Extension(s) of the Mind, and Hello

[Spartacus Sully]

Tools are not dumbing us down in any way. We are simply relocating the use of our brain from remembering directions to knowing how to use the IPhone to get directions.

Technology is potentially one of peoples greatest assets, however it can go wrong. But even when things do go wrong, we tend to learn pretty quickly and adapt/fix.

and what do you do when your Iphone dosnt work? Rely on your GPS?


ahhhh remember back in the day when there were actual paper maps?

[Mescaline]

it doesnt seem ethical to force mankind to evolve just to adapt to fads. for example if the majority of the western population would in fact submit themselves to brain implants just to become "better, stronger, smarter" human beings they would submit themselves to a certain degree of uncertainty.

Agreed to some extent, similar to the events depicted in the Ghost in a Shell movies. But, look at it like this: Advanced forms of these kinds of technology would makes some forms of present day "malfunctionings" such as for example probably most mental disorders be a thing of the past. As a consequence new malfunctionings would arise. We are already submitted to a certain degree of uncertainty, except now it is a biological uncertainty, and then it would be a non-biological uncertainty. Which is worse? I don't know. I'd say they are both equally unwanted.
Additionally I would say this:

But even when things do go wrong, we tend to learn pretty quickly and adapt/fix.

Obvious errors would indeed be fixed quickly. I don't believe we are that stupid to put ourselves in the position of using a technology that doesn't work properly and has obvious malfunctions.

malfunctions, software update errors or power failures would render us inactive as lifeforms we're supposed to be rather than lifeforms we were meant to be

What are we meant to be? Don't we, as humans, decide ourselves what we are meant to be?

as for robots and their evolution, ofcourse its tangled in with human evolution as the prime benefit of mechanical innovation is to serve mankind. the only way robots would be able to serve us better would be for them to anticipate our needs...thus think for themselves. the obvious flipside to this being they would also be able to make their own decisions, which ultimately could result into a conflict of interests

The Matrix?
I agree, but couldn't we make robots become such that they will not be aware of 'us'. Making us kind of invisible to them? Still making them serve us of course, but creating a virtual reality of such manner that in everything they are doing to serve us they are thinking they are actually just leading their normal everyday robot life, happily ever after. This would be the ultimate system of robot slavery in my opinion. Pretty evil in some sense, yet not evil at all as the robots would not be aware of it. They would just be living a happy life. (EDIT: I just realized this is also part of the complete Matrix story)
This is also directly connected to my own crazy idea: What if we, the human species, are just such robots. Slaves, or maybe just a research project, of some extremely advanced "alien" species, which is invisible to us (at least most of the time).

basically ure discussing whether "tools" are dumbing us down...thats a hard question to answer as the diversity of tools is largely increasing at this point. so comparing a clock to a gps system is almost like comparing apples to oranges, meaning we use them differently thus the degree of dependency also differs from individual to individual

Tools are not dumbing us down in any way.

and what do you do when your Iphone dosnt work? Rely on your GPS?


ahhhh remember back in the day when there were actual paper maps?

Could we please drop the dicussion of whether it is dumbing us down or not? It is secondary to the real issue at hand, namely whether it is becoming part of us. These are surely not one and the same issue, although they are closely related. This is (a bit) more in line with what I was thinking of:

We are simply relocating the use of our brain from remembering directions to knowing how to use the IPhone to get directions.

Lastly, Panda, I don't think comparing a clock to a computer is comparing apples and oranges. We might not be using computers the same way as a clock yet, but there certainly is a chance for this happening in the future. In other words the clock has become an almost completely integrated part of who we are, opposed to the computer that might be beginning to become part of who we are.

[Konstantin]

and what do you do when your Iphone dosnt work? Rely on your GPS?


ahhhh remember back in the day when there were actual paper maps?

What do you do when you don't have access to a paper map of the area?

Ah, yeah remember back in those days when people had to memorize directions, or just plain didn't go anywhere?

[-PANDA-]

Advanced forms of these kinds of technology would makes some forms of present day "malfunctionings" such as for example probably most mental disorders be a thing of the past. As a consequence new malfunctionings would arise. We are already submitted to a certain degree of uncertainty, except now it is a biological uncertainty, and then it would be a non-biological uncertainty. Which is worse? I don't know. I'd say they are both equally unwanted.

well we cant actually judge which is worse seeing as our views are mostly hypothetical. but imho why would anyone want to complicate controllable processes for individual benefits. its all about the greater good for me, so if technology would provide collective benefits which would outweigh the cons then we would be able to narrow down our views

What are we meant to be? Don't we, as humans, decide ourselves what we are meant to be?

ofcourse we do but that wasnt what panda was aiming for. our biological baggage isnt something we can just change as we see fit. humans share 99% of their dna properties with eachother so 99% of our genetic make up is predisposed meaning we cant change that for a fact (unless we're talking genetic mutation which is another subject altogether)

The Matrix?
I agree, but couldn't we make robots become such that they will not be aware of 'us'. Making us kind of invisible to them? Still making them serve us of course, but creating a virtual reality of such manner that in everything they are doing to serve us they are thinking they are actually just leading their normal everyday robot life, happily ever after. This would be the ultimate system of robot slavery in my opinion. Pretty evil in some sense, yet not evil at all as the robots would not be aware of it. They would just be living a happy life. (EDIT: I just realized this is also part of the complete Matrix story)
This is also directly connected to my own crazy idea: What if we, the human species, are just such robots. Slaves, or maybe just a research project, of some extremely advanced "alien" species, which is invisible to us (at least most of the time).

well panda doesnt know whether or not we could, it would seem somewhat idyllic. but we're hypothesizing further into the subject now and trying to shape situations which might not manifest at all. if there would be a logical chain of events to suggest human/robot slavery panda would think this plausible but as of yet...to me at least, it seems fictional

Lastly, Panda, I don't think comparing a clock to a computer is comparing apples and oranges. We might not be using computers the same way as a clock yet, but there certainly is a chance for this happening in the future. In other words the clock has become an almost completely integrated part of who we are, opposed to the computer that might be beginning to become part of who we are.

the clock doesnt present the everyday hypothesized dangers in this thread, the computer (supposedly) does which is exactly why we're comparing apples and oranges. time as a unit is an objective globally accepted fact, most industrialized and rural communities have accepted this to manage their everyday lives. the computer is something we can still go without and even ignore...u made an interesting point above which is we shape our own lives. unless that changes any time soon we will be able to make our own choices as individuals and discard computers or use them as we see fit

[Mescaline]

as our views are mostly hypothetical.

That's why it is philosophy and not science. It is nearly always hypothetical.
So don't restrict yourself too much in making assumptions that are way out there. If you bring up an argument which makes a hypothetical view an impossible view, then you have succesfully disputed a philosophical viewpoint.

but imho why would anyone want to complicate controllable processes for individual benefits. its all about the greater good for me, so if technology would provide collective benefits which would outweigh the cons then we would be able to narrow down our views

Complicate? I consider the human brain extremely complicated as it is. And really not controllable at all. Brain implants and alike are exactly to make things more controllable, don't you agree? Suddenly you can decide to implant a DBS, and there you go, you're not depressed, anxious, X, Y anymore. That's not complicating the controllable, that is making the complicated more controllable.

our biological baggage isnt something we can just change as we see fit. humans share 99% of their dna properties with eachother so 99% of our genetic make up is predisposed meaning we cant change that for a fact (unless we're talking genetic mutation which is another subject altogether)

So, because we cannot change the other 99% (yet), we should refrain from messing with the remaining 1%?

well panda doesnt know whether or not we could, it would seem somewhat idyllic. but we're hypothesizing further into the subject now and trying to shape situations which might not manifest at all. if there would be a logical chain of events to suggest human/robot slavery panda would think this plausible but as of yet...to me at least, it seems fictional

Again, this is philosophy, so we are all allowed to make crazy assumptions as long as they are potentially true.
That being said, it might seem idyllic.. In the same manner the internet seemed idyllic before it was invented. If something seems too good to be true, you should ask yourself, whether it truly is impossible, or whether it just seems very improbable. You already did that in a way though. Also, the fact that people are thinking this way, having these thoughts, as fictional as they may seem, are the very first steps in actually realizing it in reality.
Of course you are entitle to have your opinion of it being extremely improbable and thereby disagreeing with me. That's why there are different philosophies, opposed to the "hard" sciences, mostly having only a single main point of view, unless a paradigm shift is approaching (as might be the case at the moment).

the clock doesnt present the everyday hypothesized dangers in this thread, the computer (supposedly) does which is exactly why we're comparing apples and oranges. time as a unit is an objective globally accepted fact, most industrialized and rural communities have accepted this to manage their everyday lives. the computer is something we can still go without and even ignore...u made an interesting point above which is we shape our own lives. unless that changes any time soon we will be able to make our own choices as individuals and discard computers or use them as we see fit

"time as a unit is an objectively globally accepted fact"

Yes, agree completely. So why do you think the following is not true (in a hypothetical future scenario where there is a brain implant granting you direct access to the internet at all times):

"the internet is a feature of the brain that is objectively and globally accepted as a fact"

What dangers would this pose? You might say, "what if it breaks down?". Well then I say you go to your local cyborg doctor, and get your implant fixed. It breaking down being kind of like falling ill.

Your last point, about being able to choose not to make these technologies part of our mind: Yes you can take that stance, but in my opinion that would be limiting humanity in its evolution, if not bringing it to a full stop.