123


Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

Continued here:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Dr. Ferrando teachesPhilosophy at New York University (US),NYU-Program of Liberal Studies,as anAdjunctAssistant Professor.

She has earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Roma Tre (Italy),to which the European Doctoral Fellowship was applied.She holds an M.A.in Gender Studies,Director of the Program:Prof.Rosi Braidotti,UtrechtUniversity (Holland).

Dr. Ferrando is an Award-Winning Philosopher.She is the recipient of the Philosophical Prize “Premio Sainati”,with the Acknowledgment of the President of theItalian Republic, 2014.

Dr. Ferrando has repeatedly been a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University (US).She has also been an Independent Researcher at the University of Reading (England),working on Cyborg Theory with Prof.Kevin Warwick.

Dr. Ferrando has been namedone of the 100 Top Creativesmaking change in the world by ORIGIN magazine.

Follow this link:

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Part III

A concept being discussed in many elite and scientific circles today is posthuman, or after human existence.

A transhuman is an intermediary form between human and post-human. A transhuman looks like a human in physical respects but possesses powers and abilities beyond those of standard humans. These abilities might include enhanced intelligence, consciousness, strength, or endurance. This may also include the gender identity assigned to them at birth, the homosexual, trans-man, trans-woman and transgender.

A cyborg is the abbreviation of cybernetic organism, a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. A cyborg is not bionic, biorobot or android. Cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

A human-hybrid is an entity that incorporates elements from humans and animals; its a human-animal hybrid. All of these can be considered an assault on the human race.

Due to the enhanced technology of magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), the entire brain has been mapped out. Through computerized images we know the exact area of memory, thought, emotion, smell, taste and feeling, implant devices can be used to trigger those neuron connections within the brain. Just as artificial intelligence (AI) is programmed, a brain implant containing information on any given subject can be implanted to enhance human mental aptitude and performance to cause super human abilities.

US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was designated $80 million to develop brain chips capable of implanting or removing memory. These implants are intended to aid troops cognitive abilities during and after wars. Believe me, with every implant theres a back door capability to control that implant and also the person.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, ex-military and Karate expert, fears the prospect of a universal soldier with superman capabilities. He says, Now that scientists have broken the genetic code, and can successfully edit human embryos with pre-designed characteristics, we need regulations to prevent the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

AI implants inserted into bodies are humans melded with machines. Are they still human beings, made in the image of God? Moreover, arent we being melded with machines even today? Can we function without our Smart Phone, GPS, Facebook or Google? In the workforce or in every day life what, normal human being, can compete with a transhuman or a cyborg or a hybrid?

Whats happening today is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Genesis and in the Book of Enoch. It was the reason God regretted making mankind and the same reason He flooded the earth with water and destroyed every living creature with the exception of Noahs undefiled family and the uncorrupted creatures that He handpicked from every living species before they entered the ark.

Jesus reveals three significant aspects regarding the above. He warned, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will it be when he returns. In the account of Sodom and Gomorrah the entire town tried to break down the door in order to rape the angels. Due of the overpowering lust to sodomize the male angels, the mob rejected the virgin who was offered to replace them. Jesus also said, as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be when he returns. In the days of Noah a group of angels led by Satan abandoned their original state to corrupt the human genome, just as theyre doing today. This resulted in Nephilim hybrids, transhumans and giants with fierce cravings for the raw flesh of animals and humans. Lastly, Jesus said, if God hadnt sent him back before the appointed time, the devil wouldve killed every living creature on the face of the earth. But for the sake of the elect, God sends Christ back earlier.

I began this three part series by showing that in the very near future 40 to 50% of all jobs in America are at risk of being replaced by robots. Robots dont take coffee breaks or lunch breaks and they dont take vacations. They dont take sick leave or maternity leave either. And employers wont have to bother with payroll clerks, time cards, a retirement fund or a health care plan and robots are exceedingly smarter than us. Stop thinking you can successfully compete against robots.

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it. The powers that be are afraid that people will lose it. With the prospect of 50% of Americans unemployed and much higher numbers in undeveloped countries, governments and billionaires have colluded to devise a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to provide essential provisions for every human being on earth. The UBI is the concept to placate the impending magnitude of unemployed.

In part two, I revealed the astonishing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI). I also mentioned that the United Nations is currently engaged in special hearings to determine whether to relinquish life and death decisions over human beings to machines. Determining whether machines will have the sole decision making power to kill humans is profound and overwhelming. Since machines cannot be held accountable legally, this decision will determine the future existence of the human race.

This photo is of thousands of plastic coffins. The plan is laid out in the Georgia Guidestones, Reduce the population to 500 million. Zbigniew Brzezinski was Barack Obamas handler, a New World Order globalist-insider and the father of MSNBCs Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski. He said, and I quote: In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people, literally, than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.

If you disregard the spiritual aspect, none of this makes sense. After all, why would billionaire elites, scientist and governments empower machines to eradicate the human race, of which they belong? The answer is theyre luciferians.

And I reiterate Jesus words, the devil would have killed every living creature on the face of the earth, Satan kills people through other people.

Again, if you havent watched I Robot, do so, if you have watch it again. Before you do, watch this short video Slaughterbots YouTube

CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk: Artificial Intelligence Is More Dangerous Than North Korea. I dont know a lot of people who love the idea of living under a despot, said Musk, suggesting a future where artificial intelligenceor the people controlling itexceed our capabilities by orders of magnitude. Elon Musks Billion-Dollar Crusade to Stop the A.I. Apocalypse Hes also gone so far as to call artificial intelligence, a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.

When you have super intelligence that exceeds humanity by a lot, says Musk, its very important that its benign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Freedom consists in the distribution of power and despotism in its concentration. AI is a rare case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation rather than reactive. Nobody likes being regulated, but everythingcars, planes, food, drugs, etc.that is a danger to the public is regulated. AI should be too.

Elon Musk Urges U.S. Governors to Regulate AI Before Its Too Late , we only have a 5 to 10% chance of preventing killer robots from destroying humanity. Musk insisted on lawmakers considering regulations regarding AIs creation. In August, Musk even signed an open letter to the United Nations, as AI experts join Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, call for killer-robot ban.

Robots and AI are not designed to empower humanity, but to track, enslave, takeover and replace humanity, and Elon Musk not only has the foresight to realize this, hes actively moving to prevent it.

Since my last article theres been a disturbing revelation in this developing world of robotic machines and artificial intelligence. An ex-Google executive, Anthony Lavandowski, the $120 million former Google engineer that helped invent Street View, Waymo and Ubers self-driving cars, and who is also being sued by Google for stealing trade secrets, after two years as its CEO, Ex-Google Executive Registers First Church of AI With IRS, Way Of The Future (WOTF).

Lavandowski claims that one day artificial intelligence will become so efficient that itll surpass and overpower humans so theyll readily handover their power to a creation with far more intelligence, and the AI godhead will benevolently take charge of its human subjects. The WOTF churchs mission statement says it intends To develop and promote the realization of a godhead based on artificial intelligence and through understanding and worship of the godhead contribute to the betterment of society and to develop a peaceful and respectable transition of who is in charge of the planet from people to people + machines. Given that technology will relatively soon be able to surpass human abilities, we want to help educate people about this exciting future and prepare a smooth transition. WOTF has also given rights to both sexes, minority groups and even animals.

In response to Lavandowskis WOTF, Elon Musk says People who talk of AI gods should absolutely not be allowed to develop digital super intelligence.

So, they create an artificial intelligence-god and then they order us to acknowledge and worship this artificial intelligence-god that they created.

Heres what the Bible has to say about all of this, Revelation 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the best, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of Gods fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus. Rev. 14:9-12.

To quote the great theologian, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or FranceYou may like to gamble, you might like to danceYou may be the heavyweight champion of the worldYou may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But youre gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeedYoure gonna have to serve somebody,It may be the devil or it may be the LordBut youre gonna have to serve somebody.

Youre gonna serve somebody.

Whos your God and who do you serve?

Check out Al Duncans other articles and his book, The Master Plan.

2017 Al Duncan All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Al Duncan: [emailprotected]

Read more:

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

Read the rest here:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Dr. Ferrando teachesPhilosophy at New York University (US),NYU-Program of Liberal Studies,as anAdjunctAssistant Professor.

She has earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Roma Tre (Italy),to which the European Doctoral Fellowship was applied.She holds an M.A.in Gender Studies,Director of the Program:Prof.Rosi Braidotti,UtrechtUniversity (Holland).

Dr. Ferrando is an Award-Winning Philosopher.She is the recipient of the Philosophical Prize “Premio Sainati”,with the Acknowledgment of the President of theItalian Republic, 2014.

Dr. Ferrando has repeatedly been a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University (US).She has also been an Independent Researcher at the University of Reading (England),working on Cyborg Theory with Prof.Kevin Warwick.

Dr. Ferrando has been namedone of the 100 Top Creativesmaking change in the world by ORIGIN magazine.

Go here to read the rest:

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Part III

A concept being discussed in many elite and scientific circles today is posthuman, or after human existence.

A transhuman is an intermediary form between human and post-human. A transhuman looks like a human in physical respects but possesses powers and abilities beyond those of standard humans. These abilities might include enhanced intelligence, consciousness, strength, or endurance. This may also include the gender identity assigned to them at birth, the homosexual, trans-man, trans-woman and transgender.

A cyborg is the abbreviation of cybernetic organism, a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. A cyborg is not bionic, biorobot or android. Cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

A human-hybrid is an entity that incorporates elements from humans and animals; its a human-animal hybrid. All of these can be considered an assault on the human race.

Due to the enhanced technology of magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), the entire brain has been mapped out. Through computerized images we know the exact area of memory, thought, emotion, smell, taste and feeling, implant devices can be used to trigger those neuron connections within the brain. Just as artificial intelligence (AI) is programmed, a brain implant containing information on any given subject can be implanted to enhance human mental aptitude and performance to cause super human abilities.

US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was designated $80 million to develop brain chips capable of implanting or removing memory. These implants are intended to aid troops cognitive abilities during and after wars. Believe me, with every implant theres a back door capability to control that implant and also the person.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, ex-military and Karate expert, fears the prospect of a universal soldier with superman capabilities. He says, Now that scientists have broken the genetic code, and can successfully edit human embryos with pre-designed characteristics, we need regulations to prevent the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

AI implants inserted into bodies are humans melded with machines. Are they still human beings, made in the image of God? Moreover, arent we being melded with machines even today? Can we function without our Smart Phone, GPS, Facebook or Google? In the workforce or in every day life what, normal human being, can compete with a transhuman or a cyborg or a hybrid?

Whats happening today is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Genesis and in the Book of Enoch. It was the reason God regretted making mankind and the same reason He flooded the earth with water and destroyed every living creature with the exception of Noahs undefiled family and the uncorrupted creatures that He handpicked from every living species before they entered the ark.

Jesus reveals three significant aspects regarding the above. He warned, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will it be when he returns. In the account of Sodom and Gomorrah the entire town tried to break down the door in order to rape the angels. Due of the overpowering lust to sodomize the male angels, the mob rejected the virgin who was offered to replace them. Jesus also said, as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be when he returns. In the days of Noah a group of angels led by Satan abandoned their original state to corrupt the human genome, just as theyre doing today. This resulted in Nephilim hybrids, transhumans and giants with fierce cravings for the raw flesh of animals and humans. Lastly, Jesus said, if God hadnt sent him back before the appointed time, the devil wouldve killed every living creature on the face of the earth. But for the sake of the elect, God sends Christ back earlier.

I began this three part series by showing that in the very near future 40 to 50% of all jobs in America are at risk of being replaced by robots. Robots dont take coffee breaks or lunch breaks and they dont take vacations. They dont take sick leave or maternity leave either. And employers wont have to bother with payroll clerks, time cards, a retirement fund or a health care plan and robots are exceedingly smarter than us. Stop thinking you can successfully compete against robots.

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it. The powers that be are afraid that people will lose it. With the prospect of 50% of Americans unemployed and much higher numbers in undeveloped countries, governments and billionaires have colluded to devise a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to provide essential provisions for every human being on earth. The UBI is the concept to placate the impending magnitude of unemployed.

In part two, I revealed the astonishing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI). I also mentioned that the United Nations is currently engaged in special hearings to determine whether to relinquish life and death decisions over human beings to machines. Determining whether machines will have the sole decision making power to kill humans is profound and overwhelming. Since machines cannot be held accountable legally, this decision will determine the future existence of the human race.

This photo is of thousands of plastic coffins. The plan is laid out in the Georgia Guidestones, Reduce the population to 500 million. Zbigniew Brzezinski was Barack Obamas handler, a New World Order globalist-insider and the father of MSNBCs Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski. He said, and I quote: In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people, literally, than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.

If you disregard the spiritual aspect, none of this makes sense. After all, why would billionaire elites, scientist and governments empower machines to eradicate the human race, of which they belong? The answer is theyre luciferians.

And I reiterate Jesus words, the devil would have killed every living creature on the face of the earth, Satan kills people through other people.

Again, if you havent watched I Robot, do so, if you have watch it again. Before you do, watch this short video Slaughterbots YouTube

CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk: Artificial Intelligence Is More Dangerous Than North Korea. I dont know a lot of people who love the idea of living under a despot, said Musk, suggesting a future where artificial intelligenceor the people controlling itexceed our capabilities by orders of magnitude. Elon Musks Billion-Dollar Crusade to Stop the A.I. Apocalypse Hes also gone so far as to call artificial intelligence, a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.

When you have super intelligence that exceeds humanity by a lot, says Musk, its very important that its benign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Freedom consists in the distribution of power and despotism in its concentration. AI is a rare case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation rather than reactive. Nobody likes being regulated, but everythingcars, planes, food, drugs, etc.that is a danger to the public is regulated. AI should be too.

Elon Musk Urges U.S. Governors to Regulate AI Before Its Too Late , we only have a 5 to 10% chance of preventing killer robots from destroying humanity. Musk insisted on lawmakers considering regulations regarding AIs creation. In August, Musk even signed an open letter to the United Nations, as AI experts join Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, call for killer-robot ban.

Robots and AI are not designed to empower humanity, but to track, enslave, takeover and replace humanity, and Elon Musk not only has the foresight to realize this, hes actively moving to prevent it.

Since my last article theres been a disturbing revelation in this developing world of robotic machines and artificial intelligence. An ex-Google executive, Anthony Lavandowski, the $120 million former Google engineer that helped invent Street View, Waymo and Ubers self-driving cars, and who is also being sued by Google for stealing trade secrets, after two years as its CEO, Ex-Google Executive Registers First Church of AI With IRS, Way Of The Future (WOTF).

Lavandowski claims that one day artificial intelligence will become so efficient that itll surpass and overpower humans so theyll readily handover their power to a creation with far more intelligence, and the AI godhead will benevolently take charge of its human subjects. The WOTF churchs mission statement says it intends To develop and promote the realization of a godhead based on artificial intelligence and through understanding and worship of the godhead contribute to the betterment of society and to develop a peaceful and respectable transition of who is in charge of the planet from people to people + machines. Given that technology will relatively soon be able to surpass human abilities, we want to help educate people about this exciting future and prepare a smooth transition. WOTF has also given rights to both sexes, minority groups and even animals.

In response to Lavandowskis WOTF, Elon Musk says People who talk of AI gods should absolutely not be allowed to develop digital super intelligence.

So, they create an artificial intelligence-god and then they order us to acknowledge and worship this artificial intelligence-god that they created.

Heres what the Bible has to say about all of this, Revelation 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the best, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of Gods fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus. Rev. 14:9-12.

To quote the great theologian, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or FranceYou may like to gamble, you might like to danceYou may be the heavyweight champion of the worldYou may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But youre gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeedYoure gonna have to serve somebody,It may be the devil or it may be the LordBut youre gonna have to serve somebody.

Youre gonna serve somebody.

Whos your God and who do you serve?

Check out Al Duncans other articles and his book, The Master Plan.

2017 Al Duncan All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Al Duncan: [emailprotected]

Read more:

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Dr. Ferrando teaches Philosophy at New York University (US),NYU-Program of Liberal Studies,as anAdjunctAssistant Professor.

She has earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Roma Tre (Italy),to which the European Doctoral Fellowship was applied.She holds an M.A.in Gender Studies,Director of the Program:Prof.Rosi Braidotti,UtrechtUniversity (Holland).

Dr. Ferrando is an Award-Winning Philosopher.She is the recipient of the Philosophical Prize “Premio Sainati”,with the Acknowledgment of the President of theItalian Republic, 2014.

Dr. Ferrando has repeatedly been a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University (US).She has also been an Independent Researcher at the University of Reading (England),working on Cyborg Theory with Prof.Kevin Warwick.

Dr. Ferrando has been namedone of the 100 Top Creativesmaking change in the world by ORIGIN magazine.

See the article here:

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Part III

A concept being discussed in many elite and scientific circles today is posthuman, or after human existence.

A transhuman is an intermediary form between human and post-human. A transhuman looks like a human in physical respects but possesses powers and abilities beyond those of standard humans. These abilities might include enhanced intelligence, consciousness, strength, or endurance. This may also include the gender identity assigned to them at birth, the homosexual, trans-man, trans-woman and transgender.

A cyborg is the abbreviation of cybernetic organism, a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. A cyborg is not bionic, biorobot or android. Cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

A human-hybrid is an entity that incorporates elements from humans and animals; its a human-animal hybrid. All of these can be considered an assault on the human race.

Due to the enhanced technology of magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), the entire brain has been mapped out. Through computerized images we know the exact area of memory, thought, emotion, smell, taste and feeling, implant devices can be used to trigger those neuron connections within the brain. Just as artificial intelligence (AI) is programmed, a brain implant containing information on any given subject can be implanted to enhance human mental aptitude and performance to cause super human abilities.

US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was designated $80 million to develop brain chips capable of implanting or removing memory. These implants are intended to aid troops cognitive abilities during and after wars. Believe me, with every implant theres a back door capability to control that implant and also the person.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, ex-military and Karate expert, fears the prospect of a universal soldier with superman capabilities. He says, Now that scientists have broken the genetic code, and can successfully edit human embryos with pre-designed characteristics, we need regulations to prevent the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

AI implants inserted into bodies are humans melded with machines. Are they still human beings, made in the image of God? Moreover, arent we being melded with machines even today? Can we function without our Smart Phone, GPS, Facebook or Google? In the workforce or in every day life what, normal human being, can compete with a transhuman or a cyborg or a hybrid?

Whats happening today is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Genesis and in the Book of Enoch. It was the reason God regretted making mankind and the same reason He flooded the earth with water and destroyed every living creature with the exception of Noahs undefiled family and the uncorrupted creatures that He handpicked from every living species before they entered the ark.

Jesus reveals three significant aspects regarding the above. He warned, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will it be when he returns. In the account of Sodom and Gomorrah the entire town tried to break down the door in order to rape the angels. Due of the overpowering lust to sodomize the male angels, the mob rejected the virgin who was offered to replace them. Jesus also said, as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be when he returns. In the days of Noah a group of angels led by Satan abandoned their original state to corrupt the human genome, just as theyre doing today. This resulted in Nephilim hybrids, transhumans and giants with fierce cravings for the raw flesh of animals and humans. Lastly, Jesus said, if God hadnt sent him back before the appointed time, the devil wouldve killed every living creature on the face of the earth. But for the sake of the elect, God sends Christ back earlier.

I began this three part series by showing that in the very near future 40 to 50% of all jobs in America are at risk of being replaced by robots. Robots dont take coffee breaks or lunch breaks and they dont take vacations. They dont take sick leave or maternity leave either. And employers wont have to bother with payroll clerks, time cards, a retirement fund or a health care plan and robots are exceedingly smarter than us. Stop thinking you can successfully compete against robots.

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it. The powers that be are afraid that people will lose it. With the prospect of 50% of Americans unemployed and much higher numbers in undeveloped countries, governments and billionaires have colluded to devise a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to provide essential provisions for every human being on earth. The UBI is the concept to placate the impending magnitude of unemployed.

In part two, I revealed the astonishing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI). I also mentioned that the United Nations is currently engaged in special hearings to determine whether to relinquish life and death decisions over human beings to machines. Determining whether machines will have the sole decision making power to kill humans is profound and overwhelming. Since machines cannot be held accountable legally, this decision will determine the future existence of the human race.

This photo is of thousands of plastic coffins. The plan is laid out in the Georgia Guidestones, Reduce the population to 500 million. Zbigniew Brzezinski was Barack Obamas handler, a New World Order globalist-insider and the father of MSNBCs Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski. He said, and I quote: In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people, literally, than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.

If you disregard the spiritual aspect, none of this makes sense. After all, why would billionaire elites, scientist and governments empower machines to eradicate the human race, of which they belong? The answer is theyre luciferians.

And I reiterate Jesus words, the devil would have killed every living creature on the face of the earth, Satan kills people through other people.

Again, if you havent watched I Robot, do so, if you have watch it again. Before you do, watch this short video Slaughterbots YouTube

CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk: Artificial Intelligence Is More Dangerous Than North Korea. I dont know a lot of people who love the idea of living under a despot, said Musk, suggesting a future where artificial intelligenceor the people controlling itexceed our capabilities by orders of magnitude. Elon Musks Billion-Dollar Crusade to Stop the A.I. Apocalypse Hes also gone so far as to call artificial intelligence, a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.

When you have super intelligence that exceeds humanity by a lot, says Musk, its very important that its benign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Freedom consists in the distribution of power and despotism in its concentration. AI is a rare case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation rather than reactive. Nobody likes being regulated, but everythingcars, planes, food, drugs, etc.that is a danger to the public is regulated. AI should be too.

Elon Musk Urges U.S. Governors to Regulate AI Before Its Too Late , we only have a 5 to 10% chance of preventing killer robots from destroying humanity. Musk insisted on lawmakers considering regulations regarding AIs creation. In August, Musk even signed an open letter to the United Nations, as AI experts join Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, call for killer-robot ban.

Robots and AI are not designed to empower humanity, but to track, enslave, takeover and replace humanity, and Elon Musk not only has the foresight to realize this, hes actively moving to prevent it.

Since my last article theres been a disturbing revelation in this developing world of robotic machines and artificial intelligence. An ex-Google executive, Anthony Lavandowski, the $120 million former Google engineer that helped invent Street View, Waymo and Ubers self-driving cars, and who is also being sued by Google for stealing trade secrets, after two years as its CEO, Ex-Google Executive Registers First Church of AI With IRS, Way Of The Future (WOTF).

Lavandowski claims that one day artificial intelligence will become so efficient that itll surpass and overpower humans so theyll readily handover their power to a creation with far more intelligence, and the AI godhead will benevolently take charge of its human subjects. The WOTF churchs mission statement says it intends To develop and promote the realization of a godhead based on artificial intelligence and through understanding and worship of the godhead contribute to the betterment of society and to develop a peaceful and respectable transition of who is in charge of the planet from people to people + machines. Given that technology will relatively soon be able to surpass human abilities, we want to help educate people about this exciting future and prepare a smooth transition. WOTF has also given rights to both sexes, minority groups and even animals.

In response to Lavandowskis WOTF, Elon Musk says People who talk of AI gods should absolutely not be allowed to develop digital super intelligence.

So, they create an artificial intelligence-god and then they order us to acknowledge and worship this artificial intelligence-god that they created.

Heres what the Bible has to say about all of this, Revelation 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the best, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of Gods fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus. Rev. 14:9-12.

To quote the great theologian, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or FranceYou may like to gamble, you might like to danceYou may be the heavyweight champion of the worldYou may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But youre gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeedYoure gonna have to serve somebody,It may be the devil or it may be the LordBut youre gonna have to serve somebody.

Youre gonna serve somebody.

Whos your God and who do you serve?

Check out Al Duncans other articles and his book, The Master Plan.

2017 Al Duncan All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Al Duncan: [emailprotected]

See the original post:

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

See the article here:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Dr. Ferrando teaches Philosophy at New York University (US),NYU-Program of Liberal Studies,as anAdjunctAssistant Professor.

She has earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Roma Tre (Italy),to which the European Doctoral Fellowship was applied.She holds an M.A.in Gender Studies,Director of the Program:Prof.Rosi Braidotti,UtrechtUniversity (Holland).

Dr. Ferrando is an Award-Winning Philosopher.She is the recipient of the Philosophical Prize “Premio Sainati”,with the Acknowledgment of the President of theItalian Republic, 2014.

Dr. Ferrando has repeatedly been a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University (US).She has also been an Independent Researcher at the University of Reading (England),working on Cyborg Theory with Prof.Kevin Warwick.

Dr. Ferrando has been namedone of the 100 Top Creativesmaking change in the world by ORIGIN magazine.

See more here:

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

N. Katherine Hayles (born 16 December 1943) is a postmodern literary critic, most notable for her contribution to the fields of literature and science, electronic literature, and American literature.[1] She is professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Program in Literature at Duke University.[2]

Hayles was born in Saint Louis, Missouri to Edward and Thelma Bruns. She received her B.S. in Chemistry from the Rochester Institute of Technology in 1966, and her M.S. in Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology in 1969. She worked as a research chemist in 1966 at Xerox Corporation and as a chemical research consultant Beckman Instrument Company from 1968-1970. Hayles then switched fields and received her M.A. in English Literature from Michigan State University in 1970, and her Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Rochester in 1977.[3] She is a social and literary critic.

Her scholarship primarily focuses on the “relations between science, literature, and technology.”[4][5] Hayles has taught at UCLA, University of Iowa, University of MissouriRolla, the California Institute of Technology, and Dartmouth College.[3] She was the faculty director of the Electronic Literature Organization from 2001-2006.[6]

Hayles understands “human” and “posthuman” as constructions that emerge from historically specific understandings of technology, culture and embodiment; “human and “posthuman” views each produce unique models of subjectivity.[7] Within this framework “human” is aligned with Enlightenment notions of liberal humanism, including its emphasis on the “natural self” and the freedom of the individual.[8] Conversely, posthuman does away with the notion of a “natural” self and emerges when human intelligence is conceptualized as being co-produced with intelligent machines. According to Hayles the posthuman view privileges information over materiality, considers consciousness as an epiphenomenon and imagines the body as a prosthesis for the mind .[9] Specifically Hayles suggests that in the posthuman view “there are no essential differences or absolute demarcations between bodily existence and computer simulation…”[8] The posthuman thus emerges as a deconstruction of the liberal humanist notion of “human.”

Despite drawing out the differences between “human” and “posthuman”, Hayles is careful to note that both perspectives engage in the erasure of embodiment from subjectivity.[10] In the liberal humanist view, cognition takes precedence over the body, which is narrated as an object to possess and master. Meanwhile, popular conceptions of the cybernetic posthuman imagine the body as merely a container for information and code. Noting the alignment between these two perspectives, Hayles uses How We Became Posthuman to investigate the social and cultural processes and practices that led to the conceptualization of information as separate from the material that instantiates it.[11] Drawing on diverse examples, such as Turing’s Imitation Game, Gibson’s Neuromancer and cybernetic theory, Hayles traces the history of what she calls “the cultural perception that information and materiality are conceptually distinct and that information is in some sense more essential, more important and more fundamental than materiality.”[12] By tracing the emergence of such thinking, and by looking at the manner in which literary and scientific texts came to imagine, for example, the possibility of downloading human consciousness into a computer, Hayles attempts to trouble the information/material separation and in her words, “…put back into the picture the flesh that continues to be erased in contemporary discussions about cybernetic subjects.[13] In this regard, the posthuman subject under the condition of virtuality is an “amalgam, a collection of heterogeneous components, a material-informational entity whose boundaries undergo continuous construction and reconstruction.”[14] Hayles differentiates “embodiment” from the concept of “the body” because “in contrast to the body, embodiment is contextual, enmeshed within the specifics of place, time, physiology, and culture, which together compose enactment.”[15] Hayles specifically examines how various science fiction novels portray a shift in the conception of information, particularly in the dialectics of presence/absence toward pattern/randomness. She diagrams these shifts to show how ideas about abstraction and information actually have a “local habitation” and are “embodied” within the narratives. Although ideas about “information” taken out of context creates abstractions about the human “body”, reading science fiction situates these same ideas in “embodied” narrative.”

Within the field of Posthuman Studies, Hayles’ How We Became Posthuman is considered “the key text which brought posthumanism to broad international attention”.[16] In the years since this book was published, it has been both praised and critiqued by scholars who have viewed her work through a variety of lenses; including those of cybernetic history, feminism, postmodernism, cultural and literary criticism, and conversations in the popular press about humans’ changing relationships to technology.

Reactions to Hayles’ writing style, general organization, and scope of the book have been mixed. The book is generally praised for displaying depth and scope in its combining of scientific ideas and literary criticism. Linda Brigham of Kansas State University claims that Hayles manages to lead the text “across diverse, historically contentious terrain by means of a carefully crafted and deliberate organizational structure.”[17] Some scholars found her prose difficult to read or over-complicated. Andrew Pickering describes the book as “hard going” and lacking of “straightforward presentation.”[18] Dennis Weiss of York College of Pennsylvania accuses Hayles of “unnecessarily complicat[ing] her framework for thinking about the body”, for example by using terms such as “body” and “embodiment” ambiguously. Weiss however acknowledges as convincing her use of science fiction in order to reveal how “the narrowly focused, abstract constellation of ideas” of cybernetics circulate through a broader cultural context.[19] Craig Keating of Langara College on the contrary argues that the obscurity of some texts questions their ability to function as the conduit for scientific ideas.[20]

Several scholars reviewing How We Became Posthuman highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of her book vis a vis its relationship to feminism. Amelia Jones of University of Southern California describes Hayles’ work as reacting to the misogynistic discourse of the field of cybernetics.[21] As Pickering wrote, Hayles’ promotion of an “embodied posthumanism” challenges cybernetics’ “equation of human-ness with disembodied information” for being “another male trick to feminists tired of the devaluation of women’s bodily labor.”[18] Stephanie Turner of Purdue University also described Hayles’ work as an opportunity to challenge prevailing concepts of the human subject which assumed the body was white, male, and European, but suggested Hayles’ dialectic method may have taken too many interpretive risks, leaving some questions open about “which interventions promise the best directions to take.”[22]

Reviewers were mixed about Hayles’ construction of the posthuman subject. Weiss describes Hayles’ work as challenging the simplistic dichotomy of human and post-human subjects in order to “rethink the relationship between human beings and intelligent machines,” however suggests that in her attempt to set her vision of the posthuman apart from the “realist, objectivist epistemology characteristic of first-wave cybernetics”, she too, falls back on universalist discourse, premised this time on how cognitive science is able to reveal the “true nature of the self.”[19] Jones similarly described Hayles’ work as reacting to cybernetics’ disembodiment of the human subject by swinging too far towards an insistence on a “physical reality” of the body apart from discourse. Jones argued that reality is rather “determined in and through the way we view, articulate, and understand the world”.[21]

In terms of the strength of Hayles’ arguments regarding the return of materiality to information, several scholars expressed doubt on the validity of the provided grounds, notably evolutionary psychology. Keating claims that while Hayles is following evolutionary psychological arguments in order to argue for the overcoming of the disembodiment of knowledge, she provides “no good reason to support this proposition.”[20] Brigham describes Hayles’ attempt to connect autopoietic circularity to “an inadequacy in Maturana’s attempt to account for evolutionary change” as unjustified.[17] Weiss suggests that she makes the mistake of “adhering too closely to the realist, objectivist discourse of the sciences,” the same mistake she criticizes Weiner and Maturana for committing.[19]

Read more:

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

See the article here:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Part III

A concept being discussed in many elite and scientific circles today is posthuman, or after human existence.

A transhuman is an intermediary form between human and post-human. A transhuman looks like a human in physical respects but possesses powers and abilities beyond those of standard humans. These abilities might include enhanced intelligence, consciousness, strength, or endurance. This may also include the gender identity assigned to them at birth, the homosexual, trans-man, trans-woman and transgender.

A cyborg is the abbreviation of cybernetic organism, a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. A cyborg is not bionic, biorobot or android. Cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

A human-hybrid is an entity that incorporates elements from humans and animals; its a human-animal hybrid. All of these can be considered an assault on the human race.

Due to the enhanced technology of magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), the entire brain has been mapped out. Through computerized images we know the exact area of memory, thought, emotion, smell, taste and feeling, implant devices can be used to trigger those neuron connections within the brain. Just as artificial intelligence (AI) is programmed, a brain implant containing information on any given subject can be implanted to enhance human mental aptitude and performance to cause super human abilities.

US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was designated $80 million to develop brain chips capable of implanting or removing memory. These implants are intended to aid troops cognitive abilities during and after wars. Believe me, with every implant theres a back door capability to control that implant and also the person.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, ex-military and Karate expert, fears the prospect of a universal soldier with superman capabilities. He says, Now that scientists have broken the genetic code, and can successfully edit human embryos with pre-designed characteristics, we need regulations to prevent the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

AI implants inserted into bodies are humans melded with machines. Are they still human beings, made in the image of God? Moreover, arent we being melded with machines even today? Can we function without our Smart Phone, GPS, Facebook or Google? In the workforce or in every day life what, normal human being, can compete with a transhuman or a cyborg or a hybrid?

Whats happening today is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Genesis and in the Book of Enoch. It was the reason God regretted making mankind and the same reason He flooded the earth with water and destroyed every living creature with the exception of Noahs undefiled family and the uncorrupted creatures that He handpicked from every living species before they entered the ark.

Jesus reveals three significant aspects regarding the above. He warned, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will it be when he returns. In the account of Sodom and Gomorrah the entire town tried to break down the door in order to rape the angels. Due of the overpowering lust to sodomize the male angels, the mob rejected the virgin who was offered to replace them. Jesus also said, as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be when he returns. In the days of Noah a group of angels led by Satan abandoned their original state to corrupt the human genome, just as theyre doing today. This resulted in Nephilim hybrids, transhumans and giants with fierce cravings for the raw flesh of animals and humans. Lastly, Jesus said, if God hadnt sent him back before the appointed time, the devil wouldve killed every living creature on the face of the earth. But for the sake of the elect, God sends Christ back earlier.

I began this three part series by showing that in the very near future 40 to 50% of all jobs in America are at risk of being replaced by robots. Robots dont take coffee breaks or lunch breaks and they dont take vacations. They dont take sick leave or maternity leave either. And employers wont have to bother with payroll clerks, time cards, a retirement fund or a health care plan and robots are exceedingly smarter than us. Stop thinking you can successfully compete against robots.

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it. The powers that be are afraid that people will lose it. With the prospect of 50% of Americans unemployed and much higher numbers in undeveloped countries, governments and billionaires have colluded to devise a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to provide essential provisions for every human being on earth. The UBI is the concept to placate the impending magnitude of unemployed.

In part two, I revealed the astonishing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI). I also mentioned that the United Nations is currently engaged in special hearings to determine whether to relinquish life and death decisions over human beings to machines. Determining whether machines will have the sole decision making power to kill humans is profound and overwhelming. Since machines cannot be held accountable legally, this decision will determine the future existence of the human race.

This photo is of thousands of plastic coffins. The plan is laid out in the Georgia Guidestones, Reduce the population to 500 million. Zbigniew Brzezinski was Barack Obamas handler, a New World Order globalist-insider and the father of MSNBCs Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski. He said, and I quote: In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people, literally, than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.

If you disregard the spiritual aspect, none of this makes sense. After all, why would billionaire elites, scientist and governments empower machines to eradicate the human race, of which they belong? The answer is theyre luciferians.

And I reiterate Jesus words, the devil would have killed every living creature on the face of the earth, Satan kills people through other people.

Again, if you havent watched I Robot, do so, if you have watch it again. Before you do, watch this short video Slaughterbots YouTube

CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk: Artificial Intelligence Is More Dangerous Than North Korea. I dont know a lot of people who love the idea of living under a despot, said Musk, suggesting a future where artificial intelligenceor the people controlling itexceed our capabilities by orders of magnitude. Elon Musks Billion-Dollar Crusade to Stop the A.I. Apocalypse Hes also gone so far as to call artificial intelligence, a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.

When you have super intelligence that exceeds humanity by a lot, says Musk, its very important that its benign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Freedom consists in the distribution of power and despotism in its concentration. AI is a rare case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation rather than reactive. Nobody likes being regulated, but everythingcars, planes, food, drugs, etc.that is a danger to the public is regulated. AI should be too.

Elon Musk Urges U.S. Governors to Regulate AI Before Its Too Late , we only have a 5 to 10% chance of preventing killer robots from destroying humanity. Musk insisted on lawmakers considering regulations regarding AIs creation. In August, Musk even signed an open letter to the United Nations, as AI experts join Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, call for killer-robot ban.

Robots and AI are not designed to empower humanity, but to track, enslave, takeover and replace humanity, and Elon Musk not only has the foresight to realize this, hes actively moving to prevent it.

Since my last article theres been a disturbing revelation in this developing world of robotic machines and artificial intelligence. An ex-Google executive, Anthony Lavandowski, the $120 million former Google engineer that helped invent Street View, Waymo and Ubers self-driving cars, and who is also being sued by Google for stealing trade secrets, after two years as its CEO, Ex-Google Executive Registers First Church of AI With IRS, Way Of The Future (WOTF).

Lavandowski claims that one day artificial intelligence will become so efficient that itll surpass and overpower humans so theyll readily handover their power to a creation with far more intelligence, and the AI godhead will benevolently take charge of its human subjects. The WOTF churchs mission statement says it intends To develop and promote the realization of a godhead based on artificial intelligence and through understanding and worship of the godhead contribute to the betterment of society and to develop a peaceful and respectable transition of who is in charge of the planet from people to people + machines. Given that technology will relatively soon be able to surpass human abilities, we want to help educate people about this exciting future and prepare a smooth transition. WOTF has also given rights to both sexes, minority groups and even animals.

In response to Lavandowskis WOTF, Elon Musk says People who talk of AI gods should absolutely not be allowed to develop digital super intelligence.

So, they create an artificial intelligence-god and then they order us to acknowledge and worship this artificial intelligence-god that they created.

Heres what the Bible has to say about all of this, Revelation 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the best, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of Gods fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus. Rev. 14:9-12.

To quote the great theologian, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or FranceYou may like to gamble, you might like to danceYou may be the heavyweight champion of the worldYou may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But youre gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeedYoure gonna have to serve somebody,It may be the devil or it may be the LordBut youre gonna have to serve somebody.

Youre gonna serve somebody.

Whos your God and who do you serve?

Check out Al Duncans other articles and his book, The Master Plan.

2017 Al Duncan All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Al Duncan: [emailprotected]

Visit link:

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

Part III

A concept being discussed in many elite and scientific circles today is posthuman, or after human existence.

A transhuman is an intermediary form between human and post-human. A transhuman looks like a human in physical respects but possesses powers and abilities beyond those of standard humans. These abilities might include enhanced intelligence, consciousness, strength, or endurance. This may also include the gender identity assigned to them at birth, the homosexual, trans-man, trans-woman and transgender.

A cyborg is the abbreviation of cybernetic organism, a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. A cyborg is not bionic, biorobot or android. Cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

A human-hybrid is an entity that incorporates elements from humans and animals; its a human-animal hybrid. All of these can be considered an assault on the human race.

Due to the enhanced technology of magnetic resonance imagining (MRI), the entire brain has been mapped out. Through computerized images we know the exact area of memory, thought, emotion, smell, taste and feeling, implant devices can be used to trigger those neuron connections within the brain. Just as artificial intelligence (AI) is programmed, a brain implant containing information on any given subject can be implanted to enhance human mental aptitude and performance to cause super human abilities.

US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was designated $80 million to develop brain chips capable of implanting or removing memory. These implants are intended to aid troops cognitive abilities during and after wars. Believe me, with every implant theres a back door capability to control that implant and also the person.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, ex-military and Karate expert, fears the prospect of a universal soldier with superman capabilities. He says, Now that scientists have broken the genetic code, and can successfully edit human embryos with pre-designed characteristics, we need regulations to prevent the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

AI implants inserted into bodies are humans melded with machines. Are they still human beings, made in the image of God? Moreover, arent we being melded with machines even today? Can we function without our Smart Phone, GPS, Facebook or Google? In the workforce or in every day life what, normal human being, can compete with a transhuman or a cyborg or a hybrid?

Whats happening today is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Genesis and in the Book of Enoch. It was the reason God regretted making mankind and the same reason He flooded the earth with water and destroyed every living creature with the exception of Noahs undefiled family and the uncorrupted creatures that He handpicked from every living species before they entered the ark.

Jesus reveals three significant aspects regarding the above. He warned, as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will it be when he returns. In the account of Sodom and Gomorrah the entire town tried to break down the door in order to rape the angels. Due of the overpowering lust to sodomize the male angels, the mob rejected the virgin who was offered to replace them. Jesus also said, as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be when he returns. In the days of Noah a group of angels led by Satan abandoned their original state to corrupt the human genome, just as theyre doing today. This resulted in Nephilim hybrids, transhumans and giants with fierce cravings for the raw flesh of animals and humans. Lastly, Jesus said, if God hadnt sent him back before the appointed time, the devil wouldve killed every living creature on the face of the earth. But for the sake of the elect, God sends Christ back earlier.

I began this three part series by showing that in the very near future 40 to 50% of all jobs in America are at risk of being replaced by robots. Robots dont take coffee breaks or lunch breaks and they dont take vacations. They dont take sick leave or maternity leave either. And employers wont have to bother with payroll clerks, time cards, a retirement fund or a health care plan and robots are exceedingly smarter than us. Stop thinking you can successfully compete against robots.

When people have nothing to lose, they lose it. The powers that be are afraid that people will lose it. With the prospect of 50% of Americans unemployed and much higher numbers in undeveloped countries, governments and billionaires have colluded to devise a Universal Basic Income (UBI) to provide essential provisions for every human being on earth. The UBI is the concept to placate the impending magnitude of unemployed.

In part two, I revealed the astonishing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI). I also mentioned that the United Nations is currently engaged in special hearings to determine whether to relinquish life and death decisions over human beings to machines. Determining whether machines will have the sole decision making power to kill humans is profound and overwhelming. Since machines cannot be held accountable legally, this decision will determine the future existence of the human race.

This photo is of thousands of plastic coffins. The plan is laid out in the Georgia Guidestones, Reduce the population to 500 million. Zbigniew Brzezinski was Barack Obamas handler, a New World Order globalist-insider and the father of MSNBCs Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski. He said, and I quote: In earlier times, it was easier to control a million people, literally, than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people.

If you disregard the spiritual aspect, none of this makes sense. After all, why would billionaire elites, scientist and governments empower machines to eradicate the human race, of which they belong? The answer is theyre luciferians.

And I reiterate Jesus words, the devil would have killed every living creature on the face of the earth, Satan kills people through other people.

Again, if you havent watched I Robot, do so, if you have watch it again. Before you do, watch this short video Slaughterbots YouTube

CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, Elon Musk: Artificial Intelligence Is More Dangerous Than North Korea. I dont know a lot of people who love the idea of living under a despot, said Musk, suggesting a future where artificial intelligenceor the people controlling itexceed our capabilities by orders of magnitude. Elon Musks Billion-Dollar Crusade to Stop the A.I. Apocalypse Hes also gone so far as to call artificial intelligence, a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization.

When you have super intelligence that exceeds humanity by a lot, says Musk, its very important that its benign. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Freedom consists in the distribution of power and despotism in its concentration. AI is a rare case where I think we need to be proactive in regulation rather than reactive. Nobody likes being regulated, but everythingcars, planes, food, drugs, etc.that is a danger to the public is regulated. AI should be too.

Elon Musk Urges U.S. Governors to Regulate AI Before Its Too Late , we only have a 5 to 10% chance of preventing killer robots from destroying humanity. Musk insisted on lawmakers considering regulations regarding AIs creation. In August, Musk even signed an open letter to the United Nations, as AI experts join Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, call for killer-robot ban.

Robots and AI are not designed to empower humanity, but to track, enslave, takeover and replace humanity, and Elon Musk not only has the foresight to realize this, hes actively moving to prevent it.

Since my last article theres been a disturbing revelation in this developing world of robotic machines and artificial intelligence. An ex-Google executive, Anthony Lavandowski, the $120 million former Google engineer that helped invent Street View, Waymo and Ubers self-driving cars, and who is also being sued by Google for stealing trade secrets, after two years as its CEO, Ex-Google Executive Registers First Church of AI With IRS, Way Of The Future (WOTF).

Lavandowski claims that one day artificial intelligence will become so efficient that itll surpass and overpower humans so theyll readily handover their power to a creation with far more intelligence, and the AI godhead will benevolently take charge of its human subjects. The WOTF churchs mission statement says it intends To develop and promote the realization of a godhead based on artificial intelligence and through understanding and worship of the godhead contribute to the betterment of society and to develop a peaceful and respectable transition of who is in charge of the planet from people to people + machines. Given that technology will relatively soon be able to surpass human abilities, we want to help educate people about this exciting future and prepare a smooth transition. WOTF has also given rights to both sexes, minority groups and even animals.

In response to Lavandowskis WOTF, Elon Musk says People who talk of AI gods should absolutely not be allowed to develop digital super intelligence.

So, they create an artificial intelligence-god and then they order us to acknowledge and worship this artificial intelligence-god that they created.

Heres what the Bible has to say about all of this, Revelation 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the best, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of Gods fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. There will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and its image, or for anyone who receives the mark of its name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus. Rev. 14:9-12.

To quote the great theologian, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or FranceYou may like to gamble, you might like to danceYou may be the heavyweight champion of the worldYou may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But youre gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeedYoure gonna have to serve somebody,It may be the devil or it may be the LordBut youre gonna have to serve somebody.

Youre gonna serve somebody.

Whos your God and who do you serve?

Check out Al Duncans other articles and his book, The Master Plan.

2017 Al Duncan All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Al Duncan: [emailprotected]

Read the original:

News With Views | Reality Is Often Stranger Than Fiction …

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

N. Katherine Hayles (born 16 December 1943) is a postmodern literary critic, most notable for her contribution to the fields of literature and science, electronic literature, and American literature.[1] She is professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Program in Literature at Duke University.[2]

Hayles was born in Saint Louis, Missouri to Edward and Thelma Bruns. She received her B.S. in Chemistry from the Rochester Institute of Technology in 1966, and her M.S. in Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology in 1969. She worked as a research chemist in 1966 at Xerox Corporation and as a chemical research consultant Beckman Instrument Company from 1968-1970. Hayles then switched fields and received her M.A. in English Literature from Michigan State University in 1970, and her Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Rochester in 1977.[3] She is a social and literary critic.

Her scholarship primarily focuses on the “relations between science, literature, and technology.”[4][5] Hayles has taught at UCLA, University of Iowa, University of MissouriRolla, the California Institute of Technology, and Dartmouth College.[3] She was the faculty director of the Electronic Literature Organization from 2001-2006.[6]

Hayles understands “human” and “posthuman” as constructions that emerge from historically specific understandings of technology, culture and embodiment; “human and “posthuman” views each produce unique models of subjectivity.[7] Within this framework “human” is aligned with Enlightenment notions of liberal humanism, including its emphasis on the “natural self” and the freedom of the individual.[8] Conversely, posthuman does away with the notion of a “natural” self and emerges when human intelligence is conceptualized as being co-produced with intelligent machines. According to Hayles the posthuman view privileges information over materiality, considers consciousness as an epiphenomenon and imagines the body as a prosthesis for the mind .[9] Specifically Hayles suggests that in the posthuman view “there are no essential differences or absolute demarcations between bodily existence and computer simulation…”[8] The posthuman thus emerges as a deconstruction of the liberal humanist notion of “human.”

Despite drawing out the differences between “human” and “posthuman”, Hayles is careful to note that both perspectives engage in the erasure of embodiment from subjectivity.[10] In the liberal humanist view, cognition takes precedence over the body, which is narrated as an object to possess and master. Meanwhile, popular conceptions of the cybernetic posthuman imagine the body as merely a container for information and code. Noting the alignment between these two perspectives, Hayles uses How We Became Posthuman to investigate the social and cultural processes and practices that led to the conceptualization of information as separate from the material that instantiates it.[11] Drawing on diverse examples, such as Turing’s Imitation Game, Gibson’s Neuromancer and cybernetic theory, Hayles traces the history of what she calls “the cultural perception that information and materiality are conceptually distinct and that information is in some sense more essential, more important and more fundamental than materiality.”[12] By tracing the emergence of such thinking, and by looking at the manner in which literary and scientific texts came to imagine, for example, the possibility of downloading human consciousness into a computer, Hayles attempts to trouble the information/material separation and in her words, “…put back into the picture the flesh that continues to be erased in contemporary discussions about cybernetic subjects.[13] In this regard, the posthuman subject under the condition of virtuality is an “amalgam, a collection of heterogeneous components, a material-informational entity whose boundaries undergo continuous construction and reconstruction.”[14] Hayles differentiates “embodiment” from the concept of “the body” because “in contrast to the body, embodiment is contextual, enmeshed within the specifics of place, time, physiology, and culture, which together compose enactment.”[15] Hayles specifically examines how various science fiction novels portray a shift in the conception of information, particularly in the dialectics of presence/absence toward pattern/randomness. She diagrams these shifts to show how ideas about abstraction and information actually have a “local habitation” and are “embodied” within the narratives. Although ideas about “information” taken out of context creates abstractions about the human “body”, reading science fiction situates these same ideas in “embodied” narrative.”

Within the field of Posthuman Studies, Hayles’ How We Became Posthuman is considered “the key text which brought posthumanism to broad international attention”.[16] In the years since this book was published, it has been both praised and critiqued by scholars who have viewed her work through a variety of lenses; including those of cybernetic history, feminism, postmodernism, cultural and literary criticism, and conversations in the popular press about humans’ changing relationships to technology.

Reactions to Hayles’ writing style, general organization, and scope of the book have been mixed. The book is generally praised for displaying depth and scope in its combining of scientific ideas and literary criticism. Linda Brigham of Kansas State University claims that Hayles manages to lead the text “across diverse, historically contentious terrain by means of a carefully crafted and deliberate organizational structure.”[17] Some scholars found her prose difficult to read or over-complicated. Andrew Pickering describes the book as “hard going” and lacking of “straightforward presentation.”[18] Dennis Weiss of York College of Pennsylvania accuses Hayles of “unnecessarily complicat[ing] her framework for thinking about the body”, for example by using terms such as “body” and “embodiment” ambiguously. Weiss however acknowledges as convincing her use of science fiction in order to reveal how “the narrowly focused, abstract constellation of ideas” of cybernetics circulate through a broader cultural context.[19] Craig Keating of Langara College on the contrary argues that the obscurity of some texts questions their ability to function as the conduit for scientific ideas.[20]

Several scholars reviewing How We Became Posthuman highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of her book vis a vis its relationship to feminism. Amelia Jones of University of Southern California describes Hayles’ work as reacting to the misogynistic discourse of the field of cybernetics.[21] As Pickering wrote, Hayles’ promotion of an “embodied posthumanism” challenges cybernetics’ “equation of human-ness with disembodied information” for being “another male trick to feminists tired of the devaluation of women’s bodily labor.”[18] Stephanie Turner of Purdue University also described Hayles’ work as an opportunity to challenge prevailing concepts of the human subject which assumed the body was white, male, and European, but suggested Hayles’ dialectic method may have taken too many interpretive risks, leaving some questions open about “which interventions promise the best directions to take.”[22]

Reviewers were mixed about Hayles’ construction of the posthuman subject. Weiss describes Hayles’ work as challenging the simplistic dichotomy of human and post-human subjects in order to “rethink the relationship between human beings and intelligent machines,” however suggests that in her attempt to set her vision of the posthuman apart from the “realist, objectivist epistemology characteristic of first-wave cybernetics”, she too, falls back on universalist discourse, premised this time on how cognitive science is able to reveal the “true nature of the self.”[19] Jones similarly described Hayles’ work as reacting to cybernetics’ disembodiment of the human subject by swinging too far towards an insistence on a “physical reality” of the body apart from discourse. Jones argued that reality is rather “determined in and through the way we view, articulate, and understand the world”.[21]

In terms of the strength of Hayles’ arguments regarding the return of materiality to information, several scholars expressed doubt on the validity of the provided grounds, notably evolutionary psychology. Keating claims that while Hayles is following evolutionary psychological arguments in order to argue for the overcoming of the disembodiment of knowledge, she provides “no good reason to support this proposition.”[20] Brigham describes Hayles’ attempt to connect autopoietic circularity to “an inadequacy in Maturana’s attempt to account for evolutionary change” as unjustified.[17] Weiss suggests that she makes the mistake of “adhering too closely to the realist, objectivist discourse of the sciences,” the same mistake she criticizes Weiner and Maturana for committing.[19]

Go here to see the original:

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

Read more:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

N. Katherine Hayles (born 16 December 1943) is a postmodern literary critic, most notable for her contribution to the fields of literature and science, electronic literature, and American literature.[1] She is professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Program in Literature at Duke University.[2]

Hayles was born in Saint Louis, Missouri to Edward and Thelma Bruns. She received her B.S. in Chemistry from the Rochester Institute of Technology in 1966, and her M.S. in Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology in 1969. She worked as a research chemist in 1966 at Xerox Corporation and as a chemical research consultant Beckman Instrument Company from 1968-1970. Hayles then switched fields and received her M.A. in English Literature from Michigan State University in 1970, and her Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Rochester in 1977.[3] She is a social and literary critic.

Her scholarship primarily focuses on the “relations between science, literature, and technology.”[4][5] Hayles has taught at UCLA, University of Iowa, University of MissouriRolla, the California Institute of Technology, and Dartmouth College.[3] She was the faculty director of the Electronic Literature Organization from 2001-2006.[6]

Hayles understands “human” and “posthuman” as constructions that emerge from historically specific understandings of technology, culture and embodiment; “human and “posthuman” views each produce unique models of subjectivity.[7] Within this framework “human” is aligned with Enlightenment notions of liberal humanism, including its emphasis on the “natural self” and the freedom of the individual.[8] Conversely, posthuman does away with the notion of a “natural” self and emerges when human intelligence is conceptualized as being co-produced with intelligent machines. According to Hayles the posthuman view privileges information over materiality, considers consciousness as an epiphenomenon and imagines the body as a prosthesis for the mind .[9] Specifically Hayles suggests that in the posthuman view “there are no essential differences or absolute demarcations between bodily existence and computer simulation…”[8] The posthuman thus emerges as a deconstruction of the liberal humanist notion of “human.”

Despite drawing out the differences between “human” and “posthuman”, Hayles is careful to note that both perspectives engage in the erasure of embodiment from subjectivity.[10] In the liberal humanist view, cognition takes precedence over the body, which is narrated as an object to possess and master. Meanwhile, popular conceptions of the cybernetic posthuman imagine the body as merely a container for information and code. Noting the alignment between these two perspectives, Hayles uses How We Became Posthuman to investigate the social and cultural processes and practices that led to the conceptualization of information as separate from the material that instantiates it.[11] Drawing on diverse examples, such as Turing’s Imitation Game, Gibson’s Neuromancer and cybernetic theory, Hayles traces the history of what she calls “the cultural perception that information and materiality are conceptually distinct and that information is in some sense more essential, more important and more fundamental than materiality.”[12] By tracing the emergence of such thinking, and by looking at the manner in which literary and scientific texts came to imagine, for example, the possibility of downloading human consciousness into a computer, Hayles attempts to trouble the information/material separation and in her words, “…put back into the picture the flesh that continues to be erased in contemporary discussions about cybernetic subjects.[13] In this regard, the posthuman subject under the condition of virtuality is an “amalgam, a collection of heterogeneous components, a material-informational entity whose boundaries undergo continuous construction and reconstruction.”[14] Hayles differentiates “embodiment” from the concept of “the body” because “in contrast to the body, embodiment is contextual, enmeshed within the specifics of place, time, physiology, and culture, which together compose enactment.”[15] Hayles specifically examines how various science fiction novels portray a shift in the conception of information, particularly in the dialectics of presence/absence toward pattern/randomness. She diagrams these shifts to show how ideas about abstraction and information actually have a “local habitation” and are “embodied” within the narratives. Although ideas about “information” taken out of context creates abstractions about the human “body”, reading science fiction situates these same ideas in “embodied” narrative.”

Within the field of Posthuman Studies, Hayles’ How We Became Posthuman is considered “the key text which brought posthumanism to broad international attention”.[16] In the years since this book was published, it has been both praised and critiqued by scholars who have viewed her work through a variety of lenses; including those of cybernetic history, feminism, postmodernism, cultural and literary criticism, and conversations in the popular press about humans’ changing relationships to technology.

Reactions to Hayles’ writing style, general organization, and scope of the book have been mixed. The book is generally praised for displaying depth and scope in its combining of scientific ideas and literary criticism. Linda Brigham of Kansas State University claims that Hayles manages to lead the text “across diverse, historically contentious terrain by means of a carefully crafted and deliberate organizational structure.”[17] Some scholars found her prose difficult to read or over-complicated. Andrew Pickering describes the book as “hard going” and lacking of “straightforward presentation.”[18] Dennis Weiss of York College of Pennsylvania accuses Hayles of “unnecessarily complicat[ing] her framework for thinking about the body”, for example by using terms such as “body” and “embodiment” ambiguously. Weiss however acknowledges as convincing her use of science fiction in order to reveal how “the narrowly focused, abstract constellation of ideas” of cybernetics circulate through a broader cultural context.[19] Craig Keating of Langara College on the contrary argues that the obscurity of some texts questions their ability to function as the conduit for scientific ideas.[20]

Several scholars reviewing How We Became Posthuman highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of her book vis a vis its relationship to feminism. Amelia Jones of University of Southern California describes Hayles’ work as reacting to the misogynistic discourse of the field of cybernetics.[21] As Pickering wrote, Hayles’ promotion of an “embodied posthumanism” challenges cybernetics’ “equation of human-ness with disembodied information” for being “another male trick to feminists tired of the devaluation of women’s bodily labor.”[18] Stephanie Turner of Purdue University also described Hayles’ work as an opportunity to challenge prevailing concepts of the human subject which assumed the body was white, male, and European, but suggested Hayles’ dialectic method may have taken too many interpretive risks, leaving some questions open about “which interventions promise the best directions to take.”[22]

Reviewers were mixed about Hayles’ construction of the posthuman subject. Weiss describes Hayles’ work as challenging the simplistic dichotomy of human and post-human subjects in order to “rethink the relationship between human beings and intelligent machines,” however suggests that in her attempt to set her vision of the posthuman apart from the “realist, objectivist epistemology characteristic of first-wave cybernetics”, she too, falls back on universalist discourse, premised this time on how cognitive science is able to reveal the “true nature of the self.”[19] Jones similarly described Hayles’ work as reacting to cybernetics’ disembodiment of the human subject by swinging too far towards an insistence on a “physical reality” of the body apart from discourse. Jones argued that reality is rather “determined in and through the way we view, articulate, and understand the world”.[21]

In terms of the strength of Hayles’ arguments regarding the return of materiality to information, several scholars expressed doubt on the validity of the provided grounds, notably evolutionary psychology. Keating claims that while Hayles is following evolutionary psychological arguments in order to argue for the overcoming of the disembodiment of knowledge, she provides “no good reason to support this proposition.”[20] Brigham describes Hayles’ attempt to connect autopoietic circularity to “an inadequacy in Maturana’s attempt to account for evolutionary change” as unjustified.[17] Weiss suggests that she makes the mistake of “adhering too closely to the realist, objectivist discourse of the sciences,” the same mistake she criticizes Weiner and Maturana for committing.[19]

Go here to read the rest:

N. Katherine Hayles – Wikipedia

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Dr. Ferrando teaches Philosophy at New York University (US),NYU-Program of Liberal Studies,as anAdjunctAssistant Professor.

She has earned a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Roma Tre (Italy),to which the European Doctoral Fellowship was applied.She holds an M.A.in Gender Studies,Director of the Program:Prof.Rosi Braidotti,UtrechtUniversity (Holland).

Dr. Ferrando is an Award-Winning Philosopher.She is the recipient of the Philosophical Prize “Premio Sainati”,with the Acknowledgment of the President of theItalian Republic, 2014.

Dr. Ferrando has repeatedly been a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University (US).She has also been an Independent Researcher at the University of Reading (England),working on Cyborg Theory with Prof.Kevin Warwick.

Dr. Ferrando has been namedone of the 100 Top Creativesmaking change in the world by ORIGIN magazine.

See original here:

Posthuman Philosophy – HOME

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

Continue reading here:

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman – Wikipedia

Posthuman or post-human is a concept originating in the fields of science fiction, futurology, contemporary art, and philosophy that literally means a person or entity that exists in a state beyond being human.[1] The concept addresses questions of ethics and justice, language and trans-species communication, social systems, and the intellectual aspirations of interdisciplinarity. Posthumanism is not to be confused with transhumanism (the nanobiotechnological enhancement of human beings) and narrow definitions of the posthuman as the hoped-for transcendence of materiality.[2] The notion of the posthuman comes up both in posthumanism as well as transhumanism, but it has a special meaning in each tradition. In 2017, Penn State University Press in cooperation with Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and James Hughes (sociologist) established the “Journal of Posthuman Studies” in which all aspects of the concept “posthuman” can be analysed.[3]

In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to re-conceive the human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman position recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, and understands the world through heterogeneous perspectives while seeking to maintain intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can “become” or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives.[4]

Critical discourses surrounding posthumanism are not homogeneous, but in fact present a series of often contradictory ideas, and the term itself is contested, with one of the foremost authors associated with posthumanism, Manuel de Landa, decrying the term as “very silly.”[5] Covering the ideas of, for example, Robert Pepperell’s The Posthuman Condition, and Hayles’s How We Became Posthuman under a single term is distinctly problematic due to these contradictions.

The posthuman is roughly synonymous with the “cyborg” of A Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Haraway.[6] Haraway’s conception of the cyborg is an ironic take on traditional conceptions of the cyborg that inverts the traditional trope of the cyborg whose presence questions the salient line between humans and robots. Haraway’s cyborg is in many ways the “beta” version of the posthuman, as her cyborg theory prompted the issue to be taken up in critical theory.[7] Following Haraway, Hayles, whose work grounds much of the critical posthuman discourse, asserts that liberal humanism – which separates the mind from the body and thus portrays the body as a “shell” or vehicle for the mind – becomes increasingly complicated in the late 20th and 21st centuries because information technology puts the human body in question. Hayles maintains that we must be conscious of information technology advancements while understanding information as “disembodied,” that is, something which cannot fundamentally replace the human body but can only be incorporated into it and human life practices.[8]

The idea of post-posthumanism (post-cyborgism) has recently been introduced.[9][10][11][12][13] This body of work outlines the after-effects of long-term adaptation to cyborg technologies and their subsequent removal, e.g., what happens after 20 years of constantly wearing computer-mediating eyeglass technologies and subsequently removing them, and of long-term adaptation to virtual worlds followed by return to “reality.”[14][15] and the associated post-cyborg ethics (e.g. the ethics of forced removal of cyborg technologies by authorities, etc.).[16]

Posthuman political and natural rights have been framed on a spectrum with animal rights and human rights.[17]

According to transhumanist thinkers, a posthuman is a hypothetical future being “whose basic capacities so radically exceed those of present humans as to be no longer unambiguously human by our current standards.”[18] Posthumans primarily focus on cybernetics, the posthuman consequent and the relationship to digital technology. The emphasis is on systems. Transhumanism does not focus on either of these. Instead, transhumanism focuses on the modification of the human species via any kind of emerging science, including genetic engineering, digital technology, and bioengineering.[19]

Posthumans could be completely synthetic artificial intelligences, or a symbiosis of human and artificial intelligence, or uploaded consciousnesses, or the result of making many smaller but cumulatively profound technological augmentations to a biological human, i.e. a cyborg. Some examples of the latter are redesigning the human organism using advanced nanotechnology or radical enhancement using some combination of technologies such as genetic engineering, psychopharmacology, life extension therapies, neural interfaces, advanced information management tools, memory enhancing drugs, wearable or implanted computers, and cognitive techniques.[18]

As used in this article, “posthuman” does not necessarily refer to a conjectured future where humans are extinct or otherwise absent from the Earth. As with other species who speciate from one another, both humans and posthumans could continue to exist. However, the apocalyptic scenario appears to be a viewpoint shared among a minority of transhumanists such as Marvin Minsky[citation needed] and Hans Moravec, who could be considered misanthropes, at least in regard to humanity in its current state. Alternatively, others such as Kevin Warwick argue for the likelihood that both humans and posthumans will continue to exist but the latter will predominate in society over the former because of their abilities.[20] Recently, scholars have begun to speculate that posthumanism provides an alternative analysis of apocalyptic cinema and fiction, often casting vampires, werewolves and even zombies as potential evolutions of the human form and being.[21]

Many science fiction authors, such as Greg Egan, H. G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Bruce Sterling, Frederik Pohl, Greg Bear, Charles Stross, Neal Asher, Ken MacLeod, Peter F. Hamilton and authors of the Orion’s Arm Universe,[22] have written works set in posthuman futures.

A variation on the posthuman theme is the notion of a “posthuman god”; the idea that posthumans, being no longer confined to the parameters of human nature, might grow physically and mentally so powerful as to appear possibly god-like by present-day human standards.[18] This notion should not be interpreted as being related to the idea portrayed in some science fiction that a sufficiently advanced species may “ascend” to a higher plane of existencerather, it merely means that some posthuman beings may become so exceedingly intelligent and technologically sophisticated that their behaviour would not possibly be comprehensible to modern humans, purely by reason of their limited intelligence and imagination.[23]

View post:

Posthuman – Wikipedia


123