TV Tropes Org

Forums

On-Topic Conversations:
Is humanity perfectible?
search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [125]  1  2  3  4
5

Is humanity perfectible?:

I think that's the best one can do in that regard; even if it doesn't perfectly accord with what every single person wants, it's still "perfect" in some sense if anything better is actually impossible.
If "the best one can do" is sufficient to qualify as "perfect", then it would seem that "Is humanity perfectible?" is equivalent to "Is humanity capable of improving to the greatest extent that humanity is capable of?", the only possible answer to which is yes.

Wouldn't it make sense to interpret the question in this context?
No. Your context renders the question pointless.
 
 102 Enthryn, Sun, 27th Feb '11 11:07:20 AM from Earth Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
[up] Yeah, I guess it does. What's a good definition for perfect that doesn't turn the question into a tautology, then?
Prendre le bien, le mal et sans trier, accepter
Sans couvrir tes yeux, tout regarder.
 103 Usht, Sun, 27th Feb '11 11:08:10 AM from an arbitrary view point.
Lv. 3 Genasi Wizard
There probably isn't one. And so the quest for perfection goes on...
The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.
 104 Bobby G, Sun, 27th Feb '11 12:06:04 PM from the Silvery Tay
vigilantly taxonomish
I took it to mean "the best".

Where "the best" is defined as "that which is most good" and "good" is defined as "totally rad and groovy and awesome".
Pro-Freedom Fanatic
Improve? Yeah. Become perfect? Nah.
You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.
 106 De Marquis, Mon, 28th Feb '11 6:02:46 PM from Hell, USA Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
If you want a rigorous and logically defendable definition of "perfect", there isn't one (nor is there one for any absolute concept). But in practical terms, you could define it as "attaining a state that satisfies all idealistic desires." The state that, once achieved, leaves no further desired states to achieve.
“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.”
 107 Ekuran, Mon, 28th Feb '11 6:46:20 PM from somewhere. Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Hi.
Perfection is impossible. Absolutes are nonsense. Morality, existence, perfection... everything is relative.

But...

I think what we're looking for is the aversion/inversion(?) of Humans Are Bastards. This can be done. Not as we are now though. We just lack that empathy for everything, that intelligence, that greatness of surpassing our human limitations and going beyond even that.

But we can't. We're going to suffer the indignities of the Human Condition, and there is no changing that as we are now.

I feel find though. I think something will help us with that soon enough.
[Insert seemingly profound or amusing phrase here.]
A: No. This position, while plausible from an evolutionary (we are as good as natural selection needs us to be) or creationist standpoint (we have the capability to fulfil a destiny, no further improvement is necessary for that purpose), suggests there is no room for improvement; that the percieved "ought" is idle daydreaming. Certainly some of it is. But I believe "small" achievements have been made in the past, and more should be possible, at least certainly on an individual or group level, if not on an all of humanity level.

B: Yes. As a species we have the ability to imagine goals that are unachievable, so this would logically follow.

C: Yes. In combination with (B), certain definitions of a supreme being would require this to be true. The question of faith is only whether such a being exists.

D: No. It may depend on how you define "ought" and "superhuman". IMHO, the superhuman that could do that would perhaps be so far from modern humans that it would be closer to being a god than a human.

E: No. I do not see any conceivable, possible pathway, HOWEVER, it (1) may depend on how you define "ought", and (2) just because it may not be possible for current humanity to comprehend such a change does not mean it is strictly impossible. If the supreme being of (C) exists, the supreme being can perhaps bridge the gap when we cannot.

Hmm, how about that - humanity is perfectible in eternity. Which it currently doesn't have but can have.
If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common
It can't have that. No pattern of matter/energy as large or complex as a human can last an eternity.
 
 111 De Marquis, Tue, 1st Mar '11 10:47:05 AM from Hell, USA Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
The OP cocerns humanity, Tong, not individual humans.
“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.”
My statement also concerned humanity. Perhaps this will be clearer: humanity's perpetuation is dependent upon DNA propagated by humans who eat food on a planet with an atmosphere orbiting a sun within a galaxy. Humanity cannot have eternity because all of the things italicized in the previous sentence will at some point cease to exist.
 
 113 Yej, Tue, 1st Mar '11 11:43:31 AM from <0,1i>
See ALL the stars!
I don't think the galaxy will cease to exist within any imaginable timescale.

edited 1st Mar '11 11:43:41 AM by Yej

Da Rules excuse all the inaccuracy in the world. Listen to them, not me.
And I doubt humanity will exist as long as this planet, much less the galaxy. As for your "imaginable timescales", you have entered an exchange concerning eternity. The goal post has never been "imaginable timescale".
 
 115 Ekuran, Tue, 1st Mar '11 12:38:20 PM from somewhere. Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Hi.
[up]We'll live forever. Do you really think we would just let a little old thing like mortal bodies and the heat death of the universe get in our way? Hell, we'll probably bail this crappy finite universe and go multiverse hopping. The question of perfection by that time... we'll never know. As long as everything is relative in "all" of existence, we will never be able to determine if we could be "Perfect".
[Insert seemingly profound or amusing phrase here.]
 116 De Marquis, Wed, 2nd Mar '11 7:24:11 PM from Hell, USA Relationship Status: Buried in snow, waiting for spring
Who Am I?
We could, in theory, last as long as time itself does, which is functionally equivalent to 'eternity.'
“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.”
 117 Lanceleoghauni, Wed, 2nd Mar '11 11:39:58 PM from Z or R Twice Relationship Status: In my bunk
Humanity is inherently flawed. "Perfecting" it requires destroying humanity and transcending the human condition. In My Opinion.

edited 2nd Mar '11 11:40:33 PM by Lanceleoghauni

"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"
That raises the question, if The Singularity does happen and humans transcend the design flaws evolution saddled us with, would we still count as "human"?
"War doesn't prove who's right, only who's left."

"Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future."
Nihilist Hippie
"That raises the question, if The Singularity does happen and humans transcend the design flaws evolution saddled us with, would we still count as "human"?"

Well that would be pretty neat. It must be much better to be a god than a human.
"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom
[up][up] If that happens, it mostly likely won't happen to all of us at once. There will be those who transcend the human condition while others don't for one of many hypothetical reasons such as power or moral objections. So there will have to be a new label for those who are not "human" anymore in comparison.

edited 3rd Mar '11 8:40:23 PM by ViralLamb

Power corrupts. Knowledge is Power. Study hard. Be evil.
 121 Lanceleoghauni, Thu, 3rd Mar '11 9:29:55 PM from Z or R Twice Relationship Status: In my bunk
it'd be the death of the human race, and the birth of the posthuman :P
"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"
It doesn't necessarily have to be godhood. It could just be a good debugging, to get rid of harmful quirks like the tendency to throw in good money after bad and other annoying biases and fallacies that seem to be ingrained into our psyche. We can start on that a little bit now, just by educating ourselves. My question is, how dramatic do these changes have to be before we would be justified in making a new name for the modified humans?
"War doesn't prove who's right, only who's left."

"Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future."
 123 Lanceleoghauni, Thu, 3rd Mar '11 10:11:21 PM from Z or R Twice Relationship Status: In my bunk
you should know well enough that as soon as they were made different from baseline humanity they would be renamed. regardless of how they felt about it. humanity does that.
"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"
But it's not as clear-cut as that. We have artificial hearts, skin grafts, prosthetic limbs, gene therapy, and we already have brain surgery. Why would the general public view tweaking with thought processes a bit any more monumental than all these developments? When would they sit up and say "Hey, this could actually make you stop being human"?
"War doesn't prove who's right, only who's left."

"Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future."
 125 Lanceleoghauni, Thu, 3rd Mar '11 10:29:39 PM from Z or R Twice Relationship Status: In my bunk
Once it was obvious, or they were informed about it likely. Wetwiring would DEFINITELY qualify.
"Coffee! Coffeecoffeecoffee! Coffee! Not as strong as Meth-amphetamine, but it lets you keep your teeth!"
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 125
 1  2  3  4
5


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy