I wanted to repost the below essay in its entirety because you should read it for yourself. I need you to realize academics have been openly publishing Transhumanist-related literature on the web since at least year 2004. Consider how a couple of decades ago anyone connected to the web could access publications on Transhumanism. Access to publications written by world-leading Academic institutions and their acolytes who seemed obsessed with the topic of Transhumanism portrayed as humanity's only hope for the future.

This essay is so incomprehensibly anti-human and extraordinarily anti-individual that I don't know what to think about it's obscurity. To this day I've not come through such an example of extensive usage of scientific terminology used to evidence & argue for humanity's shared future as an collectively inevitable dystopia.

Ask yourself: how can it exist online for two decades, remaining openly accessible to this day? And how come we weren't warned about this secret plan of the global Supervillians? I swore that Supervillains aren't meant to leave secret diabolical schemes out in the open for any old passerby to read. Secret plans are meant to stay secret. If the audience knows what next plot twist awaits them, then it wont be exciting for them. Likewise, if we know what horrors lie in shadows waiting for us, it's less likely we'll get caught by them. Also unexciting.

*This a manifesto of technocratic-eschatalogy. Its packed to the brim with scenarios of impending doomsday. And because we failed to seek out what they spelled out 20 years ago, the majority of our planet's internet addicted population cannot consider if decades of exposure to marketing and branding of technological evolution will not eventuate in world harmony.

We can only buy into a vision of utopia if it's for us all. Presently, we feast on the inverse concept. Pretending that being force-fed shit has to be our utopian future destiny because we're all in it together and no longer fighting one another. Is this how World Peace will be achieved?

https://www.tarrdaniel.com/documents/Transzhumanizmus/transzhumanizmus.htm

Nick Bostrom

What is Transhumanism?

- What is Transhumanism? -

2004.

Transhumanist statement

(1) In the future, technology will radically change humanity. We foresee the possibility of a transformation of the human condition, including parameters such as the inevitability of aging, the limitations of human and artificial intelligence, unwanted mental dispositions, suffering, and our forced attachment to Earth.

(2) Methodical research should be conducted in order to understand the approaching developments and their long-term consequences.

(3) Transhumanists believe that by being generally open and embracing new technology, we have a better chance of turning it to our advantage than by trying to ban or prevent it.

(4) Transhumanists support the moral rights of those who wish to use technology to enhance their mental and physical capabilities and develop control over their own lives. We strive for personal development, beyond our current biological limitations.

(5) Prospects for dramatic technological development must be taken into account in long-term planning. It would be tragic if the potential benefits were not realized due to ill-founded technophobia or unnecessary bans. On the other hand, it would also be tragic if intelligent life died out as a result of some kind of catastrophe or war using advanced technologies.

(6) We must create forums where people can engage in rational debate about what needs to be done, and we must create a social order in which responsible decisions can be made.

(7) Transhumanism supports the well-being of all forms of life (artificial intelligences, humans, non-human animals, or possible extraterrestrial species) and takes many of the principles of modern secular humanism. Transhumanism does not endorse any particular party, politician or political platform.

The following people contributed to this document: Doug Bailey, Anders Sandberg, Gustavo Alves, Max More, Holger Wagner, Natasha Vita More, Eugene Leitl, Berrie Staring, David Pearce, Bill Fantegrossi, Doug Baily Jr., den Otter, Ralf Fletcher , Kathryn Aegis, Tom Morrow, Alexander Chislenko, Lee Daniel Crocker, Darren Reynolds, Keith Elis, Thom Quinn, Mikhail Sverdlov, Arjen Kamphuis, Shane Spaulding, Nick Bostrom

What is Transhumanism?

Regarding the future of humanity, a new paradigm has emerged in the last few years among leading computer scientists, neuroscientists, nanotechnologists and researchers at the forefront of technological development. The new paradigm rejects the basic assumption inherent in traditional futurology and practically all political thinking today. According to this interpretation, the "human condition" is basically constant: the processes of the present can be refined, wealth can be increased and redistributed, tools can be developed and perfected, culture can change, sometimes drastically, but human nature itself cannot be touched.

This assumption is no longer valid. It is also debatable whether it was ever true. Innovations such as speech, writing, printing, machines, modern medicine and computers have profoundly affected not only the way people live, but also what a person is. Compared to what may happen over the next few decades, these changes feel slow and even relatively weak. Consider, however, that just one new invention of similar importance to the above would be enough to invalidate the orthodox visions of our world.

"Transhumanism," which has become popular as a new way of thinking, challenges the premise that the human condition is essentially unchangeable. Anyone who removes this mental obstacle will be presented with a dazzling picture of radical possibilities, from the creation of undisturbed happiness to the extinction of intelligent life. In general, in the light of the present, the future seems very strange, but at the same time perhaps wonderful.

Some of these possibilities, which we will hear debate about in the coming years, are quite extreme and may sound like science fiction. Consider the following:

- Super intelligent machines . Superintelligence refers to any form of artificial intelligence—perhaps “self-teaching” neural networks—that can outperform the best human brains by leaps and bounds in virtually any domain, including scientific creativity, practical wisdom, and social skills. According to some analysts, the hardware and software needed to build superintelligence will be developed in the next few decades. (See Moravec [1998] and Bostrom [1998].)

- Lifelong emotional well-being through the restoration of pleasure centers . Even today, mild forms of sustained euphoria are achievable for those few who respond particularly well to mood-enhancing drugs ("antidepressants"). The drugs currently under development are expected to drastically reduce the occurrence of negative emotions in the lives of more and more "normal" people. In some cases, the harmful side effects of new active ingredients are negligible. While street drugs typically destroy the brain's neurochemistry, resulting in a short-lived emotional high and then a crash, modern clinical drugs can target a specific neurotransmitter or receptor subtype with extreme precision and thus reverse the negative impact on the subject's cognitive abilities - the subject does not will make you feel "high" - and they allow for a long-lasting, indefinitely enhanced mood, without the risk of addiction. David Pearce [1997] predicts a post-Darwinian era in which aversive experiences are replaced by degrees of pleasure beyond the constraints of normal human experience. As cleaner and safer mood-enhancing drugs and gene therapies become available, Eden design may become a viable option.

- Personality pills . Gene therapy and drugs will offer much more than superficial, one-dimensional pleasure. They can also modify the personality. They can help overcome shyness, eliminate jealousy (Kramer [1994]), increase creativity, and improve empathic skills and emotional depth. Think of the multitude of preachings, fastings, and abstinences that men have been willing to undergo through the ages, just to ennoble their personalities. By swallowing a daily cocktail of pills, we will soon be able to achieve these goals much more thoroughly.

- Space colonization . Space colonization is now technologically feasible, but prohibitively expensive. As costs decrease, economic and political obstacles to space colonization may be removed. it is important that once a self-sustaining colony is created, capable of sending its own colonization probes into space, an exponential self-multiplication process begins, capable of expanding to millions of stars in our galaxy, and then to millions of other galaxies, without any intervention from the Earth. Of course, this series of events will take an extremely long time in human terms. But it might be interesting to note how close we are to setting off a chain of events that will have such a momentous consequence as populating the observable universe with our descendants.

- Molecular nanotechnology . Nanotechnology is the hypothetical design and manufacture of atomic-scale machines, including general-purpose "assemblers", devices that can build virtually any previously specified, chemically permissible material configuration, even an exact copy of themselves, by arranging atoms individually. Biology provides evidence for the existence of a limited form of nanotechnology: the cell is a molecular self-multiplier capable of producing many different versions of proteins. However, evolution limits the design freedom available to biological organisms mostly to non-solid carbon structures. Eric Drexler ([1988], [1992]) was the first to analyze in detail the physical possibilities of a universal molecular assembler. Once such an instrument is created, it will be possible to produce any product extremely cheaply (and perfectly cleanly), based on the design specification and using the necessary energy and atoms. The self-starting problem of nanotechnology - that is, how to build the first assembler - is very difficult to solve. There are currently two approaches. One builds on what nature has already accomplished: it seeks to use biochemistry to produce new proteins that can serve as tools for further production attempts. Other ideas would build atomic structures from scratch using proximal probes, such as atomic force microscopes, which would place atoms one by one on a surface. It is also possible to use the two methods together. Much research is needed to realize the physical potential of Drexler's nanotechnology; this will certainly not happen in the next few years, but maybe in the first decades of our century.

- Extremely extended life . Using radical gene therapy and other biological methods, it may be possible to stop the aging process and to permanently stimulate the body's rejuvenating and regenerating mechanisms. At the same time, it is conceivable that only nanotechnology can realize this trick. In the meantime, there are already unproven and in some cases expensive hormone treatment procedures that seem to have a beneficial effect on the general vitality of older people, although nothing has so far been shown to be more effective in extending life than controlled restriction of caloric intake.

- Extinction of intelligent life . The risks are at least as great as the opportunities. In addition to the already recognized (though probably inadequately countered) dangers—such as a worldwide military, terrorist, or accidental strike that could occur through nuclear, chemical, virological, or bacteriological effects—new technologies invariably pose a very different kind of danger. Nanotechnology, for example, could pose a dire threat to our very existence if a terrorist group acquires it before we develop adequate defense systems. It is not even certain that adequate protection is possible. Perhaps in the world of nanotechnology, offense has a decisive advantage over defense. It is not too far-fetched to assume that other risks may emerge that we cannot even imagine today.

- The connected world . Even in its current form, the Internet has a huge influence on some people's lives. Its possibilities are just beginning to unfold. This is an area where radical change is widely experienced and is the subject of extensive media debate.

- Uploading our consciousness into virtual reality . If we could scan the synaptic matrix of the human brain and simulate it on a computer, it would be possible to move from our biological embodiment to a purely digital substrate (provided we accept certain philosophical assumptions about the nature of consciousness and identity). If we constantly took care of our backups, we could enjoy the joys of practically infinite longevity. By controlling the activation process of the simulated neural network, we could design completely new types of experiences. Recharging, in this sense, would certainly require advanced nanotechnology. But there are less extreme ways to bring humans and computers together. Nowadays, they are working on the development of neuron/chip interfaces. The technology is still in its early stages, but one day we will be able to produce neuroprostheses that can be used to "connect" to cyberspace. Even less speculative are the various implementations of immersive virtual reality, such as head-mounted displays that can communicate with the brain through our natural senses.

- Reviving people in cryostasis . People frozen by today's procedure will probably only be able to be brought back to life with advanced nanotechnology. Even if we were absolutely certain that advanced nanotechnology would ever materialize, there would still be no guarantee that the gamble of cryonics customers would succeed; the beings of the future may not even be interested in reviving the people of today. However, even a 5-10 percent chance makes the Alcor contract a rational decision for those who can afford it and who value their own continued existence. If they are revived, they can look forward to thousands of years of individual life, with living conditions of their own choosing.

These prospects may seem distant. According to transhumanists, however, there is reason to believe that they are not as far away as many assume. According to the Technology Postulate hypothesis, some of the topics listed above, or other equally profound changes, will be possible within, say, seventy years (or perhaps even sooner). This is the antithesis of the proposition that the human condition is constant. The Technology Postulate is usually the premise of transhumanist debates. However, it is not an object of blind faith; questionable hypothesis, which they support with specific scientific and technological arguments.

If we are convinced that we have a good basis for accepting the Technological Postulate, what consequences can this have for our worldview and way of life? Once we start to reflect on the matter and become aware of its possibilities, the consequences can be profound.

From this awareness grows the transhumanist philosophy and "movement". Because transhumanism is more than an abstract belief that we will soon overcome our biological limitations with the help of technology; an attempt to re-evaluate the traditional human valley of woe. It is also an attempt to adopt a far-sighted and constructive position in the changed circumstances. Its primary task is to awaken the widest possible debate on these topics and promote their better public acceptance. The set of skills and competencies required in transhumanist debates is far beyond the purview of computer scientists, neuroscientists, software developers, and other high-tech gurus. Transhumanism is not only for minds accustomed to inveterate futurism. It should become a matter for all sections of society.

The Foresight Institute is an excellent source of information on nanotechnology-related topics. It organizes annual conferences and brings together a prestigious team of nanotechnology experts. The Extropian Institute has already organized several international conferences on transhumanist topics, and its president, Max More, has done a lot to bring Extropian topics into the mass media. (Extropianism is defined by the Extropian Principles as a subtype of transhumanism.) In 1997, the World Transhumanist Association ( WTA ) was formed with the goal of making transhumanism a mainstream scientific discipline and providing a platform for various academic and non-academic transhumanist groups, local for the communication of associations and transhumanist individuals. WTA publishes the electronic journal Journal of Transhumanism, which publishes leading studies by scientists researching in transhumanist disciplines. The WTA website is a good starting point for those researching topics related to transhumanism.

It is extremely difficult to predict the consequences of our actions today. According to transhumanists, however, instead of ostrich politics, we should try to plan our steps as best as possible. Thus, it becomes necessary to face some infamous "big questions", such as the so-called Fermi paradox ("Why haven't we seen any signs of intelligent extraterrestrial life yet?"). The problem requires delving into many different disciplines. The Fermi paradox is not only an intellectual challenge, but can also be useful in practice, as it can influence our perception of human survival and space colonization (Hanson [1996]). At present, however, it seems that the science of evolution is not at a sufficient level to draw certain conclusions about our own future in this matter. Another significant source of indirect information about our future is the extremely controversial Carter-Leslie's Judgment Day argument, which, based on the basic principles of probability theory and simple empirical assumptions, tries to prove that the extinction of the human race in the 21st century is much more likely than we previously thought. The argument, based on a version of the Anthropic Principle, was coined by astrophysicist Brandon Carter and later developed by philosopher John Leslie and others [1996]. So far, no one has been able to satisfactorily explain what is wrong with it, if it is wrong at all (Bostrom [1998]).

Broad perspectives and big questions are key to transhumanism, but that doesn't mean transhumanists aren't interested in what's happening in our world today. On the contrary! In the wide-ranging and lively discussions of the transhumanist forums, topics as diverse as cloning were recently on the agenda; proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; neuron/chip interfaces; psychological tools such as skeptical thinking skills, natural language processing (NLP) and memetics; processor technology and Moore's Law; gender roles and sexuality; neural networks and neuromorphic design; life extension techniques such as calorie restriction techniques; PET, MRI and other brain imaging procedures; myths about Martian life (?); transhumanist literature and film; quantum cryptography and "teleportation"; the digital citizen; atomic force microscopy as a technology promoting the development of nanotechnology; e-commerce... Of course, the participants are not equally at home in all areas, but many like the experience of participating in the research of ideas, facts and positions unknown to them.

One important transhumanist goal is to improve the functioning of human society as an epistemic community. In addition to trying to decipher the events of today, we can try to understand the possibilities of self-improvement. We can create institutions that increase the effectiveness of academic and other scientific communities. More and more people have access to the Internet. Programmers, software designers, IT consultants and others have become involved in projects that continually increase the quality and quantity of the benefits of being connected. Hypertextual publishing and the collaborative information filtering paradigm (Chislenko [1997]) can accelerate the dissemination of valuable information and help eliminate information that appears to be delusions and crazy claims. People working in computer science join the army of educators, scientists, humanists, teachers and responsible journalists who have been striving since time immemorial to reduce ignorance and make humanity as a whole more rational.

According to a simple but brilliant idea developed by Robin Hanson [1990], we should create a market for "thought futures". What this really amounts to is placing bets on all sorts of controversial science and technology-themed claims. One of the many advantages of such an institution would be that consensus estimates could be made about the likelihood of uncertain hypotheses about predicted events, such as when a particular technological breakthrough would occur. It would also offer a decentralized way to monetize people who put effort into realizing their ideas. At the same time, it would promote intellectual honesty by encouraging those making strong claims to put their money where their mouths are. Currently, the idea is in the experimental phase, the Foresight Exchange, where people can stake "credibility points" in relation to several claims. But to realize the potential benefits, the market would have to operate with real money, integrated into the existing economic structure, similar to today's stock exchanges. (Current anti-gambling legislation is an obstacle; in many countries, all betting other than sports and horse racing is prohibited.)

At first glance, the transhumanist approach may seem cold and alien. Many are frightened by the rapid changes they witness every day and reject new technologies or urge their ban. It is worth remembering that labor pain relief achieved with anesthetics was previously labeled as unnatural. Not long ago, the idea of "bottle babies" was met with disgust. Genetic manipulation is widely seen as an interference with God's creation. Currently, the biggest ethical panic has erupted over cloning. Today, well-intentioned biofundamentalists, religious leaders and so-called a whole army of moral experts has formed, who feel it their duty to protect us from all kinds of "unnatural" things that do not fit into their prejudiced worldview. Transhumanist philosophy offers a positive alternative to this “ban everything new” approach to coping with a changing world. Instead of rejecting the opportunities that have yet to be fulfilled, he calls us to embrace them as firmly as possible. Transhumanists see technological progress as a collective human effort to invent new tools to transform the human condition and transcend our biological limitations. This makes it possible for anyone who wants to become a posthuman being. It is completely irrelevant whether the means are "natural" or "unnatural".

Transhumanism is not a philosophy made up of rigid dogmas. Beyond their emphatically technophile values, transhumanists stand out with the problems they research. These problems include such profound questions as the future of intelligent life, but at the same time the much narrower scientific, technological or social achievements of our present. In dealing with these topics, transhumanists take a factual, scientific, problem-solving approach. Neither principle is unquestionable, neither the necessity of death nor our need for finite earthly resources; he does not even see transhumanism itself as above the need for constant critical reevaluation. Ideology must evolve and transform in response to new experiences and new challenges. The transhumanists are prepared to - if they were wrong - see it and learn from their mistakes.

Transhumanism can be very practical and tangible at the same time. Many transhumanists seek applications of their philosophy in their own lives, from health-enhancing and life-extending diets and exercises, to signing up for cryonics, investing in technology stocks, creating transhumanist art, using clinical drugs to control mood and personality parameters, various he uses psychological self-development techniques and - in general - takes steps towards a richer and more responsible life. An empowering mentality common among transhumanists is dynamic optimism: the attitude that desirable outcomes are generally attainable, but only with considerable effort and wise decisions (See More [1997]).

Are you a Transhumanist? If so, you can expect to see your views reflected more and more in the media and society. After all, it is clear that the time for transhumanist ideas has come.

Nick Bostrom
Department of Philosophy, Logic and the Scientific Method
London School of Economics
nick@nickbostrom.com at: www.nickbostrom.com

Literature:

• Bostrom, N. 1998. "How long before superintelligence?" [International Journal of Futures Studies, 2. ]
• Bostrom, N. 1998. "Investigations into the Doomsday Argument"
• Bostrom, N. 1997. "The Fermi Paradox"
• Chislenko, A. 1997. "Collaborative Information Filtering"
• Drexler, E. 1992. Nanosystems. [John Wiley & Sons, New York].
• Drexler, E. 1988. Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology. [Fourth Estate. London. ]
• Hanson, R. 1996. "The Great Filter: Are we almost past it?"
• Kramer, P. 1994. Listning to Prozac. [Penguin. U.S.A.]
• Leslie, J. 1996. The End of the World: The Ethics and Science of Human Extinction. [Routledge, New York.]
• More, M. 1997. "The Extropian Principles"
• More, M. 1995. "Dynamic optimism: Epistemological Psychology for Extropians"
• Moravec, H. 1998. Robot, Being: mere machine to transcendent mind. [Oxford Univ. Press.]
• Pearce, D. 1997. "The Hedonistic Imperative".

Institutions

• Extropy Institute
• Foresight Stock Exchange
• Foresight Institute
• Transhumanist World Association

I am grateful to David Pearce and Anders Sandberg for their thoughtful comments on earlier versions of this text. -NB

---

Some Homework

On Persuasion

Speakers: Mr. Bas Wouters (Cialdini Institute)
Date: 6 February 2024
Speaker Session Summary

During his presentation, Mr. Wouters delved into the original model developed by the Cialdini Institute, alongside two recently-devised tools tailored for assessing a target audience’s interests and executing an influence campaign. He underscored the foundational work outlined in Dr. Cialdini’s seminal book, The Psychology of Persuasion, shedding light on the early research endeavors of Dr. Cialdini. In particular, Mr. Wouters described the seven universal principles of persuasion, identifying what distinguishes some individuals as more persuasive than others. He emphasized the significance of comprehending the scientific underpinnings of persuasion, asserting that individuals well-versed in the science behind persuasion wield greater influence compared to those who rely solely on natural charisma. Among the seven universal principles delineated were “scarcity,” hailed as the most potent external driver of persuasion, and “consistency,” recognized as the most formidable internal driver.

In addition to expounding upon Dr. Cialdini’s framework, Mr. Wouters delved into Neidert’s Core Motives Model, explaining its intricacies and its synergy with the seven universal principles of persuasion. The presentation also encompassed strategies for optimizing brainstorming sessions, underscoring how these principles influence the effectiveness of the Neidert’s Core Motives Model in various scenarios.

Ritual Warfare (wikipedia)

Ritual warfare (sometimes called endemic warfare) is a state of continual or frequent warfare, such as is found in (but not limited to) some tribal societies.