Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Opposing side of transhumanism
Technical advancement in medical field
Essays about the technology of medicine
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Opposing side of transhumanism
In my paper, I will be discussing possibly the biggest ethical issue with regards to mind uploading, the question of whether or not we will still be human after the upload. My view is that we will stay human from Kantian’s point of view of reasoning. I will not be arguing for the plausibility of mind uploading; we will assume hypothetically that it exists and works. Mind uploading is a concept that is getting more attention in the world of Transhumanism. Ray Kurzweil is Google’s director of engineering and he made a prediction that mind uploading will exist by 2045 (Woollaston). The idea behind this is that people will be able to replace their bodies with machines, theoretically granting them immortality as they live and are powered by computers. …show more content…
Immanuel Kant, an 18th century philosopher, claims that humans are unique compared to everything else. According to him, rationality is the key feature that makes us human. Rationality, is the “ability to transcend ‘instinct’ as the driver of our actions and replace, or at least guide that instinct by rational thought that takes account of the ‘outcomes’…we can now see our actions as not just ‘good’ (it worked and I got what I wanted), or bad (didn't work and I didn't get what I wanted), but as also ‘good’ (morally correct)” (Reedman). In other words, we have the ability to think deeper and use facts before we act instead of just blindly following our instincts. So according to Kant, if we do not utilize or do not have rationality, then we are no longer human and no different than animals. Connecting this with mind uploading, if the upload is not capable of being rationale, then it is not human. Conversely, if it is rationale, it is human. Rationality, I believe, is affected by our environment and our experiences. There is no other way to learn about how the world works unless we experience it. Which means our memories and personality are critical in how we will think and act. With mind uploading, the upload guarantees to have exactly copy over one’s memories and personality. Being that this technology is labeled as a transhumanist technology, it is safe to assume that our upload’s intelligence will not be lower than our own. Not only that, the upload will have direct access to the cloud, providing instantaneous information to
One of the key questions raised by Rupert Sheldrake in the Seven Experiments That Could Change the World, is are we more than the ghost in the machine? It is perfectly acceptable to Sheldrake that humans are more than their brain, and because of this, and in actual reality “the mind is indeed extended beyond the brain, as most people throughout most of human history have believed.” (Sheldrake, Seven Experiments 104)
In the essay titled “Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals” published in the Morality and Moral Controversies course textbook, Immanuel Kant argues that the view of the world and its laws is structured by human concepts and categories, and the rationale of it is the source of morality which depends upon belief in the existence of God. In Kant’s work, categorical imperative was established in order to have a standard rationale from where all moral requirements derive. Therefore, categorical imperative is an obligation to act morally, out of duty and good will alone. In Immanuel Kant’s writing human reason and or rational are innate morals which are responsible for helping human. Needless to say, this also allows people to be able to distinct right from wrong. For the aforementioned reasons, there is no doubt that any action has to be executed solely out of a duty alone and it should not focus on the consequence but on the motive and intent of the action. Kant supports his argument by dividing the essay into three sections. In the first section he calls attention to common sense mor...
When talking about the future of technology, one can only imagine what it will be down the road. The future of technology evokes many questions about the preservation of human existence, human advancement and intelligence. Some writers even discuss their positions on the future of technology and human kind. Writers such as James J. Bell, who explains the theory of the ‘Singularity’. In summary, he states that the rate of technological advancement, compared to human intelligence, will one day reach the ‘singularity’ were it will surpass the human mind (pg. 52). We may never know if technology will ever have the power to surpass the human intellect or what the consequences will be if it does attain these capabilities. Will humans still maintain control over them, or will they control us? Theses eight articles illustrate the implicit and explicit control that technology holds over humans in the future.
ABSTRACT: In light of interpreting a paradox of irrationality, vaguely expressed by Donald Davidson in the context of explaining weakness of will, I attempt to show that it contains a significant thesis regarding the cognitive as well as motivational basis of our normative practice. First, an irrational act must involve both a rational element and a non-rational element at its core. Second, irrationality entails free and intentional violation of fundamental norms which the agent deems right or necessary. Third, "normative interpretation" is only possible for objects that are both natural events and capable of mental operations which presuppose some freedom of will as well as constructive representation of the surrounding reality. Fourth, there is always a question of whether we strike the best balance between fitting individual mental items consistently with the overall behavior pattern and keeping our critical ability in following certain normative principles which constitute our rational background. Fifth, the paradox of irrationality reflects and polarizes a deep-seated tension in the normative human practice under the ultimate constraints of nature. Finally, the ultimate issue is how we can find the best lines on which our normative rational standards are based-"best" in the sense that they are close enough to limits of human practical potentialities and are not too high as to render our normative standards idle or even disastrous.
Kant believes that by nature, society will perfect itself over time and become more rational and free. Kant does not focus on the most primitive state of human nature, but rather the present state of society. In stark contrast to Rousseau, Kant encourages people to use their intended reasoning and believes that natural capacities of reasoning should be developed in all of mankind. Since nature “gave man reason and the freedom of will based on it”, she clearly wishes for man to utilize it. (Kant 31) Kant proposes the ridiculousness of being motivated by instinct or “provided for and instructed by ready-made knowledge” and urges man to discover everything on his own. This natural reasoning is what gives value and significance to the world, so
Artificial Intelligence is a term not too widely used in today’s society. With today’s technology we haven’t found a way to enable someone to leave their physical body and let their mind survive within a computer. Could it be possible? Maybe someday, but for now it’s just in theory. The novel by William Gibson, Neuromancer, has touched greatly on the idea of artificial intelligence. He describes it as a world where many things are possible. By simply logging on the computer, it opens up a world we could never comprehend. The possibilities are endless in the world of William Gibson.
In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that human beings inherently have capability to make purely rational decisions that are not based on inclinations and such rational decisions prevent people from interfering with freedom of another. Kant’s view of inherent ability to reason brings different perspective to ways which human beings can pursue morality thus it requires a close analytical examination.
Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons regardless of their individual desires or partial interests. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
While Kant’s theory may seem “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008) now, it was ruled as acceptable and rational behavior then. Kant believed that any moral or ethical decision could be achieved with consistent behavior. While judgment was based on reason, morals were based on rational choices made by human beings (Freeman, 2000). A human’s brain is the most advanced in the animal kingdom. Not only do human beings work on instinct, but they have the ability to sort out situations in order to make a decision. This includes weighing the pros and cons of decisions that could be made and how they affect others either positively or negatively. This is called rational thought. Kant believed that any human being able to rationalize a decision before it was made had the ability to be a morally just person (Freeman, 2000). There were certain things that made the decision moral, and he called it the “Categorical Imperative” (Johnson, 2008). If someone was immoral they violated this CI and were considered irrational. The CI is said to be an automatic response which was part of Kant’s argument that all people were deserving of respect. This automatic response to rational thinking is where he is considered, now, to be “overly optimistic” (Johnson, 2008).
Finally, Kant saw the world as he wanted to see it, not the reality of it. In reality human beings are social animals that can be deceived, and can become irrational, this distinction is what makes us human, and it is that which makes us make mistakes. Kant states good arguments in his essay however his belief that people are enslaved and shackled by the “guardians” when he writes “shackles of a permanent immaturity” (Kant, 1) is sometimes absurd when the same guardians are the people that encourage our minds of thinking.
The traditional notion that seeks to compare human minds, with all its intricacies and biochemical functions, to that of artificially programmed digital computers, is self-defeating and it should be discredited in dialogs regarding the theory of artificial intelligence. This traditional notion is akin to comparing, in crude terms, cars and aeroplanes or ice cream and cream cheese. Human mental states are caused by various behaviours of elements in the brain, and these behaviours in are adjudged by the biochemical composition of our brains, which are responsible for our thoughts and functions. When we discuss mental states of systems it is important to distinguish between human brains and that of any natural or artificial organisms which is said to have central processing systems (i.e. brains of chimpanzees, microchips etc.). Although various similarities may exist between those systems in terms of functions and behaviourism, the intrinsic intentionality within those systems differ extensively. Although it may not be possible to prove that whether or not mental states exist at all in systems other than our own, in this paper I will strive to present arguments that a machine that computes and responds to inputs does indeed have a state of mind, but one that does not necessarily result in a form of mentality. This paper will discuss how the states and intentionality of digital computers are different from the states of human brains and yet they are indeed states of a mind resulting from various functions in their central processing systems.
Moving forward, the question remains…what makes Kant’s theory of enlightenment humanistic? Humanism is defined as a concern with the nature, capacity and potential of humanity, and the development and promotion of the same. Kant did not reject our normal, moral judgements. Rather, he devised a new method; one that would allow man to take the right action by thinking – something that people who call themselves “humanists”
reasoning, spirit, and natural wants are all part of human nature. In book 1 of The
Would it be the start of a new era for humanity? Or extinction? It’s on this issue that Transcendence is based. The idea is not new. The transfer of a human being into a computer is often reflected on in science fiction theory or even its expansion via the Internet and its worldwide takeover, which is the basis of the plot in Terminator. But Transcendence is not about machines uprising. It’s about the human identity and the limit we want to give it. The movie elaborates and reflects on a situation that it wants to make us believe is possible in today’s world. Are we still far? Artificial intelligence is increasingly present in our lives. We all have a form of it in our cell phones, Siri and other programs, transformed the simple machine in something that we talk to, ask questions, and have a sort of conversation with. In a way it gave life to the machine, it gave it a voice. Transcendence is a cautionary tale about the perils of artificial intelligence and is full of philosophical and ethical questions regarding the advent of artificial
A.I. Artificial Intelligence is a Steven Spielberg science fiction drama film, which tells the story of a younger generation robot, David, who yearns for his human mother’s love. David’s character stimulates the mind-body question. What is the connection between our “minds” and our bodies? It is apparent that we are personified entities, but also, that we embrace “more” than just our bodies. “Human persons are physical, embodied beings and an important feature of God’s intended design for human life” (Cortez, 70).