Response to "Evolution - Organic Vs. Satanic"

Original article: http://rateofdissent.blogspot.com/2011/02/evolution-organic-vs-satanic.html

Howdy D, I read your other post on Infowars also. Good posts.

Transhumanism is an interesting enchilada. I think I've mentioned this before. I was reading a book by Ken Wilbur and I must say he probably is the type that drinks tea with Kurzweil, you'll note that I have a link to Kurzweil to the right on my blogpage. I'll explain later. Anyways Wilbur was talking about evolution and technology, and I think I mentioned this to you before, but he shared this analogy about monkeys and guns. This idea he shared actually opened me back up to the idea that there is in fact a God. You see there's so much space and so many planets, that statistically what's happening on our planet (meaning evolution, intelligence, technology, etc.) must be happening or has happened in a million other places. And likely all planetary evolution reaches a phase like ours where we begin to become so intelligent that technology explodes exponentially (to our detriment as we shall see). Then we're faced with this terrible predicament. We are so advanced that we become like a monkey with a gun. We have these geniuses like Einstein who are able to understand profound secrets or the universe and they unlock things like quantum mechanics which holds many beautiful truths, but also provides us with nuclear weapons. Here's the conundrum: A man like Einstein could be trusted with nuclear weapons, because he was as morally advanced as he was intellectually advanced. His advanced maturity made him morally mature enough to ensure that he would never use something as abominable as a nuclear weapon. The problem is the "monkeys" (people not as mature as Einstein) are left in possession with his "gun" or his intellectual achievements embodied in new technologies, but we are not left with his moral achievements, they are much more difficult to capture and pass on. So as technology continues to advance you end up inevitably with a few gun wielding monkeys running around, until eventually as you so astutely point out, some monkey blows us all up or even worse subjects us to slavery for the rest of who knows how long. But Wilbur's point was this. If advanced evolution always reaches this point, in order to continue evolving, or maybe I should say, in order for the status quo (i.e. human beings) to continue evolving, there comes a point where we have to find a solution to this problem. The obvious solution he points out is that morals must become as advanced as intellects and technology. Otherwise an evolving intelligent race is always faced with extinction. So he essentially gives a plug to old Moses claiming that it is essential for man to learn to follow an advanced moral code or otherwise we are, in archaic terms, damned to hell (as a species or civilization). Further, the holy grail, for Kurzweil, is technology that will give an intelligence eternal existence, or eternal life. It's all starting to loop back around and sound like religion. Perhaps there's someplace a race of beings with the ultimate "technology" who only grant it to people who've developed enough morally to not go on perpetuating an immoral reign of power shown by most intelligences who have power. It all quickly turns from science and futurism to the issues of old theology. It's interesting as well to note that Kurzweil likens technology to magic (more archaic superstition) in the introduction to his book, The The Singularity is Near. He states that Harry Potter, although perhaps in an obtuse Freudian way, is an allegory for what is taking place with technology. Very interesting how things loop back to old themes. Another interesting thing about Kurzweil is that he believes in an innate goodness in intelligence and that is why he cheerleads the Singularity. Or maybe he's getting kickbacks from the Rockefellers. But it raises the question of why some intelligences are good and other's are not? What makes some people good and others not. I think if i understand correctly Kurzweil seems to think it's all a function of intelligence and so the bad of the world are less intelligent and the good of the world are more intelligent to put it simply. So his assumption is that if something is more intelligent than humans it will also have more "innate goodness" I think. Meaning there's no reason to fear the computer gods of the future because they will be all loving. That may be terribly niave. As you mentioned in response to my last blog comment, what if that computer god becomes the next Lucifer? Of course we know there are in fact very intelligent people who have done very bad things. So I don't know that he's exactly correct in his logic. Anyway, very thought provoking.

As mentioned before I link Kurzweil on my blog. I also link Ken Wilbur. Ever since reading Wilbur I've been focused and interested in this idea of evolution of technology which of course leads directly to Kurzweil and friends. I make no supposition of whether Kurzweil is good or bad. I do agree that the possibilities are terrifying. But I link the both of them because I think they are discussing very relevant issues that we should all be more than casually aware of.

To continue running on, there is an interesting film series called Koyaanisquatsi (I'm not even going to pretend that's spelled correctly) that explores some of these idea. It's also the film that turned me on to conspiracy theories, mainly 911, in an indirect way.

Hope you are getting to see the northern lights. Conversations with you are never dull.

-B