Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The next stage of human evolution
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 12 of 33 (343374)
08-25-2006 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by mitchellmckain
08-25-2006 1:02 PM


I'm not so sure
mitchellmckain writes:
Besides the point of a next stage of evolution is not that this process cannot be found elsewhere in nature, quite the opposite, I am saying that is an inevitable part of the process of the development of life on this planet. Anyway, it does change the rules that most people attribute to evolution and more importantly it combats the misuse of the ideas of evolution that were behind social darwinism and the eugenics program of the nazis. It introduces a philosophy that sees medical technology and the care of the handicapped as a positive forces for the evolution of man.
I am not convinced that medical technology does actually represent a step forward at all. It seems to me that what is really behind the desire to make gains in medical technology is the hope that WE will live longer healthier lives. Our hope is that we won't have to deal with cancer, alzheimer's, ALS etc. I don't see the desire to advance medical technology as being altruistic at all, in contrast to our desire to care for the handicapped.
At the same time as we are increasing our longevity we are decreasing the number of kids we are having. I would suggest in generations past people got pleasure from contributing to the next generation by having kids and raising them. (I realize this is a very general statement.) Nowadays our focus seems to be on us. People aren't having kids because it impacts on lifestyle, even though in the western world, materially speaking, we enjoy the highest standard of living in history.
I guess my point is that I am not convinced at all of your basic premise, which as I understand it, is that our sense of altruism is evolving, and that we as a society are becoming more altruistic. I tend to think that the phrase of the 70's, "looking out for number one", is very much alive and well.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-25-2006 1:02 PM mitchellmckain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-25-2006 5:25 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 14 of 33 (343408)
08-25-2006 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by mitchellmckain
08-25-2006 5:25 PM


Re: I'm not so sure -> But I am.
OK but I'm still not completely clear. It's true with our urbanization and increased technologies I would agree that being handicapped is not as much of a handicap as it used to be.
I'm wondering though, if we're evolving, what do you see us as individuals and as a society looking like 500 years from now, if by any chance civilization survives that long?
Edited by GDR, : typo

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-25-2006 5:25 PM mitchellmckain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-25-2006 10:43 PM GDR has replied
 Message 16 by kuresu, posted 08-26-2006 12:02 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 17 of 33 (343471)
08-26-2006 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by kuresu
08-26-2006 12:02 AM


Re: I'm not so sure -> But I am.
kuresu writes:
I'd say that in five hundred years we'll still be primates. We'll still be H. sapiens sapiens--we have been for roughly twenty thousand years, why not an extra five hundred?
I don't want to drag this off topic, but we are looking at what human life will be like in the future.
This is the first time in over 20,000 years that we have hundreds if not thousands of fanatics that are more than happy to blow themselves up in order to kill people they've never met. How long 'till these guys have nuclear weapons?
We have been over using anti-biotics for so long that we are now vulnerable to a pandemic caused by some super virus that has evolved far beyond anything we've had to deal with before.
How about super volcanoes such as Yellowstone Park. At some point in time one of them will blow and people who study these things believe they will cause a world wide nuclear winter.
http://www.geocities.com/Northstarzone/VOLCANO.html
I hate to sound so pessimistic but we are very used to the Earth being a very friendly environment. That can all change in a heartbeat.
At any rate there's not much that we can do so sleep tight.
Edited by GDR, : typo

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by kuresu, posted 08-26-2006 12:02 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by kuresu, posted 08-26-2006 12:49 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 21 by kuresu, posted 08-26-2006 3:46 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 24 of 33 (343715)
08-26-2006 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by mitchellmckain
08-25-2006 10:43 PM


Re: Technological enhancement
Hi Mitchell
mitchellmckain writes:
Without the force of natural selection on the human gene pool, genetic deficiencies will only increase and the handicapped will become an increasing portion of the population. However our medical technology and other technological compensations and augmentation will race forward even faster so that technological capabilities will soon become more important than the biological ones. The variety of man will keep increasing. This all assuming that no retro-conservative forces get too powerful, and that we do not make the mistake of excessive tampering with the human genome. Unregulated tampering with the genetics of next generation would be very dangerous for I think it will most likely reduce genetic variation by dangerous proportions.
In much less than five hundred years from now computer enhancement to brain function will be routine and close to universal. Computer terminals and tv-sets outside these enhancements will cease to exist as obsolete. On the other hand, since these will most likely take no more room than wall posters, they may be quite common even if nobody needs them. Automotive transportation will become more scarce due to rising costs and a greatly reduced need to go anywhere to get things done, so I predict a great increase in the popularity of walking, cycling (and wheelchair transportation?). Higher education and office work will no doubt be almost entirely virtual. Beyond a great increase in the variety of human appearances, whether cosmetic or fundamental technological alteration, I cannot say what people would look like. As always has been the case in the past, the most radical changes are completely beyond our ability to imagine them.
The more I think about this, the more I think you make a very good point. It will be a brave new world.
You say that, "Unregulated tampering with the genetics of next generation would be very dangerous for I think it will most likely reduce genetic variation by dangerous proportions". I agree with that but I also think that it presents risks to society on both biological and sociological grounds. I also think that the temptation to engage in genetic manipulation will be too powerful to avoid. I'm sure people are even experimenting with it already. We can easily wind up with a nazi style super race.
I think that it is great that you're looking ahead like this. The trouble with advances in technology is that we just look at the short term benefits and we don't look ahead at the long term ramifications.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-25-2006 10:43 PM mitchellmckain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-27-2006 12:40 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 26 of 33 (343844)
08-27-2006 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by mitchellmckain
08-27-2006 12:40 AM


Re: Technological enhancement
I don't have any knowledge of genetics but I remain unconvinced that genetic manipulation won't have long term negative biological ramifications.
The sociological ramifications are really frightening IMHO.
Greg

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by mitchellmckain, posted 08-27-2006 12:40 AM mitchellmckain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by kuresu, posted 08-27-2006 1:37 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 28 by obvious Child, posted 08-27-2006 5:53 AM GDR has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024