Augmentation: Is the Train Leaving the Station? -- AL, Bio, CPS, Plan, Soc
*
Given how fast augmentation techniques have been surfacing in recent years, the question arises: How long before we have augmentation methods too powerful to ignore? And for that matter, how long before we have neo-humans who are in many ways definitively superior to the previous model -- that is to say, the rest of us?
Personally, as a human-enhancement enthusiast, it has been surprising to see progress in this field consistently outracing even my expectations. Especially considering that no large organization or wealthy entity seems to be pushing such research. Indeed, given the position of the President's Council on Bio-Ethics, it would seem that the present attitude of the U.S. government is relatively hostile to the field. Yet progress is continuing regardless, and a number of breakthroughs enabling the creation of "superhumans" using existing technology may already be possible.
So far on this blog, I've either discussed or linked to significant new discoveries with the potential to create people who are "more than human." There's been the techniques for doubling muscle mass and amplifying cardio-vascular endurance through genetic manipulation -- already in use in animals, and which experts speculated could well be in use in our next Olympics, if they weren't already a part of the last one.
When injecting rats with the gene for IGF-1 and then having them exercise results in a doubling of their muscle mass (and when merely being injected and not exercising increases muscle size and strength by 15% to 30%), it becomes clear that only a relative handful of such modifications would be necessary for a genetically human "sub-species" to pull away from the rest of us in terms of performance. Particularly if they started at an elevated baseline of abilities.
And of course, there's been the various bio-energy manipulations described here, here, here and here. And the accelerated learning and creativity boosting techniques described here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, among others. Some of my previous articles, such as this one and this one, have surveyed the rate at which science has been making strides in biologically enhancing human beings. Obviously, there's no shortage of enhancement methods, even for those of us not yet (or perhaps never) biologically, pharmacologically or cybernetically augmented. Which raises the very basic question -- how long before someone realizes that any effective methods for significant human improvement could be synergistically combined, thus leading to ever more radically evolved beings? And that a relatively simple program could take a relatively small number of such people -- a few hundred to a few thousand or tens of thousands -- and with a fairly small budget (within the reach of many companies, not to mention nations) develop a host of "posthumans" to serve that organization's interests...?
Not a grandiose leap of the imagination if the people in said program included many of the leaders and thinkers of such a group, particularly people who would have reason to expect to see great improvements in their personal compensation in exchange for substantial improvements in the quality of their work and thought. And who might be personally, ideologically and/or philosophically devoted to the group and its goals.
Along these lines, here's my response to one query about potential augmented humans:
"As to the exceptional individuals I mentioned, that was technically one of the relatively fictional parts of the post (unlike, say, the two computers engaged in automated biotech research). But you're right to ask about them, because in fact both were based on human capabilities that have been developed not through genetic engineering, but through regular practice of particular disciplines.
"I'll save a more detailed discussion for another blog post, but to summarize, the guy with the unusually well-developed capillaries is based on simple techniques by Dr. Win Wenger for increasing healthy circulation to your brain. He's the easier of the two to create through simple, daily exercises -- especially given several years of work.
"The girl with the superior limbic access/learning skills is based on a number of accelerated learning techniques, including a number of hypnosis methods developed (and never written down) by Dr. Milton Erickson, Dr. Raikov, and others. She'd be more difficult to develop -- in particular the kind of automatic access to her superlearning gifts that I describe -- but given the research and an intensive project to create one or more such people, hardly impossible.
"One key point of this article was that there are a number of ways to develop a superhuman (or "superentity"). Also implied, I think, is the point that many of the methods available could be used to enhance each other -- a genetically augmented person using accelerated learning and mindtech to leverage their assets and then turning around to improve a computer system that researches biotech options.
"You quickly end up with a snowball effect here. Or a "Singularity." =)"
Future Imperative
Given how fast augmentation techniques have been surfacing in recent years, the question arises: How long before we have augmentation methods too powerful to ignore? And for that matter, how long before we have neo-humans who are in many ways definitively superior to the previous model -- that is to say, the rest of us?
Personally, as a human-enhancement enthusiast, it has been surprising to see progress in this field consistently outracing even my expectations. Especially considering that no large organization or wealthy entity seems to be pushing such research. Indeed, given the position of the President's Council on Bio-Ethics, it would seem that the present attitude of the U.S. government is relatively hostile to the field. Yet progress is continuing regardless, and a number of breakthroughs enabling the creation of "superhumans" using existing technology may already be possible.
So far on this blog, I've either discussed or linked to significant new discoveries with the potential to create people who are "more than human." There's been the techniques for doubling muscle mass and amplifying cardio-vascular endurance through genetic manipulation -- already in use in animals, and which experts speculated could well be in use in our next Olympics, if they weren't already a part of the last one.
When injecting rats with the gene for IGF-1 and then having them exercise results in a doubling of their muscle mass (and when merely being injected and not exercising increases muscle size and strength by 15% to 30%), it becomes clear that only a relative handful of such modifications would be necessary for a genetically human "sub-species" to pull away from the rest of us in terms of performance. Particularly if they started at an elevated baseline of abilities.
And of course, there's been the various bio-energy manipulations described here, here, here and here. And the accelerated learning and creativity boosting techniques described here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, among others. Some of my previous articles, such as this one and this one, have surveyed the rate at which science has been making strides in biologically enhancing human beings. Obviously, there's no shortage of enhancement methods, even for those of us not yet (or perhaps never) biologically, pharmacologically or cybernetically augmented. Which raises the very basic question -- how long before someone realizes that any effective methods for significant human improvement could be synergistically combined, thus leading to ever more radically evolved beings? And that a relatively simple program could take a relatively small number of such people -- a few hundred to a few thousand or tens of thousands -- and with a fairly small budget (within the reach of many companies, not to mention nations) develop a host of "posthumans" to serve that organization's interests...?
Not a grandiose leap of the imagination if the people in said program included many of the leaders and thinkers of such a group, particularly people who would have reason to expect to see great improvements in their personal compensation in exchange for substantial improvements in the quality of their work and thought. And who might be personally, ideologically and/or philosophically devoted to the group and its goals.
Along these lines, here's my response to one query about potential augmented humans:
"As to the exceptional individuals I mentioned, that was technically one of the relatively fictional parts of the post (unlike, say, the two computers engaged in automated biotech research). But you're right to ask about them, because in fact both were based on human capabilities that have been developed not through genetic engineering, but through regular practice of particular disciplines.
"I'll save a more detailed discussion for another blog post, but to summarize, the guy with the unusually well-developed capillaries is based on simple techniques by Dr. Win Wenger for increasing healthy circulation to your brain. He's the easier of the two to create through simple, daily exercises -- especially given several years of work.
"The girl with the superior limbic access/learning skills is based on a number of accelerated learning techniques, including a number of hypnosis methods developed (and never written down) by Dr. Milton Erickson, Dr. Raikov, and others. She'd be more difficult to develop -- in particular the kind of automatic access to her superlearning gifts that I describe -- but given the research and an intensive project to create one or more such people, hardly impossible.
"One key point of this article was that there are a number of ways to develop a superhuman (or "superentity"). Also implied, I think, is the point that many of the methods available could be used to enhance each other -- a genetically augmented person using accelerated learning and mindtech to leverage their assets and then turning around to improve a computer system that researches biotech options.
"You quickly end up with a snowball effect here. Or a "Singularity." =)"
Future Imperative
posted by Ralph Cerchione | Sunday, July 17, 2005
1 Comments:
Hi, Brent, and thanks for pointing that out. The error has been corrected. Apparently when I clicked copy on one of my links, it copied the wrong one. And once you've put the hyperlink into your draft, you can't really check it until you print the article. (Assuming you even anticipate such a freak error...)
I, of course, hope that everyone searched the entire site and the Web for relevant bio-energy articles that could fill that space. But then I'm an optimist. =)
Post a Comment
<< Home