[lordfrito]

Not knocking you or general discussion on transhumanism. There's different definitions, and I haven't read up on it enough. Agree that reading glasses isn't a problem, sorry if that's what you thought I was arguing.

The original comment was talking about improving people through genetics and brain tinkering. That's just a modern form of Eugenics, and I thought that we all agreed that this line of thinking doesn't reach anywhere constructive and is best avoided.

Very delicate stuff were talking about here. I'm all for helping cure disease, but some argue that weakens the overall gene pool and opens up the door for superbugs etc. Win a short term battle, lose the war. The stakes are very very high when talking about this stuff. Move fast and break things... just... NO. Much caution.

As I get older, I feel the time is ripe for when the younger generation will make vast sweeping decisions which will end in them relearning the lessons of the past the hard way. Too many voices saying "This time its different" echoing all around me. Too many people willing to tear down too much that has been built. If history isn't learned the easy way, it will be learned the hard way. I guess I'm just throwing out some caution here when dealing with blanket statements about improving humans.

[light_cone]

No sorry, I went on a tangent and generalized without stating it clearly.

I just wanted to argue that by my definition, we are already in a tranhumanistic (and eugenistic) society, so we should not spare ourselves these debates instead of blanket statements and be afraid of concepts.

I probably appeared as pro go-nuts-on-brain-generics, whereas I actually agree we should be very cautious. The law of unintended consequences is indeed a strong argument.