cash billionaire Roger Ver and former chief technology officer of Coinbase and a16z general partner Balaji Srinivasan, are all fascinated by the pursuit of longevity.

De Grey recently helped advise a decentralized collective funding longevity research. He says:

I have been gratified since the beginning of blockchain to see the enormous fanbase that I and the longevity movement have in there.

Miller, alongside his engineering hall-of-fame accomplishments, is a senior research fellow at the Foresight Institute, a not-for-profit founded in 1986 with the aim of advancing technology for the long-term benefit of life.

Im very much involved in this new world of crypto commerce, often referred to as the blockchain sector, he says. Im very hopeful about that as creating an ecosystem in which secure software will dominate because insecure software results in massive losses quickly, with no recourse.

Srinivasans Twitter bio describes his vision as: Immutable money, infinite frontier, eternal life. #Bitcoin. Srinivasan states that the ultimate purpose of technology is to eliminate mortality and life extension is the most important thing we can invent.

Blockchain communities are clearly excited about longevity. But what does cryptocurrency have to do with life extension, and where might this future be headed?

It turns out that the link between crypto and cryogenics stretches back to core contributors, and the Cypherpunks mailing list and its links to transhumanist groups, including the first person to transact Bitcoin with Satoshi, Hal Finney.

Crypto philanthropists are donating significant wealth to this area, which is typically difficult to garner mainstream support for. They may be the only people on the planet optimistic enough to fund tech that currently only exists in sci-fi novels.

According to Buterin, longevity is a battle worth fighting for. Buterin donated $25 million in SHIB cryptocurrency tokens to the Future of Life Institute in June 2021 and has donated over $350,000 to the SENS Research Foundation to reimagine ageing.

He discussed the topic in recent podcast interviews with the likes of Lex Fridman and Tim Ferriss saying that life extension is definitely really important to me.

I think I hope to see the concept of seeing your parents and grandparents die just slowly disappear from the public consciousness as a thing that happens over the course of half a century.

Buterin has emphasized his adherence to the moral philosophy of effective altruism. This value, known to transhumanists as the moral urgency of saving lives, is perhaps what motivated his donations of dog coins to both COVID-19 relief in India and life-extension.

Just even the process of aging turning into something that just becomes reversible and it being a regular thing for people to live one and a half, two centuries and then go even further from there, Buterin states.

Pinned in Buterins Twitter is an essay called The Fable of the Dragon Tyrant by professor Nick Bostrom, director of the Future of Humanity Institute. It argues that allowing death from old age is unethical. If you view aging as a disease, the urgency to support the transhumanist project also makes sense.

While we still lack effective and acceptable means for slowing the aging process, we can identify research directions that might lead to the development of such means in the foreseeable future, states Bostrom. The key to freeing humanity from the dragon tyrant of aging, is funding. The new riches from crypto are key.

Bitcoin.com founder Roger Ver has already signed up to be cryogenically frozen. Rather than investing in cryptocurrency stuff, I want to focus on the extreme life extension technologies, because if you die, you cant enjoy your life anymore, Ver told Cointelegraph. Hes so confident in the tech, he even considered being cryogenically frozen as a legitimate alternative to going to prison in 2002.

DAOs are also taking part in this life extension renewal. There is a strong overlap of crypto people and longevity people, Vincent Weisser, core team member at VitaDAO tells Cointelegraph. VitaDAO funds longevity research and exceeded its initial token raise funding target of $490,000 in June 2021.

Now, they are working with popular blockchain crowd-funding platform Gitcoin to include a future funding category for longevity and life extension.

Transhumanist philanthropy and funding at scale holds the potential to significantly impact longevity research and the transhumanist project.

Transhumanism is a loosely defined movement that promotes the use of technology to enhance the human condition. This includes information technology, genetic engineering, and artificial intelligence for radical extension of human lifespan, augmentation of physical and intellectual capacities, space colonization, and super-intelligent machines.

The goal is not just life extension, but more, to the point of becoming superhuman. Although the transhumanist pursuit of post-humanity is often thought of as medical, the gambit of transhumanist technologies includes economic and social institutional design and cultural development.

Like crypto communities, transhumanism is grounded in a vision of evolution and individual freedom of choice. In practice, this leads to a sense of personal responsibility for contributing to solutions, such as biohacking or making provisions for being cryogenically frozen and one day hopefully reanimated. The goal of the transhumanist project for society is one based on freedom in determining social arrangements, enabled by self-generating systems and spontaneous order. This description of perpetual, open systems is similar to blockchain.

Not everyone thinks eternal life, or the philosophy underpinning it, is a good idea. Political economist Francis Fukuyama calls transhumanism the most dangerous idea in the world and argues it is a strange libertarian movement whose crusaders want nothing less than to liberate the human race from its biological constraints. He lists the risks of the fraught nature of humankind to want to live forever, the effects on equality between the haves and the have nots, and that the essence of humanity is mortality. Yet, transhumanism has a long history in crypto communities.

Transhumanist values are reflected in the ideological underpinnings of blockchain communities around anarchy and autonomy, self-improvement, and a long-term mindset.

Transhumanist ideas have long existed in the technology communities that pioneered the core tenets of public blockchains. For example, cryptography pioneer Ralph Merkle (inventor of public key distribution and Merkle trees) considered himself a transhumanist, publishing on such matters as The Molecular Repair of the Brain.

Furthermore, there was substantial cross-pollination of ideas between the Cypherpunks mailing list, which discussed ideas on privacy and digital cash throughout the 1990s and 2000s in the lead-up to the invention of Bitcoin in 2008, and the Extropian mailing list.

Extropy is the extent of a systems intelligence, information, order, vitality, and capacity for improvement. According to 1998s Principles of Extropy published by president of the Extropy Institute, Max Moore, extropians are those who seek to increase extropy. The core principles, refined in The Extropist Manifesto in 2010, are endless eXtension, meaning perpetual growth and progress in all aspects of human endeavor; transcending the restrictions of authoritarianism, surveillance, or social control; overcoming property rights, including IP and money, by sharing knowledge, culture, and resources; intelligence, including independent thinking and personal responsibility; and smart machines, specifically the attainment of Friendly Artificial Intelligence that exceeds human ability, through funding and favorable legislation.

Extropians advocate and explore the philosophies of transhumanism (technological enhancement), extropy (improving the human condition), and the future. Numerous prominent cypherpunks also subscribed to the Extropian mailing list, including co-founders of the cypherpunk movement Timothy C. May and Eric Hughes.

Another active member of the extropians was Hal Finney. Finney was co-developer of the first anonymous remailer, the first person to transact Bitcoin with Satoshi and the first maintainer of the Bitcoin codebase. He was cryogenically frozen when he passed away in the hope of living in the future alongside his wife, Fran, who noted that Hal liked the present. But he looked towards the future. For this community, technologies like digital cash offered a way of long-term thinking about the future of humanity, transhumanism, and solutions and preventions for cryogenics, outer space, and catastrophic environmental or societal collapse.

The cypherpunks interest in extropianism, and vice versa, was concerned with building infrastructure today that would sustain the future of human evolution. In some ways, this makes sense.

In order for ones cryogenic suspended animation to be paid for, maintained and reversed to wake them up in the far-flung future where science advances to the point where this aspiration is realized, there needs to be an incentive. In 1994, Wired magazine reported over 27 frozen people (technically 17 frozen heads and 10 entire bodies) at the Alcor Life Extension Foundation, the same company that Roger Ver has signed up with.

Immortality is mathematical, not mystical, stated Mike Perry, their overseer. The hope is that Bitcoin will be a resilient long-term incentive for someone to wake up Hal, Fran and other friends. Herein lies the need for long-term blockchain infrastructure, to last as a secure monetary reward until the century when unfreezing is possible.

Among the principles of extropianism set out by Moore is intelligent technology, meaning technologies that bring beneficial results, including genetic engineering, life-extending bio-sciences, intelligence intensifiers, smarter interfaces to swifter computers, neural-computer integration, worldwide data networks, virtual reality, intelligent agents, swift electronic communications, artificial intelligence, neuroscience, neural networks, artificial life, off-planet migration, and molecular nanotechnology.

Expect to see more life extension, brain-machine interfaces, limb regeneration, curing deafness, bionic sight and more incredible feats in the next decade, states Srinivasan. Transhumanists predict an inevitable singularity, when technology becomes intelligent, uncontrollable and irreversible, to occur around 2035. Blockchain is part of this technology stack.

The lofty, futuristic ideas of transhumanists depend on resilience and digital infrastructure. This is especially true for the goal of friendly artificial intelligence, which is seen as an enabling condition for rapid development across all other core principles of the project. Thanks to blockchain technology, and blockchain philanthropy, we are beginning to have the resources to do it.

An immutable worldwide computer enables a decentralized autonomous organization to allow our uploaded brain image to automatically coordinate with friendly artificial intelligence in a decentralized, freedom-loving way.

Blockchains immutability makes it the perfect long-term infrastructure. Cypherpunks were paranoid about Orwellian dystopias in which authorities would rewrite history to match state propaganda. The architectural and political decentralization of public blockchains means that no one can tamper with, control or delete the record of history. This makes it the perfect record-keeping infrastructure if we are going to live forever.

This is essential when it comes to your brain image or your Bitcoin balance. In order to document who owns what coins when you are cryogenically frozen and woken up in the next century, you need resilient, long-term, tamper-proof blockchains. The values of independence and immutability are essential to both crypto enthusiasts and transhumanists. Buterin states:

Its great that we have people trying to upload or improve brain scanning. Its also great that we have people including cryonics, so we could just go to sleep in the freezer and eventually, hopefully, sometime in the future [] anyone who gets cryogenically frozen will be able to wake up.

The combination of transhumanist philosophy, blockchain technology, community obsession and money enable whole new possibilities. The transhumanist-blockchain vision is that we will all be connected, humans and machine intelligence, through decentralized, automatically executing smart contracts and marketplaces.

Blockchains provide a platform infrastructure to enable a host of technologically advanced human-machine futures. One example is a decentralized marketplace for AI, such as SingularityNET by artificial intelligence researcher, transhumanist, and CEO Ben Goertzel. Here, intelligent computational agents buy, sell and barter over work for digital tokens via a blockchain.

In The Transhumanism Handbook, Melanie Swan predicts that crypto cloudminds, in which mind node peers interact through multicurrency pay channels of digital denominations, will algorithmically enforce good behavior between humans and machines through the privacy and transparency of blockchains. According to Srinivasan, this could also lead to cloud cities, which allow their members to negotiate with other jurisdictions and crowdfund territories in the physical world.

Transhumanism, like human beings, is only in its early stages of development.

Transhumanism, with its focus on superhumans and longevity instead of an afterlife, can be viewed as something akin to a religious impulse. Although many transhumanists take their worldview to be in opposition to religious outlooks on life, transhumanism may become the religion of blockchainers. Yet, this doctrine does not come without a clear burden of responsibility.

While some fear transhumanism, a core tenet is to ensure that technology produces positive outcomes for humanity. Transhumanists advocate that the choice to improve human capacities lies with the individual.

Part of the longevity research agenda is figuring out how to measure the risks of friendly artificial intelligence and make it truly friendly to avoid a catastrophe. Transhumanists want to avoid X risk, which is existential risk to humanity of a hypothetical, global, catastrophic future event that could damage human well-being or destroy human civilization. This is why colonizing outer space is so logical, as Elon and other crypto enthusiasts are pursuing. The Extropian Principles, v. 3.0 by Max Moore from 1998 emphasizes this, stating that migration into space will immensely enlarge the energy and resources accessible to our civilization. Of course, smart machines will also help us explore space because they can handle more gravitational force than humans as they enter the orbit of other planets.

To a transhumanist, the goal of technology is to amplify our abilities and extend human freedoms. How could we ensure humanity lives forever and life spreads throughout the universe? asks Weisser from VitaDAO. Its all about probabilities and increasing the probability that humanity will survive, he says.

A long-term mindset treats aging as an engineering problem. Now, it remains to be seen if the intersection of blockchain philanthropy, VitaDAOs research collective, and other decentralized, transhumanist pursuits will be cautiously and collectively propelled forwards with the kind of long-termism that will benefit humanity. As Buterin states:

I hope you guys can [] come to my thousandth birthday party.

The rest is here:

Crypto leaders are obsessed with life extension. Here's why Cointelegraph Magazine - Cointelegraph

The gameplay of Glitchpunk is a feast for all fans of high-octane action, explosive shootouts and cyberpunk aesthetics. It is top-down action inspired by the classics of the genre, wrapped in a futuristic neon cloak. Theres plenty of guns, melee weapons and vehicles for you to choose from and cause havoc with. Experience frantic action and wild police chases while listening to futuristic beats on your stolen cars radio.

Run, hack, steal, drive, shoot and blast your way through the criminal underworld of the future. Make some friends, make even more enemies. Kill or be killed, even if it means killing everything you love.

But thats not all: Glitchpunks dystopian streets, back alleys and skyscrapers are also stage for themes like transhumanism, xenophobia and religion as well as an all too human story about relationship, self-discovery and betrayal. The sex and drug infused world of the future raises many questions, only one thing seems certain: humanity is a matter of perspective.

You are an android gifted with a special trait called "glitch": It enables you to go against your programming. Set out to destabilize the tyrannical governments of the post-nuclear world, it's up to you to craft your own agenda. Across four unique locations filled tech-crazed gangs, drugged-up gangs and governed by ever-present megacorporations, take up contracts, earn money and upgrade yourself.

Influence whether or not a gang leader stays on top of the food chain, or let heads roll. There might be something more for you to gain than just money: An ally, or a friend? Maybe even a lover.

Glitchpunk is out now in Steam Early Access at $19.99 with a 20% discount at launch.

Celebrating the release, tune in on launch day, August 11th, to see the official Glitchpunk cosplay model, bloodyfaster, stream the game at 2 PM CET (3 PM EST / 12Pm PT) on Twitch in full costume! See the insanity of Glitchpunk in action, and get a cool look at the games protagonist in real life.

Theres plenty more on the way with Glitchpunks first city, New Baltia, available now and Outpost Texas arriving in three to four weeks. Two more cities Neo Tokyo and Moscow will be added during the Early Access journey. Each city has its own gangs and characters while also continuing the protagonists gripping story. Keep an eye out for more information on Glitchpunks Early Access updates as a detailed road map will be on the way soon after the games launch.

Key Features:

Glitchpunk is is coming to PC (Steam) in 2022.

Link:

'Glitchpunk' Available On Steam Early Access - Trailer - WorthPlaying.com

He writes that great care must be taken when humans experiment with transhuman and posthuman techniques. Paul Budde..

For those involved in technology from a government and industry perspective, as well as from a user perspective, we all have a responsibility to monitor the development of this area and ensure that it is being used for the benefit of society.

If you bring people from Stone ageEarly peasants from MesopotamiaWhen the Greek philosopher, the Florentine Renaissance merchant and one of us blindfolded and started chatting around the campfire, we soon realized that we had a lot in common.

After a few pints, we sing together and soon end up in a cheerful hug. At this level, human evolution has changed little.

Benefits and risks of AI and posthuman life

Philosophers involved in the theory of posthumanism and transhumanism are fascinated by the possibilities or dangers that the future brings to the understanding of human life.

What has changed is the environment in which we live using the tools we have developed. If you dig a little deeper here, its amazing to see that with the help of technology, the quality of life for humans has improved significantly. Even more daunting is the fact that most of it has happened in the last 50 years.

Our consciousness is what makes us human. Ongoing unprecedented technological developments allow us to increasingly reduce our dependence on the body, transplant organs, and other tools enhance our biological and cognitive function. can.

If these developments continue, why do we need a body? Aristoteles I asked the same question about 2,500 years ago.

Returning to the meetings around the campfire, even with its various group chats, we still cant find the answer to the big questions in life.

We cannot discover the exact meaning of life, free will, what the truth is, and so on. Nowadays, you can add issues of democracy, fake news, conspiracy theory, social media echo chambers, populism, and totalitarianism to the list. The human mind does not seem ready to tackle them.

What do you need to improve the current situation?

If history is a good measure, it is doubtful that humans 10,000 years from now will be very different from us. But our cognitive limits are already a problem for the great crisis we are facing today, not to mention the future.

It is not technology that prevents us from tackling these major issues, but human cognitive limitations in dealing with these situations.

But we are clearly at the forefront of inflection points as new technologies are being developed that change the meaning of being human.

The increasing number of tools today seems to enhance our cognitive abilities. For centuries and thousands of years, we are certain that our tool manufacturing capabilities will be greater and create a better environment. It would be difficult to claim that humans remain the same.

The tools we are creating and other developments around the corner show a logical and rational direction. Transhumanism..

So far, we have been able to keep control of the technology we have developed. But machine learning, DNA engineering, biotechnology, neurotechnology, and self-learning algorithms and developments of quantum mechanisms related to our consciousness are all opening Pandoras box.

Can we still maintain control? As a global society, there seems to be a lack of cognitive quality needed to manage these processes in the long run.

If we work to improve our cognitive qualities, we need to do this jointly. Alternatives can be catastrophic.

Do you need a crisis first to build a global consensus? Is it too late? Does our innate fighting instinct lead to selected groups of transhumanism?

As both Stephen hawking And Ray Kurzweil As we insist, we need to face these challenges. Otherwise, you will be defeated by transhumans and posthumans arriving at the scene.

Professor Stuart Russell Lists three principles that guide the development of profitable machines. He emphasizes that these principles are not intended to be explicitly coded on the machine. Rather, they are aimed at human developers.

Artificial intelligence is increasing

Paul Budde states that new developments and opportunities are being opened up in artificial intelligence.

The principles are as follows:

Instead of using artificial intelligence or other technologies to solve complex problems, we need to focus on developing better-equipped technologies to solve these problems faster and more effectively. ..

Last week the Australian Government Announcement We want to be a global leader in the development and adoption of responsible artificial intelligence (AI). This has secured $ 124.1 million. For this National Artificial Intelligence Center Within CSIRO, there are four AI and Digital Function Centers and a Next Generation AI Alumni Program.

Expect to adhere to the above principles to further develop unstoppable transhuman and potentially posthuman technologies while humans are still responsible.

Paul Budde Independent Australian columnist and Paul Budde Consulting, An independent telecommunications research and consulting organization. Follow Paul on Twitter @PaulBudde..

Read the original post:

Technologies that change human nature must be treated with caution - Illinoisnewstoday.com

Extreme caution must be taken when humans experiment with transhuman and posthuman technology, writes Paul Budde.

FOR THOSE INVOLVEDin technology from a government and industry perspective,as well asfrom a users point of view, we all have a responsibility to monitor developments in this space to ensure they're utilised for the benefit of society.

If we brought a person from the Stone Age, an early farmer from Mesopotamia, a Greek philosopher, a Renaissance merchant from Florence and one of us together, blindfolded, and we started chatting around a campfire, we would very quickly find out we have a lot in common.

After a few pints, we will sing together and rapidly end up in some jovial embracing. At this level, very little has changed in the evolution of humans.

What has changed is the environment we live in using the toolswe've developed. To dig a bit deeper here, it is amazing to see that with the assistance of technology, the quality of human life has enormously improved. Even more mindboggling is the fact that most of that happened in the last 50 years.

Our consciousness is what makes us human. With the ongoing and ever faster technologicaldevelopments, we are less and less dependent on our body, organs can be transplanted, and other tools can enhance our biological and cognitive functions.

If these developments continue, why would we need a body? Aristotle asked that same question about 2,500 years ago.

Coming back to the meeting around the campfire, evenwith that varied group chatting, we still would not be able to find answers to the big questions of life.

We wouldn't discover the exact meaning of life, free will, what is truth and so on. In contemporary times, we can add issues of democracy, fake news, conspiracy theories, social media echo chambers, populismand totalitarianism to the list. It looks like the human mind isill-prepared to tackle them.

What is needed for us to improve on our current situation?

If history is a good measure, then it is doubtful that humans in another 10,000 yearstime would be much different from us. Though, our cognitive limitations are already a problem for the big crises facing us today, let alone in the future.

It is not the technology that stops us from addressing these major issues, but the cognitive limitations of humans to deal with these situations.

But we clearly are at the doorstep of an inflection point, as new technology develops to change what it means to be human.

The tools on the rise today would seem to enhance our cognitive capacities. Over centuries and millennia, it is certain that our tool-making capacity will create bigger and better environments. It'll be harder to argue that humans will remain the same.

The tools we are creating and other developments that are around the corner indicate a logical and rational direction towards transhumanism.

So far, we have been able to stay in control of the technology we have developed. However, self-learning algorithms and developments in machine learning, DNA engineering, biotechnics, neuro-technologies and quantum mechanisms relatingto our consciousness are all opening Pandora's box.

Can we still stay in control? It looks like that, as a global society, we seem to lack the cognitive quality needed to manage these processes in the long term.

If we work on lifting our cognitivequalities, we need to do this together, in a collaborative way.The alternative could be catastrophic.

Do we first need a crisis to build global consensus? Will that be too late? Will our innate warring instincts lead to selected groups of transhumans?

As both Stephen Hawkingand Ray Kurzweil have argued, we need to face these challenges, otherwise we will be outcompeted by whatever transhumansor posthumans that'll arrive on the scene.

Professor Stuart Russelllists three principles to guide the development of beneficial machines. He emphasises that these principles are not meant to be explicitly coded into the machines; rather, they are intended for the human developers.

The principles are as follows:

We should not use artificial intelligenceand other technologies to solve our complex problems, instead, we should concentrate on developing technologies that equip us better to solve these problems faster and more effectively.

Last week, the Australian Government announced that it wants to become a global leader in developing and adopting responsible artificial intelligence (AI). For this, $124.1 million has been set aside which includes the establishment of a National Artificial Intelligence Centre within the CSIRO, four AI and digitalcapability centres, and a next generation AI graduates program.

Let us hope that humans, while still in charge, will adhere to thoseprinciples set out above, to further developalready unstoppable transhumanand potentially posthuman technologies.

Paul Buddeis an Independent Australia columnist and managing director ofPaul Budde Consulting, an independent telecommunications research and consultancy organisation. You can follow Paul on Twitter@PaulBudde.

Support independent journalism Subscribeto IA.

Original post:

Technology changing human nature must be treated with caution - Independent Australia

Fresh and dried psilocybin mushroom, gelcaps and digital pocket scale on black background, top view. ... [+]

Psychedelic use is no longer a relatively small, counterculture phenomenon. Indeed, by microdosing, tech workers and many career strivers seem to be infusing psychedelics into the brave, new, somewhat middle class and much larger world of social and professional ladder climbing.

Microdosing is defined as the regular use of a psychedelic drug (a/k/a hallucinogen) at amounts so tiny as to be impossible to consciously perceive. This generally translates into 1/10 1/20 of a recreational dose. Many enthusiasts swear by microdosings positive effect on mood, insight, and creativity. Studies that rely on self-reporting have tended to bolster such anecdotal claims, but other evidence suggests that the effects of microdosing are illusory. For example, in one double-blind study, microdosing improved users mood, energy, and creativity but so did the placebo.

A 2019 article published in the peer-reviewed journal Pharmacology described the type of person who microdoses. As spelled out in Microdosing Psychedelics: Personality, Mental Health and Creativity Differences in Microdosers, researchers from several Toronto institutions gave psychological questionnaires and a task of creativity to roughly 900 adults. Of these participants 29% were microdosing, 37% had microdosed in the past but had since stopped (former microdosers), 30% were interested in microdosing but had no prior experience, and a shockingly tiny 4% had no prior experience and reported not being interested in microdosing. From the questionnaires and the performance on the creativity task, the researchers concluded that, on average, microdosers had lower negative emotionality, higher wisdom and open-mindedness, higher creativity, and more positively charged emotions.

If the sheer volume of press is any measure, interest in microdosing is surging, and getting a leg up in ones career seems to be a major motivator.

Popular psychedelics being microdosed include LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide), magic mushrooms (containing the active ingredient psilocybin), and DMT, also known asDimitri (which is found in ayahuasca tea). The amphetamine known as ecstasy (MDMA,molly, and E), which also has psychedelic effects, can be microdosed.

Dimitrios Liokaftos, Wellcome Trust Research Fellow at the Public Health Institute, Liverpool John ... [+] Moores University

Dimitrios Liokaftos is a Wellcome Trust Research Fellow at the Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University in the UK. In a recentcommentary published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, he placed microdosing in context as an emerging and controversial facet of human enhancement through drugs.

For Forbes.com, Rebecca Coffey met on Zoom with Liokaftos to discuss the culture and sociological implications of microdosing. The interview has been edited for length and clarity, and Liokaftos has suggested links as appropriate.

Rebecca Coffey: In yourInternational Journal of Drug Policyarticle, you mentioned that research shows microdosing tends to be aligned with middle-class or neoliberal values. Can you tell me more about what you mean by that?

Dimitrios Liokaftos: Back in the 1960s and 70s, the typical recreational psychedelics user used full doses and might have been trying for a loss of control and a melting away of the self. Today, people who microdose do so as a means of heightening their control of themselves. Contrary to recreational use in the 60s and 70s that was perceived by many as chaotic, ecstatic and risky, microdosing appears subtle, measured and rational. People seem to be seeking an elusive, very fine experience. Theres nothing tumultuous about it.

RC: When you say that microdosing is elusive, do you mean that this way of using psychedelic drugs has no real effect?

DL: Thats still a subject of investigation. Even though recent research suggests the entire effect may be placebo-generated, microdosers usually attest to a subtle effect that helps them achieve their work, emotional and creative goals. I see many parallels between bodybuilding and microdosing here. Bodybuilders, like microdosers, set very clear goals for themselves. In terms of their recent cultural past, both bodybuilding and psychedelics seem to share a relatively common root. The crazes started in the 60s and 70s. Especially in the United States, they intersected with the human potential movement [in which people sought to unleash their untapped creativity and capabilities and then altruistically help others to do the same]. In a way, they were both an exploration of what it means to be human. The people within those cultures were testing the boundaries of human possibility.

RC: Nicely said.

DL: Of course, from another perspective, bodybuilding culture and psychedelic culture back in the 60s and 70s were almost the exact opposite of each other. Bodybuilding was very much about creating a very strong, solid, visible reflection of ego. Psychedelics users, on the other hand, were often trying to dissolve their egos and break down their defenses.

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA - MARCH 10: Dexter Jackson of the USA strikes a pose during the 2007 IFBB ... [+] Australian Bodybuilding Grand Prix VII in, 2007 in Melbourne, Australia. (Photo by Robert Cianflone/Getty Images)

RC: In the 60s and 70s, the recreational doses of common psychedelics were much stronger than what a microdoser uses today. Can you talk about the implications of that?

DL: Like bodybuilding, microdosing seems to be about expanding and perfecting ones capabilities. Both groups are sophisticated about how they go about doing that. Bodybuilders will tell you that theyre not just indiscriminately using drugs. They're very precise about what steroids or other image- and performance-enhancing drugs they use for what purposes, about how they time and fine-tune their drug use, and about how they combat side effects. Microdosers will tell you that they dont use very much drug. They often seem proud of how educated and particular they are about their use of psychedelics. Both groups of people would argue they know what they want to achieve and then they very instrumentally go about minimizing potential harms.

RC: And what about these groups in relation to people outside their cultures?

DL: In many ways, people inside these cultures share a view of the outside world as discriminating against them or relying on stereotypes. From their perspective, the lay public has a limited understanding and an abundance of disapproval about what theyre up to. Bodybuilders may assume people will generally look down on them or look with disdain on their freaky bodies. They may assume that people will consider what has been painstakingly built with a fine attention to detail and a doggedness about self-discipline to be the product of drugs and nothing more. So many bodybuilders who are using drugs keep their use secret.

RC: And are microdosers shy about revealing the source of what they believe is their heightened creativity or cognitive flexibility?

DL: Many are, depending on who it is they are talking to. However, norms here may be changing as psychedelics increasingly become more mainstream.

RC: As you said, with microdosing we still don't know exactly how it works or even if it works, so it might be easy for stereotypes about drug users to cloud our view.

DL: As we all learn about microdosing, we may find that psychedelics in general can be approached as a tool for understanding the human brain and the concept of self. Studies with full-dosed psychedelics show that they can have lasting positive effects on mood and some people report life-transformative mystical experiences. This suggests that in some measure these substances can create a fundamental change in the perception of self. Investigating that will have implications not only for brain and neuroscience but also for psychology, philosophy, and sociology.

RC: Do you anticipate any dangerous political or sociological ramifications of microdosing? For example, considering that its reportedly often used in Silicon Valley and throughout the tech world, do you wonder about the creation of a neoliberal, ruling superclass?

DL: Thats a very interesting question. For the sake of argument, let's say that the effect of microdosing turns out to be not all imagined or placebo-generated. Lets say that more people want to use it to increase their performance at work and maybe their social standing. Immediately, I see questions similar to those I see associated with other kinds of human enhancement drugs. For example, will common use lead to an indirect pressure for people to use psychedelics just in order to keep up with colleagues at work and remain competitive in their professional fields? And then theres the potential debate about who gets access to what kinds of drugs. Psychedelics are internationally still highly controlled substances. Who will be able to find them and take them? Who will be able to afford to risk the legal penalties or social ramifications? We could expect people with better connections, more money and better education to have an advantage. This means that, in a sense, by using tiny doses of psychedelics in hopes of improving themselves, todays microdosers may be shaping a new playing field for tomorrow. And right now there is also the question of safety. Because aside from enrolling in a few very tightly controlled studies, most microdosers will be sourcing their psychedelics on the black market. These arent necessarily good-quality drugs. No one can be 100% sure with black market drugs what it is that theyre consuming. In this sense people are taking on real health risks.

A humanoid robot on display at the 2018 Humain Demain (Human Tomorrow) exhibition about technology, ... [+] connected body, ethics, and DNA at the 'Quai des Savoirs' museum in Toulouse, France.

RC: What you're describing here is a new rat race, not an enhancement of the human experience. Is anybody using the word transhumanism by which I mean the development of science fiction-like technologies that could improve health, extend life spans, smooth out emotions, and perfect artistic abilities and cognitive capacity?

D: Transhumanism seems to be mostly about technological enhancements, while most psychedelics are naturally occurring substances. For example, you can just go out in a forest where psychedelic mushrooms grow and pick up some yourself. You dont need to wait for technologies of the future to arrive. But the underlying logic is not dissimilar. Both transhumanism and the use of existing human enhancement drugs are about pushing the boundaries of what it means to be human. Microdosing has a bit of anavant-gardemystique around it, as though it is leading the way towards a new era for humanity. In the 60s, some psychedelics users hoped to change an unjust world in a radical way. Today, people microdose to perfect themselves and meet the demands of what is still an unjust world. Thats an enormous shift in perspective and intention.

RC: I want to thank you for your insight. It's been invaluable to learn about the inroads that psychedelics are making into our society and the ways in psychedelic use today is vastly different from the psychedelic use of yesterday. I, for one, will be fascinated to watch the degree to which microdosing creates a gentrification of psychedelics, with the influx of affluent and ambitious people into a neighborhood of drug use that was once defined by its inhabitants rejection of affluence and ambition.

Liokaftos' current research looks at microdosing psychedelics as a new facet of human enhancement drugs. The Twitter account for the project is @microdresearch.

Link:

Microdosing, And The Gentrification Of Psychedelic Culture. A Conversation With Sociologist Dimitrios Liokaftos - Forbes