.
One of the favorite themes in transhumanist discussions is considering the melding of human intellect with "machine intelligence" to arrive at superhuman abilities. More Gerhard Adam articles
All
Right from the beginning we have a few problems. We don't really know what human intelligence is and we aren't capable of building intelligent machines. However, lest that obstacle prevent us from moving forward, let's consider what such a thing really means.
If we take the normal distributions of IQ, then it would suggest that about 0.13% of the population has an IQ aboe 145 and 0.003% has an IQ over 160. Using the latter value suggests that in a world population of 6.7 Billion people, we have 201,000 geniuses living among us. Now before we go any farther, can anyone reading this, name one? Can you name what contribution they may or may not have made to human progress?
My point is not to trivialize whatever work they may be doing, but rather to suggest that such high intelligence isn't automatically recognizable except within a very narrow sphere of influence and despite the claims of transhumanists, the bulk of human progress occurs with normally well-educated people that simply work hard.
However, the real problem with the transhumanist perspective is that at the core, they want to eliminate normal human variation from intelligence. If augmentation can be artificially gained, then ultimately everyone would be the same intellectually.
At this point, all human development would stop. The complete uniformity of intellect would create an environment where there can be no meaningful use for teachers. What would be the point in writing a book about any new development, because it would be knowable to everyone without effort. There would be no skill that someone could have that couldn't be artificially gained, so there is absolute equality among all people.
Since we don't actually have a working definition of intelligence, the problem of creativity and emotion still exists, so we have to presume that some people may be more creative than others, so how that fits into superhuman intelligence isn't clear. But, if creativity and insight is the missing ingredient that produces genius, then transhumanism will have failed in successfully augmenting intelligence.
The role of emotions is even more difficult to assess, since humans are not a logical species. While people are certainly capable of being logical, they operate as much from an emotional and belief systems base than anything else. This can be seen by our cultural, political, and religious differences, each of which would still be intact.
Of course, this raises the question of any nation that actually achieved such a capability being altruistic enough to share this technology rather than simply exploit it. Similarly, among individuals, it would require a level of altruism to avoid exploiting those than don't have such augmentation.
However, let's consider what implementation of this would actually mean. Gaining worldwide cooperation for the eradication of smallpox, was not trivial and was often quite heavy-handed in achieving its goals. Would such augmentation be mandated? What would it mean for those that elect to not participate?
I would suggest that an even more fundamental problem exists in describing intelligence, namely what does it mean to comprehend an idea? It's easy to toss off the notion as something that will be taken care of by technology, but it begs the question about what kind of intellectual capacity actually creates comprehension? It certainly isn't access to information. Perhaps it's some element of creativity, but in truth we don't know.
This leads me to conclude that even if transhumanists could successfully bring together the technology and human intellect, ironically it wouldn't change anything in any meaningful way. The primary reason, is because we already have all the information we need. It's in books (or pick your favorite medium). We can look up anything we like and determine an answer or obtain an opinion, or review current work. However, unless we have the comprehension of the subject, it doesn't help much and, as such, neither will any artificial technology that primarily looks like it will be a data storage device.
At the end of the day, the point is that there is no technology that will ever allow me to share my thoughts with someone else. I can try and express my ideas and viewpoints, but I can never convey the essences, the history, the multitude of factors that gave rise to my perspective because that's what makes me a person. When someone else hears or reads my ideas, they will integrate those into their own sense of "personhood" and the idea will have "evolved" just a bit.
Transhumanism's desire to augment intelligence isn't about improving human beings. It's about quick, easy answers to the complexities that have motivated and driven humans to achieve what they have. In effect, it's the lazy approach to the future and, for myself, I think its a cop-out.
"We don't really know what human intelligence is and we aren't capable of building intelligent machines."
However we do know lot of different parts of the intelligence. Different brain functions are located in specific parts of the brain. But many of them, like memory, are not located in a single part of the brain. Still we can pinpoint different parts of the cortex that are related to different kind of intelligence. By mimicking the neural structure of the brain we have made computer programs that can learn. They are called artificial neural networks.
"If we take the normal distributions of IQ, then it would suggest that about 0.13% of the population has an IQ aboe 145 and 0.003% has an IQ over 160. Using the latter value suggests that in a world population of 6.7 Billion people, we have 201,000 geniuses living among us. Now before we go any farther, can anyone reading this, name one? Can you name what contribution they may or may not have made to human progress?"
IQ is the most cliché and unreliable way of measuring intelligence. It basicly measures mathematical, logical and dimensional intelligence. These huge IQ persons are probably not artist or psychologist or sociologist.
"My point is not to trivialize whatever work they may be doing, but rather to suggest that such high intelligence isn't automatically recognizable except within a very narrow sphere of influence and despite the claims of transhumanists, the bulk of human progress occurs with normally well-educated people that simply work hard."
Emphasis on the well educated. Completing education needs some basic intelligence. Lazynes or productivity is also influenced by our genes. So, same technology that can shape our intelligence, can be used to increase human productivity.
"However, the real problem with the transhumanist perspective is that at the core, they want to eliminate normal human variation from intelligence."
No more than prison system tries to eliminate normal human variation from temperance. And what do you suggest that already intelligent person would look like if he/she would eat brain boost medicine or attach math or memory chip in the brain?
"If augmentation can be artificially gained, then ultimately everyone would be the same intellectually."
No. We don’t ride the same cars. Different technologies compete with each others. New technologies emerge and some are better and more expensive. Some are better and also cheaper. There’s no way that everybody would be using same product from the same company or that one-size would fit all.
"At this point, all human development would stop."
The opposite. By definition human intelligence would increase over time as new products and enhancements would mature to safe products.
"The complete uniformity of intellect would create an environment where there can be no meaningful use for teachers."
Teachers are for kids and adolescents. Because we can have children there’s no “uniform intelligence”. Teachers are needed. On the other hand what are the ethical arguments that say that world without teachers is evil? If we can learn some other way more efficiently I don’t think this is issue.
"What would be the point in writing a book about any new development, because it would be knowable to everyone without effort."
Hello, this is not practically possible! If you don’t write it down, nobody can read it. Though we are in the internet, we are writing all the time. It’s not like you could learn anything about quantum physics without reading a single article or book. Even if they come in some kind of brain-implantable chip, they have to be downloaded and probably in text format. The form of the information doesn’t change the fact that somebody has to put the information into file of some kind.
"Since we don't actually have a working definition of intelligence, the problem of creativity and emotion still exists, so we have to presume that some people may be more creative than others, so how that fits into superhuman intelligence isn't clear. But, if creativity and insight is the missing ingredient that produces genius, then transhumanism will have failed in successfully augmenting intelligence."
Only if you understand intelligence as mathematical intelligence or as good memory. I think creativity is one aspect of intelligence and it is regulated by genes to some point. As we don’t know for sure the neural basics of creativity, your assumption don’t have a bottom. It Is just your opinion, not a justified argument. If creativity can be enhanced also it would increase the quality of life and be made into very successful product.
"The role of emotions is even more difficult to assess, since humans are not a logical species."
Unfortunately some of us are more logical than others. Another point that can be affected by our genes, hence it can be modified. One dream of transhumanist is to not to be dictated by our born personality or moods. As I am transhumanist, products that increase my control over my emotions (medicines, brain implants, genetic modification/ therapy) would be first products to access.
"This can be seen by our cultural, political, and religious differences, each of which would still be intact."
Once again, only if intelligence is synonymous with good memory. Otherwise I think that intelligent people tend to avoid extreme or radical movements.
"It's easy to toss off the notion as something that will be taken care of by technology, but it begs the question about what kind of intellectual capacity actually creates comprehension? It certainly isn't access to information. Perhaps it's some element of creativity, but in truth we don't know."
Yes! We don’t know but we science that studies this is neurology. It has advanced a lot in last three decades and this is not “universal mystery” rather than question to be answered.
"This leads me to conclude that even if transhumanists could successfully bring together the technology and human intellect, ironically it wouldn't change anything in any meaningful way. The primary reason, is because we already have all the information we need..."
Ha ha! Bollocks! If we would already have all the information we need, we wouldn’t have cancer and we wouldn’t have built the Large Hadron Collider. And again: Transhumanist are not going to come with technology or science. Scientists are going to come with knowledge and business is going to come with the applications and engineers come with the products. We transhumanists are going BUY the products.
"...It's in books (or pick your favorite medium)."
Brain implant thank you!
"At the end of the day, the point is that there is no technology that will ever allow me to share my thoughts with someone else."
Never say never. We know for example the area where pictures are formed in the brain. We have successfully made a first video from cat’s brain that shows what the cat is seeing at the time.
"When someone else hears or reads my ideas, they will integrate those into their own sense of "personhood" and the idea will have "evolved" just a bit."
That is true, but it’s not going to change with these new enhancement technologies.
"Transhumanism's desire to augment intelligence isn't about improving human beings."
By definition this is wrong. Yoga isn’t about improving human being, because it’s not doing anything to person. Transhumanist’s desire to enhance his/hers self is nothing but improvement. Airbags are improvement of a car, contact lenses are improvement of vision and brain implant chips could be improvement of the self of an individual. Not answer to world peace, end hunger or climate change, but little personal improvement.
"It's about quick, easy answers to the complexities that have motivated and driven humans to achieve what they have."
Complexities that have motivated and driven humans like wars and famine? I don’t think that crime in the society is motivation in any positive meaning. It is definitely a motivation to build prisons and give more rights to law enforcements. As human enhancement technologies are not yet here I refuse to think that transhumanism gives quick answers to any these questions. Nor it is easy answer as we already see.
"In effect, it's the lazy approach to the future and, for myself, I think its a cop-out."
Everything but lazy. Praying for world peace is lazy. Yoga for personal enlightment is lazy. Belief in 6000 year old earth is lazy. Censoring rock music or radical literature is lazy. Banning safe sex in favour of restraint is lazy. Science is not answer of the lazy person. In science there are no easy answers to explain this all and there are no shortcuts to wisdom.