(June 30, 2012 at 2:13 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: This wasn't what I was suggesting but at the end of the day, what would be wrong with it? So you've altered a few chromosomes to make your child smarter, so what? Now you've altered a few more to make him kinder and a few others to safe-guard against genetic diseases and defects. Perhaps make him more athletic too.
At what point is any of this a bad thing?

Read moar Sci-fi......... Are you honestly having trouble imagining why this road would lead to tears (just judging by your appraisal of why communism never panned out). Off the top of my head, who decides what we encourage and what we "disable"? Who gets access to these procedures and how are they done? Can anyone opt out? If you're not much of a reader try Gattaca or THX1138

Smarter- Excellent, here's to hoping everyone can avail themselves of this procedure for their children, lest we find ourselves in a transparent (and much more dire) two class society, the altered and the unaltered, owners and possessions.
Kinder- Oh yes, despots the world over would be interested in such a procedure. I know I'd rather have a herd of human cattle to have to deal with if I wanted to rule (lazily) with an iron fist.
Genetic Diseases and Defects- Again, a good one, but I'd rather not see any stormtroopers come over the hill on account of this one, and I hope everybody gets access to it.
Athletic- See stormtroopers above..lol.

Lets imagine a similar scenario with only a single point of divergence. Smarter, genetically "perfect", extremely athletic, and about ten times more aggressive and apathetic than your standard human (bonus points for built in unwavering loyalty to command structure). The technology and system would likely be the same. Bit of a pandoras box situation don't you think? Personally, I don't think we're quite ready for that sort of tampering yet. I do think we'll end up trying it out long before we have any business doing so, learning the hard way is kind of our MO.

(June 30, 2012 at 1:18 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: No matter what side you vote for you'll still get the same result. A candidate who will make handshakes with people who had power before he was in office, will gain power while hes in office and will continue to gain power after he has left office. These handshakes will determine his policies, his statements and his terms. This will have occured with his predecessor and will inevitably occur with his successor.
The candidates are puppets and the puppeteers are many, even should all of these puppeteers succumb to old age most will have a heir to their legacies or be replaced by a competitor.
So don't you worry your pretty little heads off about voting wether you live in America, Spain, France, Russia, Germany, England, Greece, Turkey, etc etc.
Democracy is a stage, the elections just another performance and your freewill a carefully constructed illusion.

If free will is an illusion then how can any be 'puppeteers'? Oh I know what has to come next: because the puppeteers themselves have strings .. yada yada yada.

Mostly the free will debate strikes me as just a waste of time. But then you see it used to justify acquiescing to whatever will come. If only it were possible for everyone to benefit from history. Why does everyone need to make this mistake? It certainly plays into the hands of those who would concentrate wealth into the hands of the very few.

Okay, you get one more try. How about falsifiability? Is that important to you? If so then perhaps you could realize that the no free will illusion is not falsifiable. We reject gods over this, why not absurd paradoxes of human affairs? People exist. They operate pretty much the way you do. Some of those people will make you much worse off if you do nothing. Resistance is not futile.

(June 30, 2012 at 8:13 am)Rhythm Wrote:

(June 30, 2012 at 2:13 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: This wasn't what I was suggesting but at the end of the day, what would be wrong with it? So you've altered a few chromosomes to make your child smarter, so what? Now you've altered a few more to make him kinder and a few others to safe-guard against genetic diseases and defects. Perhaps make him more athletic too.
At what point is any of this a bad thing?

Read moar Sci-fi......... Are you honestly having trouble imagining why this road would lead to tears (just judging by your appraisal of why communism never panned out). Off the top of my head, who decides what we encourage and what we "disable"? Who gets access to these procedures and how are they done? Can anyone opt out? If you're not much of a reader try Gattaca or THX1138

Smarter- Excellent, here's to hoping everyone can avail themselves of this procedure for their children, lest we find ourselves in a transparent (and much more dire) two class society, the altered and the unaltered, owners and possessions.
Kinder- Oh yes, despots the world over would be interested in such a procedure. I know I'd rather have a herd of human cattle to have to deal with if I wanted to rule (lazily) with an iron fist.
Genetic Diseases and Defects- Again, a good one, but I'd rather not see any stormtroopers come over the hill on account of this one, and I hope everybody gets access to it.
Athletic- See stormtroopers above..lol.

Lets imagine a similar scenario with only a single point of divergence. Smarter, genetically "perfect", extremely athletic, and about ten times more aggressive and apathetic than your standard human (bonus points for built in unwavering loyalty to command structure). The technology and system would likely be the same. Bit of a pandoras box situation don't you think? Personally, I don't think we're quite ready for that sort of tampering yet. I do think we'll end up trying it out long before we have any business doing so, learning the hard way is kind of our MO.

Gat-ta-ca, Gat-ta-ca ...

---

(June 30, 2012 at 10:44 am)whateverist Wrote:

(June 30, 2012 at 1:18 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: No matter what side you vote for you'll still get the same result. A candidate who will make handshakes with people who had power before he was in office, will gain power while hes in office and will continue to gain power after he has left office. These handshakes will determine his policies, his statements and his terms. This will have occured with his predecessor and will inevitably occur with his successor.
The candidates are puppets and the puppeteers are many, even should all of these puppeteers succumb to old age most will have a heir to their legacies or be replaced by a competitor.
So don't you worry your pretty little heads off about voting wether you live in America, Spain, France, Russia, Germany, England, Greece, Turkey, etc etc.
Democracy is a stage, the elections just another performance and your freewill a carefully constructed illusion.

If free will is an illusion then how can any be 'puppeteers'? Oh I know what has to come next: because the puppeteers themselves have strings .. yada yada yada.

Mostly the free will debate strikes me as just a waste of time. But then you see it used to justify acquiescing to whatever will come. If only it were possible for everyone to benefit from history. Why does everyone need to make this mistake? It certainly plays into the hands of those who would concentrate wealth into the hands of the very few.

Okay, you get one more try. How about falsifiability? Is that important to you? If so then perhaps you could realize that the no free will illusion is not falsifiable. We reject gods over this, why not absurd paradoxes of human affairs? People exist. They operate pretty much the way you do. Some of those people will make you much worse off if you do nothing. Resistance is not futile.

Democracy has been a long standing stage.

(June 30, 2012 at 2:13 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: Read what I said about communism again. I wasn't saying it was good or bad, I was stating a fact that human nature twists it. It was good in theory because it was a good system, humans don't do equality though. Its not how we've evolved, its not how we've survived. We are predisposed to attempt to out do each other, this is no longer a sufficent means of survival.

Eugenics would certainly be a means, yes. Of course ever since Hitler looked it up in a dictionary, decided he didn't like that definition and created his own people have been less than receptive towards it. I presume thats the light you're casting it in.

This wasn't what I was suggesting but at the end of the day, what would be wrong with it? So you've altered a few chromosomes to make your child smarter, so what? Now you've altered a few more to make him kinder and a few others to safe-guard against genetic diseases and defects. Perhaps make him more athletic too.
At what point is any of this a bad thing?

SO why are you shitting on democracy then, what do you hope to accomplish? What are you proving? If you can't name or explain a better system then why do you attempt to discredit something else? It is the same situation with the people who complain about obamacare or the federal reserve but can't recommend a single coherent alternative. Representative democracy is the best form of government we have to date, I'm still waiting for any new suggestions, from the people who don't vote in this country (48% of eligible americans) it's amazing that we have a democracy where everyone can vote regardless of race, gender, or religion, something that people are dying for in the arab spring and frankly all over the world, but just Americans don't vote........ apathy, laziness, good ole' fashioned douchebaggery .......whatever it is I just DO NOT know!!!

(July 1, 2012 at 3:17 am)cratehorus Wrote: .. apathy, laziness, good ole' fashioned douchebaggery .......whatever it is I just DO NOT know!!!

I would hate to think the Drake was subject to the douchebaggery charge, but I do love the word. "What sort of douchebaggery is this?" Not sure I can work this into my classroom patter but I will certainly try.

(July 1, 2012 at 3:17 am)cratehorus Wrote:

(June 30, 2012 at 2:13 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: Read what I said about communism again. I wasn't saying it was good or bad, I was stating a fact that human nature twists it. It was good in theory because it was a good system, humans don't do equality though. Its not how we've evolved, its not how we've survived. We are predisposed to attempt to out do each other, this is no longer a sufficent means of survival.

Eugenics would certainly be a means, yes. Of course ever since Hitler looked it up in a dictionary, decided he didn't like that definition and created his own people have been less than receptive towards it. I presume thats the light you're casting it in.

This wasn't what I was suggesting but at the end of the day, what would be wrong with it? So you've altered a few chromosomes to make your child smarter, so what? Now you've altered a few more to make him kinder and a few others to safe-guard against genetic diseases and defects. Perhaps make him more athletic too.
At what point is any of this a bad thing?

SO why are you shitting on democracy then, what do you hope to accomplish? What are you proving? If you can't name or explain a better system then why do you attempt to discredit something else? It is the same situation with the people who complain about obamacare or the federal reserve but can't recommend a single coherent alternative. Representative democracy is the best form of government we have to date, I'm still waiting for any new suggestions, from the people who don't vote in this country (48% of eligible americans) it's amazing that we have a democracy where everyone can vote regardless of race, gender, or religion, something that people are dying for in the arab spring and frankly all over the world, but just Americans don't vote........ apathy, laziness, good ole' fashioned douchebaggery .......whatever it is I just DO NOT know!!!

Oh please. Every representitive makes special little deals to get in power, those are what determine their policies. Not you and not me. The ones who don't make these deals don't get in power so will you please cut the " Don't you love demoncracy." bullshit. It makes you sound like a dropped child who just found out Santa doesn't exist. Just because I can't draw up the complex plans of a perfect democracy doesn't make the flaws in the one we're in any less grevious.

My arguement was that freewill in the terms of any democracy is an illusion, the ones pulling the strings are the ones in big business.
Money is king, now you can either accept that or you can't but don't expect me to sit here and validate your opinion that your vote counts. It doesn't. Its just a choice between mouthpiece a and mouthpiece b who despite taking different strategies to their election campaigns will both inevitably make the same decisions in power with minimal deviation from their "sponsors" plans.
Deal with it.

---

(June 30, 2012 at 10:44 am)whateverist Wrote:

(June 30, 2012 at 1:18 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: No matter what side you vote for you'll still get the same result. A candidate who will make handshakes with people who had power before he was in office, will gain power while hes in office and will continue to gain power after he has left office. These handshakes will determine his policies, his statements and his terms. This will have occured with his predecessor and will inevitably occur with his successor.
The candidates are puppets and the puppeteers are many, even should all of these puppeteers succumb to old age most will have a heir to their legacies or be replaced by a competitor.
So don't you worry your pretty little heads off about voting wether you live in America, Spain, France, Russia, Germany, England, Greece, Turkey, etc etc.
Democracy is a stage, the elections just another performance and your freewill a carefully constructed illusion.

If free will is an illusion then how can any be 'puppeteers'? Oh I know what has to come next: because the puppeteers themselves have strings .. yada yada yada.

Mostly the free will debate strikes me as just a waste of time. But then you see it used to justify acquiescing to whatever will come. If only it were possible for everyone to benefit from history. Why does everyone need to make this mistake? It certainly plays into the hands of those who would concentrate wealth into the hands of the very few.

Okay, you get one more try. How about falsifiability? Is that important to you? If so then perhaps you could realize that the no free will illusion is not falsifiable. We reject gods over this, why not absurd paradoxes of human affairs? People exist. They operate pretty much the way you do. Some of those people will make you much worse off if you do nothing. Resistance is not futile.

A peoples freewill in a demoncracy is an illusion.
Probably should of clarified that, my bad.
My arguement wasn't that resistance is futile, it is that we live in a demoncracy where both options lead to the same destination.
The games rigged.

A bit heavy on the jaundice there for someone your age. Where do you think such an outlook will get you, Raph? What do you do to address the problems you set forth?

(July 1, 2012 at 11:58 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: A peoples freewill in a demoncracy is an illusion.
Probably should of clarified that, my bad.
My arguement wasn't that resistance is futile, it is that we live in a demoncracy where both options lead to the same destination.
The games rigged.

All the more reason to try. Some paths are much, much worse than others. If you could avoid a 100,000 Iranians being bombed or 50,000 unfortunate US military getting wasted on another unfunded adventure, wouldn't that be worth it? I can't tell you for sure that Romney wants that, but I can tell you for sure that Obama doesn't. Come on, choke down your distaste for the whole rotten system and vote for Obama. Just in case. The lives you might save thank you.

(June 30, 2012 at 10:47 am)Epimethean Wrote: [quote='Rhythm' pid='304353' dateline='1341058386']

Read moar Sci-fi......... Are you honestly having trouble imagining why this road would lead to tears (just judging by your appraisal of why communism never panned out). Off the top of my head, who decides what we encourage and what we "disable"? Who gets access to these procedures and how are they done? Can anyone opt out? If you're not much of a reader try Gattaca or THX1138

Smarter- Excellent, here's to hoping everyone can avail themselves of this procedure for their children, lest we find ourselves in a transparent (and much more dire) two class society, the altered and the unaltered, owners and possessions.
Kinder- Oh yes, despots the world over would be interested in such a procedure. I know I'd rather have a herd of human cattle to have to deal with if I wanted to rule (lazily) with an iron fist.
Genetic Diseases and Defects- Again, a good one, but I'd rather not see any stormtroopers come over the hill on account of this one, and I hope everybody gets access to it.
Athletic- See stormtroopers above..lol.

Lets imagine a similar scenario with only a single point of divergence. Smarter, genetically "perfect", extremely athletic, and about ten times more aggressive and apathetic than your standard human (bonus points for built in unwavering loyalty to command structure). The technology and system would likely be the same. Bit of a pandoras box situation don't you think? Personally, I don't think we're quite ready for that sort of tampering yet. I do think we'll end up trying it out long before we have any business doing so, learning the hard way is kind of our MO.

Not a big fan of sci-fi to be honest.
All you've done is described how current human nature could interfere with such a process which is my point exactly. We haven't trusted in human nature in a long, long time because its an impossible thing to trust. Its obsessively selfish, indiscriminately violent and self-destructive beyond measure.
Some would try to use it for control, some would fear it out of the potential for a feeling of inferiority.
Now lets imagine that people who don't fear it and don't wish to use it for control obtain the technology. They simply want to improve the human race, increase their odds of survival. What then? What incredible improvements could be made? What gifts could be passed down to our children in the hopes they may have a better future than we dared dream possible? In time mans aggression, his lust for power and appetite for destruction will consume and destroy itself. This is a destination we're hurtling toward, we all know it.
What if this is the key to our continued existance as a race and we're ignoring it out of fear?

You do realize that sci-fi is science and politics in a palatable package of speculative fiction, don't you? Some of the most profound theories and issues mankind faces have been best dealt with in the arena of science fiction. Read some Philip K. Dick, some Jerry Pournelle, and some Greg Bear. Add a little Larry Niven and, for the sake of newer thinkers, some William Gibson and China Mieville. Out of a nod for the past which seems so present, read Huxley and Wells, Orwell and even Rand's Anthem. Some of the best thinking on the human condition going happens in the medium of science fiction.