= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
nyan_sandwich comments on Transhumanism and Gender Relations - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (118)
Your comment about aggression being bad seemed off to me. Aggression is a useful strategy. Maybe you meant irrational misplaced aggression...
Gender is pretty useless. I see no reason that we would opt to keep it around once we have control of our bodies. Assuming that everyone gets one body and it's rather permanent (which is a pretty big assumption), either we all figure out what the optimal physiology is and converge to that, or we decide that we like diversity or something and invent vast hordes of unique bodies, or some mix of both. I see no reason to keep a binary (which we don't exactly have in any case). Analogies can be drawn to fashion; there would likely be popular mainstream body characteristics, and vast numbers of subcultural variations.
I think you are vastly underestimating the reach of transhumanism, given that 'it occurs'.
Edit: Natural selection hasn't substantially applied to much of anything for the last few thousand years, and will be totally thrown out when we get access to our source code. Evolution is in our origin but not in our future.
Not necessarily true.
Not in Robin Hanson's Malthusian em future.
The apparent position of the sun in Earth's sky hasn't substantially changed in the last few seconds.
Memes.
That's not at all obvious. Note evolution =/= genetic evolution.
yes you are right. I should have made clear I was talking about biological evolution by natural selection. I assume that is also what the OP was talking about, given the reference to selection of mates.
By source code I mean genetic code. Once we have access to that, the human timescale modification will so totally dwarf any natural selection that it's basically not there. Can you elaborate on your position?
Except at that point evolution incorporates human modification into itself. Specifically, those who are better at modifying themselves in way that promote their inclusive genetic fitness will out compete those that don't.
Which is, of course, a good point to make up a new name so that the old one isn't stretched out of shape.
Which is obviously affected by memetic evolution.
Yes, aggression is not the best example. Thank you. I have edited to fix this. :)