The Ultimate Deception: Technological Immortality
44 2017-07-23 by polkadotgirl
The Ultimate Deception: Technological Immortality
Introduction
The other day on /r/showerthoughts, the top post stated, “I’m not really scared of dying, I’m more bummed about all the technology I’ll never get to see”, and one of the top comments was about uploading a person’s consciousness into technology one day. On Reddit daily, I see post after post about how people would be willing to one day upload their consciousness into some type of technology so that they could experience immortality. After all, who wants to miss out on all the innovative technology that is sure to come in the next 50 years or so?
It seems innocent enough, but are people ultimately being deceived? In this post, I want to argue that progress for the sake of progress in not necessarily good, and ultimately, we may be facing a bigger deception than we realize.
Technology is Our Friend
Every time I make a post like this, I get the same arguments over and over. People tell me tools like Facebook are NOT bad, and that it is how I use them. I agree with that point, but it is important to note that technology is neither inherently good or bad. We are being pushed on many levels to believe that technology for the sake of technology is good. Again, there is no inherent part of technology that is good or evil, and yes, I agree, it is how we use technology as a tool that counts. Still, is technology really a ‘tool’ anymore when our lives become completely intertwined with it? Is it a tool anymore if we cannot live without it?
This is not a new concept, so I will not overdo it here, but the social aspects of our lives have been (or are in the process of being) completely replaced by technology. Never did I think I would see the day where a woman wants to marry a robot:
If you speak out against rapid gains in modern technology, you are often labeled a luddite, or somebody who opposes technological progress. However, it is important to note that the original luddites were not anti-technology per se. Connif writes,
“As the Industrial Revolution began, workers naturally worried about being displaced by increasingly efficient machines. But the Luddites themselves “were totally fine with machines,” says Kevin Binfield, editor of the 2004 collection Writings of the Luddites. They confined their attacks to manufacturers who used machines in what they called “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to get around standard labor practices. “They just wanted machines that made high-quality goods,” says Binfield, “and they wanted these machines to be run by workers who had gone through an apprenticeship and got paid decent wages. Those were their only concerns.”
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/
Does that not sound that different than what we are experiencing today? How many jobs are being replaced through technology? Somehow I believe it is possible to speak out against the rapid and almost thoughtless evolution of technology without hating technology itself.
Where are the luddites today?
I went to Wal-Mart the other day (I had no choice) only to notice that they had put up another aisle of self check-out machines – just for more convenience, right?
Last year, I was having a friendly debate with a co-worker, where he claimed that he would rather be served by a robot than a human. Fine, I get it (they probably make less mistakes or something), but then I asked him, “Well, robots are cool and everything, but what about people’s jobs?”
The thought had never struck him. He looked at me bewildered, and I said that we should at least make sure we have enough jobs for humans before we go replacing them with robots. Interestingly, as teachers, our jobs could one day be replaced by robots.
Unfortunately, the unemployment rate is ridiculous, and yet, there are still many jobs being replaced by robots on a daily basis. There are thousands of articles about robots replacing humans and their jobs:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/24/technology/robots-jobs-us-workers-uk/index.html
Where is the outcry? Where is the protest? Where are the luddites, so to speak?
Of course, the ultimate argument I hear is What about progress?
I love that word, progress, because it is kind of like the new “equality” or “inclusion”. You hear that word everywhere, and it is used to justify everything from genderless bathrooms to sex robots. Still it is important to remember this:
Change for Change’s Sake Doesn’t Always Equal Progress
https://lifehacker.com/change-for-changes-sake-doesnt-always-equal-progress-1654021254
We are moving toward constant progress, yet simultaneously, we seem to be losing the ability to critically think about progress and its goals.
Transhumanism
Did you hear about the man that spent $50,000 to look like a genderless alien?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4274396/Man-spends-50-000-transform-genderless-ALIEN.html
To me, there is a deep connection between the endless amount of media coverage on gender, and the more current push toward genderless. Is this media warfare on gender roles really a deceptive push toward transhumanism?
When I wrote a post similar to this a few years ago, the transgender movement had really just started, and I was debating whether or not there was something suspicious about it – what was all of this gender bending about?
Now, just a few years later, the push for the breakdown of gender roles for the sake of equality is foundational. The push for the past decade or so has been that men can identify as women and women can identify as men, and that has morphed into the fact that there are 31 genders and gender can be fluid. Now in an almost completely contradictory fashion, there is a push for gender neutrality and genderlessness:
For example, did you hear about the gender neutral awards?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/08/entertainment/emma-watson-gender-neutral-mtv/index.html
What about gender neutral parenting?
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-soh-gender-neutral-parenting-20170106-story.html
Or come buy some gender neutral clothing at Target:
https://www.target.com/c/women-s-clothing/gender-neutral/-/N-5xtcmZ5xrpa
I have written much about the breakdown of gender roles and the conspiracy behind it (breakdown of families, relationships, etc.), so I do not want to get too deep into that here, but I often leave out this part: Is this really just a push for us to get used to transhumanism, and what better way to start this push then with our children:
The Ultimate Deception
The ultimate motivation behind transhumanism seems to be everlasting life. In the article “God in the machine: My strange journey into transhumanism”, the author writes,
“Many transhumanists such as Kurzweil contend that they are carrying on the legacy of the Enlightenment – that theirs is a philosophy grounded in reason and empiricism, even if they do lapse occasionally into metaphysical language about “transcendence” and “eternal life”. As I read more about the movement, I learned that most transhumanists are atheists who, if they engage at all with monotheistic faith, defer to the familiar antagonisms between science and religion. “The greatest threat to humanity’s continuing evolution,” writes the transhumanist Simon Young, “is theistic opposition to Superbiology in the name of a belief system based on blind faith in the absence of evidence.”
In other words, it seems that people want everlasting life that is disconnected from God.
Where do we usually hear the term everlasting life, at least, where did we used to hear it before all of this technology? Spirituality and religion, right? The bible is pretty clear about the connection between God and eternal life:
http://biblehub.com/john/3-15.htm
Of course, most religions promise eternal life, and that is just one example.
But could we actually have eternal life through technology? Why would we need God then? O’Geibyn (same article) writes,
“What makes the transhumanist movement so seductive is that it promises to restore, through science, the transcendent hopes that science itself has obliterated.”
But this is where I feel the ultimate deception comes in, and I feel these questions are overlooked when we talk about eternal life and technology:
*Is it really theoretically possible for our future selves to somehow upload our consciousness into technology? Or Are these promises about our future merely lies to somehow get us to avoid the spiritual side of life?
Didn’t they say we would have flying cars by now?
http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a8680/why-dont-we-have-flying-cars-15128771/
I am wondering if transhumanism itself is a lie.
*Is transhumanism promising that we ourselves can be like God? Is that a lie that we are being told to stray us from the path toward God?
*If transhumanism is possible, will it be worth it to lose a part of ourselves? What would we be losing?
*What about life itself? Is there an importance to the cycle of life?
I teach middle school, and I love to reading Tuck Everlasting with my students. Yes, the book is written for children, but it has adult themes and concepts. Almost always, before reading the book, all of my students want to live forever like Tuck and his family, and almost always, after reading the book, my students realize the message in the book:
“Don't be afraid of death; be afraid of an unlived life. You don't have to live forever, you just have to live.” ― Natalie Babbitt, Tuck Everlasting
What happens when we stop asking questions about the meaning of life, and those questions are answered by technology for us?
Though I do not claim to know the ultimate meaning of life, I wonder if there could be even true meaning in some type of technological dystopia.
Conclusion
As we move toward more and more “progress”, I wonder if our souls get left behind. I feel as though most of us are not thinking twice about our interactions with technology. Sure, we might sometimes delete Facebook or take a break, but ultimately we come back to the same point.
I do not know if we are too deep into it all to really change, but I do think that we need to examine our motivations and intentions. Here are some things I was pondering today as I thought about technology in my life:
*Is it necessary to post every moment and aspect of our lives on social media? Why? What is our motivation other than attention?
*Would the people we post for be in our lives if social media did not exist? Why or why not?
*Are we really living or are we so lost in technology now that we are living through it?
*Is technology really a tool to help us, or are we using it as a tool to hide who we really are?
*Is how we portray ourselves on social media a reflection of we really are? Would people like us if they found out who we really are?
*Is technology ultimately making us more disconnected with the illusion of a promise that it will draw us closer together?
I have written much about this topic both directly and indirectly, and most people say it’s me – I am the one who has a problem with technology, and most everybody else is doing nothing but seeing the benefits.
Still, most of the people who make this argument do not work with children, and this is where my heart breaks a little. When I see students prefer to play on the computer than play outside, it does not sit well with me. When I see students who would rather take selfies on snapchat than actually have a conversation, then that does not sit well with me either. When I see a 2-year-old on a tablet, and parents disconnected on facebook, it makes me feel nervous. What have you seen? I cannot be the only one making these observations.
I will have you know, though, that when I did finally start to strip away my identity from technology, I started to feel so much more alive. I did not have to post a picture of the beach to prove I was having a good time to strangers who talk shit about me anyway. I could just actually have a good time, in real life, right now. In other words, the problem is not technology, it is the fact that our identities are morphing with technology, or maybe in a sense, our technological identities are superseding our actual identities.
Moreover, is technology ultimately stripping us of our present, forcing us to live in the past and future? As the Buddha states,
Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment.
Perhaps transhumanism is inevitable, I am not sure, but I think I would prefer the old-fashioned cycle of life and death.
As always, please discuss instead of just downvoting! I love hearing your thoughts. In fact, I only write these posts, really, to hear what you have to say.
21 comments
1 Lord__Buckethead 2017-07-23
You say a lot of things that people will agree with, I do with many, although I am very aware of fear of ageing play a part, that isn’t necessarily read directly - it can encompass being less able to relate to younger generations.
Ultimately what do you think is a solution or alternative?
And is this direction necessarily bad, what if we’re just moving toward greater connectedness and unity but the technology isn’t quite there yet? We’re still very far from sci-fi concepts in that area and it needn’t to be full-on transhumanism. And what about just energy? Huge pushes for renewables could secure everyone’s needs, and what would that do for us?
Opposing the self-checkout because of jobs for the sake of it is just futile, history has always proven this. But how about as we transition into more automation there’s also a universal basic income? I’m pro children with scraped knees, but I’m also pro parents with time to kiss them better.
What I don’t know is what will happen to half the worlds population who live in poverty.
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Good points.
I mean the thing is, if all this technology was happening, and there was the promise of something like universal income, it wouldn't be so bad...
But there is no promise of that. In fact, there economy seems only to be getting worse, with more and more people I know without consistent jobs, drowning in debt.
The next conspiracy is that...well...they need to get rid of some of us. Too many people right?
1 DumbledoreSays 2017-07-23
Anybody with a smart phone can learn more about any topic in seconds than even the fastest researchers could learn about said topic in weeks (even months) just a generation ago. Those same phones can hear everything we say. Is technology like a god? some people seem to think so. How much did the Apple 2 first sell for?
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Yet what do people actually use technology for?
1 DumbledoreSays 2017-07-23
Cats, kittens, memes about how evil climate change skeptics are.
1 mastermind04 2017-07-23
You forgot porn, that is like half the internet in itself.
1 DumbledoreSays 2017-07-23
Have you ever wondered why so much porn is available for free?
1 mastermind04 2017-07-23
My guess is most of it is either paid for by ads, viruses that use the site as a way to spread, or spread by a sort of "hobbyist" group.
1 HibikiSS 2017-07-23
I don't know, I suppose a lot of the ideals I held today are based on my ideas of "justice" but I can't say they are absolute I probably still act because I believe it is my destiny to do so I can't explain it with logic.
1 KingContinent 2017-07-23
People will oftentimes delude themselves with the idea that we're heading toward a technological utopia, and that by uploading our consciousness to the cloud, we will ascend as immortal beings.
This is simply one outcome of technological progress. I don't see this one being the highest likely, either.
Actually, I see a different outcome being a bit more realistic, one in which the world elite will utilize technology to turn us into slaves. Uploading your consciousness sounds like a one way ticket to eternal servitude.
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Yes while I understand there are endless amazing possibilities with technology...I also do not feel we are heading in that direction.
1 StrongerTogether1 2017-07-23
People have always wanted to be immortal. If our conciousness were to be put into, say, a bionic body, then who's to say we couldn't be re-programmed into becoming a slave, for all of eternity? Sounds nasty.
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Scary thought.
1 flatearthkek 2017-07-23
They would probably have us mining Bitcoin in the afterlife, continue working to make money for your Second Life home. The Chinese believe in an afterlife that requires money. Families routinely burn hell money for thier deceased relatives. That's not an afterlife I want to be a part of.
1 flatearthkek 2017-07-23
If you don't pay for the best package when you die you are forced to watch youtube ads for eternity.
1 nom-de-reddit 2017-07-23
Or a toaster.
1 X_Irradiance 2017-07-23
The funny thing about technology is that we're already constantly witnessing a technology that is far more advanced than anything it is possible to create – us. It's just hilarious how people will get all excited about VR, when it's so much worse than our own VR within which we exist.
I attribute this to our own reality model being 'too perfect' – one's experience of the world is so seamless and glitch/artifact free that one forgets it's a simulation. People seem to operate as if they are a kind of analog device, and that what we see is a kind of image as it might appear on our retinas. But, it's not. It's a full, 3D simulation, with a virtual space, coordinates, vertices, polygons, textures, etc. – very similar to how 3D graphics are done on computer.
There's a singular, fundamental difference between life and inorganic technology. The organization of life extends from the macro to the atomic. On every level, everything is perfectly organized. Technology, on the other hand, loses its organization at a certain scale. Presently, it's in the order of, say, 10s of atoms at its most advanced. We might succeed in reducing that, but there's a limit beyond which technology can't reach. Uncertainty and quantum principles forbid it. The only thing that can organize matter at the atomic level is life. It's this kind of perfectly-organized living matter that is the only possible substrate for our consciousness or soul, and that's why it will NEVER BE POSSIBLE (imo) to "upload" one's consciousness to an inorganic computer.
Jobs, IMO, is the last thing one needs to worry about. There'll always be something to do, and there'll always be someone or something in need that we can help to secure their or its help in exchange – i.e., trade. If there's no more need, then by definition one also has no needs themselves and would be therefore content.
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Great points!
It is weird I once asked a friend to go take a hike with me, and they said they had an app thing for a virtual hike.
Ultimately, are humans the best/perfect creation? Could we ever make a robot better than a human?
I feel there will always be jobs and always could be jobs, but there is a reason they keep unemployment a real thing...
1 mastermind04 2017-07-23
No matter what any type of copy of a human brain will just be a diffrent person, so your going to be 6 feet under while another being that has a copy of the data in your brain lives, but you still die no matter what and either meet eternal nothingness or go to the after life. Transferring of ones conscious is impossible as the you just make a copy, which will get to live its life while the original is not involved.
1 mava417 2017-07-23
Wes Penre has nice read about trans humanism and the singularity. If we lived in a world of peace, uploading yourself into a computer or robot may seem like a fun idea - assuming it was reversible. However, that is not the world we live in, in a nut shell it sounds like a trap to me.
1 selfmindcontrol 2017-07-23
Part 1 of 2
Technology is a double edged sword once you are aware of the New World Order agenda. Being a programmer, I understand that technology is often man building lifeless things out of lifeless things. AIs may try to represent life but life cannot be represented by numbers in my opinion.
This sounds really scary to me. At that point, they will have full control over your consciousness. You could even become a robotic slave with no control over your own body. Your mind kept prisoner in a Satanic world. I doubt that it is even possible to upload someone's consciousness to a computer. The idea may just be propagation of the idea that our thoughts are meaningless and can be represented mathematically.
I think some people do think this but I think it is because they are unaware of the NWO agenda. Technology, for many, is one of the best parts of their lives. People's eyes are glued to their phones these days. I think there are also shills that have technology on their list of things to promote. After all, they can work for the same people that are promoting the NWO agenda.
I think this is a key agenda that is pushed. They push that "progress" is always for the greater good. They start with progress that is actually good and then slip in some other thing making progress that may not actually be good. Sometimes progress benefits both the general population, for now, and the ruling class.
Great point. We are so reliant on technology that if it stopped working all of a sudden, the amount of people that would die would be extremely high.
I am much more comfortable and confident communicating using technology. It gives me more time to gather my thoughts into what I really believe. There are downsides like not being able to communicate emotions as well. That's partly why I like to use emoticons often. :) I think live communication also makes our brain work harder.
I commented on this to you before. To me, it is an example of our world becoming more anti-social, people being more divided thus having less common ground, people only being satisfied with perfection, plus the veneration of technology stuff you mention.
I hadn't known the term luddite until you used it in one of your earlier posts. I think some technology is good. I think it is also important that people consider the risks of new technology.
I debate with my dad on this. He usually comes back with, "People don't like doing those jobs anyway." So that means less people will have a job. The problem is that people do not see that the government is as corrupt as it is. They think all people have a heart. Most people I know do. Just look at how they are presented in the media.
I could see all of education being online if the trend continues. Students may just stay home to do their school work. The indoctrination could be even more streamlined. Students would be more anti-social since they are around other people less.
I think some people who lose their jobs to technology understand the capitalism behind it. I think they assume that the company thinks it will profit more from a technological replacement. I do not think people blame technology because they love other things that technology does for them.
"Inclusion" was a word used heavily by my mom because my sister has Down syndrome. I think you are making a good connection here. I think equality, inclusion, and progress are good things. The powers that be taint and use those words for their agenda unbeknownst to the vast majority of people.
I think so too. I think I was just born a critical thinker. My sister went to the same K-12 schools and college that I did and she did not really question things until her psychotic break. At that point, it may have just been the influence of "the voices". I took a class in college called Computer Ethics. It really made me think about the societal impact of decisions that seem good in a smaller scope.
These are very interesting connections that I have read about in your posts and comments before. I think you may well have found part of their agenda.
I think the elite may well seek it. It also has appeal to those who are afraid of death or just love being here. I think their true agenda is to make us better workers and easier to control. From my personal spiritual perspective, it is also to forsake the bodies God gave to us in favor of worldly bodies, completely separate people from God, more effectively inject Satanic thoughts into our minds thus further separating people with God, and making their age old desire of "man becoming God" come to pass to name a few things.
For me, the answer is definitely not. Hopefully, I will be given a choice.
I am not afraid of death. In fact, I welcome it if it is God's will. I do feel that most would consider my life as an unlived life. I think a lived life means something different to everyone. I do not want to live forever and I do want to live. :)
I think the technology will be programmed in a way that they will program in whatever answers the powers that be want to give to those questions. If you thought the mind control is bad now, it can get far worse if transhumanism comes to pass, which I think it will unless Jesus returns soon.
Me neither. I think there are some things either we cannot comprehend or God does not want us to comprehend, at least here in this world. I think there will be even less meaning to life than there is now in a technological dystopia.
I know this is not what you are getting at but it make me think of how pretty much everyone just presses "Accept" when prompted with a software EULA (End User License Agreement). We do not have the time to read through it and people assume that what is in it couldn't be that bad if everyone else does it.
The question I try to ask myself is how is anything that I do impacting my life and the life of others.
It is hard to go off grid. :P That is probably more extreme than necessary.
My mom is extremely caring. I was the first child so I received a lot of love an attention. Perhaps so much so that I seek isolation. I have posted probably less than 25 posts in the 11 years I have been on Facebook. I think many people post a lot on Facebook for attention and validation. What gives many people's lives meaning these days is how many people care about them. That may well be a selfish life purpose. I do think it is natural for us to want to find a significant other. Posting on Facebook helps people "get out there" more. I think that is part of the drive of posting on Facebook for some people whether they are conscious of it or not.
You wouldn't be in my life if social media did not exist so I am very grateful for that. :)
For myself before I was awakened, the answer to this would have been yes. It led me to being disillusioned with a soulless world.
1 selfmindcontrol 2017-07-23
Part 2 of 2
I think this is a really profound question. I do think that it is far easier to hide who you really are compared to face to face interaction. At the same time, in some ways it can be better because it gives you more time to gather your thoughts and really come up with some profound ideas. But I get where you are coming from. There is probably more hiding of who you really are than profound ideas being formed for most people.
I think you have to be a really honest person to portray ourselves on social media as a reflection of who we really are. I take a lot of pride in being "real" with people. It builds deep bonds between people. :)
In some ways we are more connected just because of the internet being worldwide. Out in the "real world", I think people are more "anti-social" because our lives are not as "social" as in generations past.
Elsagate has made me really worried about unsupervised children on YouTube.
I am glad. :) I feel much better outside of social media too. :)
Haha. :) I think this is something girls have to deal with more than guys do. I feel bad for girls when it comes to this. :(
Well said. :)
I think this is a problem when people are not being themselves with their technological identities.
Me too. :) Thanks for another fantastic post. :)
1 polkadotgirl 2017-07-23
Good points.
I mean the thing is, if all this technology was happening, and there was the promise of something like universal income, it wouldn't be so bad...
But there is no promise of that. In fact, there economy seems only to be getting worse, with more and more people I know without consistent jobs, drowning in debt.
The next conspiracy is that...well...they need to get rid of some of us. Too many people right?