Reading the comments here illustrates to me that many people did not understand the nature of this talk. There are many takeaways, "Difference is one of the main marks of existence" and "Evolution does not move toward complexity it moves toward diversity," are ideas worth spreading.
@@atthehops Evolution doesn’t reward or make a difference between complexity or diversity. Evolution rewards that which survives and reproduces. Biodiversity is not the goal of evolution, it is an byproduct of many different organisms figuring out how to survive and reproduce.
Ferrando writes: "Posthumanism is a post-centralizing, in the sense that it recognizes not one but many specific centers of interest; it dismisses the centrality of the centre in its singular form, both in its hegemonic as in its resistant modes. -- "Posthumanism (here understood as critical, cultural, and philosophical posthumanism, as well as new materialisms) seems appropriate to investigate the geological time of the anthropocene."
This means nothing! All she has said here is that Posthumanism has no central authority and that Posthumanism would be an appropriate way to look at human history. Instead of trying to teach and make a big concept easy to understand, she is taking a big concept and adding unnecessary fluff, not to mention her own political leanings. What a sham!
@@zzzaaayyynnn Even if that was the case, as far as I can tell she presents no new information here that is of value to understanding Transhumanism or Posthumanism. There is nothing new about the struggles of what happens when human enhancement changes the human to the degree of becoming something completely different from humanity. What’s the point of this TEDTalk?
Sarif was right about one thing. It's in our nature to want to rise above our limits. Think about it. We were cold, so we harnessed fire. We were weak, so we invented tools. Every time we met an obstacle, we used creativity and ingenuity to overcome it. The cycle is inevitable. In the past, we've had to compensate for weaknesses, finding quick solutions that only benefit a few. But what if we never need to feel weak or morally conflicted again? What if the path Sarif wants us to take enables us to hold on to higher values with more stability? One thing is obvious. For the first time in history, we have a chance to steal fire from the gods. To turn away from it now - to stop pursing a future in which technology and biology combine, leading to the promise of a Singularity - would mean to deny the very essence of who we are. No doubt the road to get there will be bumpy, hurting some people along the way. But won't achieving the dream be worth it? We can become the gods we've always been striving to be. We might as well get good at it. - Deus Ex Human Revolution
I'll admit that this video lacked a certain something, but her ideas are fairly sound. Recent technological advancements have far-reaching philosophical implications that were considered preposterous only a few decades ago. What was once science fiction is now reality and we ARE becoming one with our technology. We ARE living in the era of post-humanism, whether we like it or not. While it's to be expected from the comment section of RUclips, I have a feeling there would be far less hate on this video if the speaker were a Caucasian male. Sad, but almost certainly true.
This was 2013, I wonder if any major breakthroughs have been made! Think of the the computers in phones most people had in 2013..A good percent still had flip phones and box computers, etc.. But really the technology today is just more compact versions, Not much difference other than that..And speed of surfing and loading.
More people coming to conclusions about technology as well. If you can't go build it from nature on your own, You probably should be cautious and observant of it's behavior, It means someone is more intelligent, more observant than most people!
I like her, she's certainly a refreshing variation of what we usually see for speakers. Shout out for mentioning neo-shamanism and ayahuasca in a TEDx talk! I'm not sure that I understood what she was talking about, may have to watch again. Two things I found disturbing: - 'histories and herstories' (twice!) is clearly a case of linguistic gender equality gone wrong - the 'his' in history has nothing to do with male-ness, which she should know, it's a latin word (and the same in spanish). - advocating a perception of existing beings but including just humans, cyborgs, post-humans and machines such as the mars rover, is questionable at best. I don't know if the mars rover is to be classified as a being. But I know what is: microorganisms, animals and plants, all of which she didn't seem to consider at all. Probably machines are eligible because you can't eat them?
@Paul: 'herstory' is much more than a mere grammatical point. It is a political ansatz. The term was not, since its beginning, mean to supersed a grammatical construction, but a social construction.
when people make decisions to modify themselves to material improve their life. for example, replace a original heart with an artificial heart that is better than the original. then we have arrived...
it will be cool. in 16 years apparently. I doubt about the "all" maybe even more than about the dates put forward. But I agree on the incoming advances.
In Genesis, the serpent crawling on his stomach ..Maybe it has to do with how a lot of our days are spent revolving around seeing through and from the food, drink, drugs we eat and injest by our stomachs! Our stomachs do have receptors as well!
She's magnificent. Highly intellectual and beautiful. Independent thinker with a vast mind and a great capacity for foresight. If there's ever a cloning program she should be the matriarch.
Brainbuster Who puts accents in quotes, me? (sounds like something I'd do). It's really to QUOTE someone's words; however I use to emphasize, it would be better I use 'one' instead of "two" but when it comes to spelling, grammar, bear with me. Read but, disregard the errors. Thanks.
Nano-Augmentation: Pipedream, or Theory for The Future? By Hugh Darrow Excerpt from a paper in NeoNature, September 2022 We've been throwing the word "nanotechnology" around for decades yet, despite only our bests effort, we are only inching closer to that molecular-scale frontier when in fact we should be racing towards it. In the decades to come, the enhanced beings -- post humans who are our progeny -- will look at the mechanical devices we rudely bolted onto our living flesh or buried inside our grey matter, and they will mock us for our crudity. They will look upon what we have made with the same curiosity, the same disinterest, as the pilot of a veetol aircraft would look upon an ox cart. The future of human augmentation lies in the small - in fact, the smallest. In the next thirty years, the molecular frontier will be broken and true nano-scalar programming and biological reorientation will be possible. There will be no tedious instances of severing limbs to replace them with steel proxies. We will drink in these tiny machines, inject them - and be transformed. - Deus Ex Human Revolution
Yeah and we need to STOP spending so much time with technology, and just because some one comes up with the word "transhuman" doesnt mean we are ,so stop trying to use psychological tricks on us about since we all have our live on phones and take them everywhere isnt a reason to merge with it , quit trying to make that sound normal... IT ISNT!! i only use my cell phone as a tv and a phone, i always leave it at home, i dont take it on long trips out of state, i dont need g.p.s., i look at a map once then i got it, doesnt anyone use their brain, it can remember stuff you know.
I'm doing research for a book I'm writing which asks: where will the next stage in human evolution come from? Of course, there is an answer but - why is it that as soon as "post-human" is mentioned there's a big mix up with freaks on one end and computers at the other? Seems like this space, apart from all the retro-philospohical babble and utter meaninglessness, is highly undefined.
You cannot entertain the notion of being a post human in the year 2012. Or 2019. The majority of cyborgs today are individuals with BMIs or prostheses. All we can be, for the moment, are Transhumanists, patiently waiting for a new age in the anthropocene to manifest. RIP FM-33.
Yikes. She needs to learn to modulate her voice, and maybe a little less coffee. Maybe a lot less. Not much new here, but a few bits of interest. Sloppy presentation tho. . .
What exactly is her point? That we are all post-human? Why do I feel like she's surreptitiously trying to sell us on this idea? We don't need a faux Ted lecture to tell us that we're human.
appropriately enough, she's got a strong cyborg accent.
Reading the comments here illustrates to me that many people did not understand the nature of this talk. There are many takeaways, "Difference is one of the main marks of existence" and "Evolution does not move toward complexity it moves toward diversity," are ideas worth spreading.
She doesn't make a lot of sense.
@@mq5731 What didn't you inderstand?
@@atthehops Evolution doesn’t reward or make a difference between complexity or diversity. Evolution rewards that which survives and reproduces. Biodiversity is not the goal of evolution, it is an byproduct of many different organisms figuring out how to survive and reproduce.
Ferrando writes: "Posthumanism is a post-centralizing, in the sense that it recognizes not one but many specific centers of interest; it dismisses the centrality of the centre in its singular form, both in its hegemonic as in its resistant modes. -- "Posthumanism (here understood as critical, cultural, and philosophical posthumanism, as well as new materialisms) seems appropriate to investigate the geological time of the anthropocene."
This means nothing! All she has said here is that Posthumanism has no central authority and that Posthumanism would be an appropriate way to look at human history.
Instead of trying to teach and make a big concept easy to understand, she is taking a big concept and adding unnecessary fluff, not to mention her own political leanings. What a sham!
@@mq5731 nice point: but it's the nature of theorists to use too many words to say very little
@@zzzaaayyynnn Even if that was the case, as far as I can tell she presents no new information here that is of value to understanding Transhumanism or Posthumanism. There is nothing new about the struggles of what happens when human enhancement changes the human to the degree of becoming something completely different from humanity.
What’s the point of this TEDTalk?
one of the best Transcendence talk ever i have listen, thank you
"Yoomons"
Sarif was right about one thing. It's in our nature to want to rise above our limits. Think about it. We were cold, so we harnessed fire. We were weak, so we invented tools. Every time we met an obstacle, we used creativity and ingenuity to overcome it. The cycle is inevitable. In the past, we've had to compensate for weaknesses, finding quick solutions that only benefit a few. But what if we never need to feel weak or morally conflicted again? What if the path Sarif wants us to take enables us to hold on to higher values with more stability? One thing is obvious. For the first time in history, we have a chance to steal fire from the gods. To turn away from it now - to stop pursing a future in which technology and biology combine, leading to the promise of a Singularity - would mean to deny the very essence of who we are. No doubt the road to get there will be bumpy, hurting some people along the way. But won't achieving the dream be worth it? We can become the gods we've always been striving to be. We might as well get good at it. - Deus Ex Human Revolution
Very bad sound , impossible to hear !
I'll admit that this video lacked a certain something, but her ideas are fairly sound. Recent technological advancements have far-reaching philosophical implications that were considered preposterous only a few decades ago. What was once science fiction is now reality and we ARE becoming one with our technology. We ARE living in the era of post-humanism, whether we like it or not.
While it's to be expected from the comment section of RUclips, I have a feeling there would be far less hate on this video if the speaker were a Caucasian male. Sad, but almost certainly true.
id be in school every day if she were my teacher
That accent... I don't know why, but I find it pleasing...
it's Italian of course - what is wrong with that?
Does she acknowledge Donna Haraway at any point? these ideas are all from her... among others.
Fantastic person.
This was 2013, I wonder if any major breakthroughs have been made! Think of the the computers in phones most people had in 2013..A good percent still had flip phones and box computers, etc.. But really the technology today is just more compact versions, Not much difference other than that..And speed of surfing and loading.
More people coming to conclusions about technology as well. If you can't go build it from nature on your own, You probably should be cautious and observant of it's behavior, It means someone is more intelligent, more observant than most people!
intro killed my ears
I like her, she's certainly a refreshing variation of what we usually see for speakers.
Shout out for mentioning neo-shamanism and ayahuasca in a TEDx talk!
I'm not sure that I understood what she was talking about, may have to watch again.
Two things I found disturbing:
- 'histories and herstories' (twice!) is clearly a case of linguistic gender equality gone wrong - the 'his' in history has nothing to do with male-ness, which she should know, it's a latin word (and the same in spanish).
- advocating a perception of existing beings but including just humans, cyborgs, post-humans and machines such as the mars rover, is questionable at best. I don't know if the mars rover is to be classified as a being. But I know what is: microorganisms, animals and plants, all of which she didn't seem to consider at all. Probably machines are eligible because you can't eat them?
@Paul: 'herstory' is much more than a mere grammatical point. It is a political ansatz. The term was not, since its beginning, mean to supersed a grammatical construction, but a social construction.
when she says "we" she means the 1/7 that have internet
when people make decisions to modify themselves to material improve their life. for example, replace a original heart with an artificial heart that is better than the original. then we have arrived...
it will be cool. in 16 years apparently. I doubt about the "all" maybe even more than about the dates put forward. But I agree on the incoming advances.
Magnificent intelligence! What a bright and active mind she has!!! This is dense with information.
In Genesis, the serpent crawling on his stomach ..Maybe it has to do with how a lot of our days are spent revolving around seeing through and from the food, drink, drugs we eat and injest by our stomachs! Our stomachs do have receptors as well!
The purse on stage, that's definitely post human.
😂
She's magnificent. Highly intellectual and beautiful. Independent thinker with a vast mind and a great capacity for foresight. If there's ever a cloning program she should be the matriarch.
Please remove that opening sound. It is horribly annoying.
is she a cyborg?
francesca!
Quantum physics
Do you think, that 'accent' is real?
Why did you put "accent" in quotes?
Brainbuster Who puts accents in quotes, me? (sounds like something I'd do). It's really to QUOTE someone's words; however I use to emphasize, it would be better I use 'one' instead of "two" but when it comes to spelling, grammar, bear with me. Read but, disregard the errors. Thanks.
Nano-Augmentation: Pipedream, or Theory for The Future?
By Hugh Darrow
Excerpt from a paper in NeoNature, September 2022
We've been throwing the word "nanotechnology" around for decades yet, despite only our bests effort, we are only inching closer to that molecular-scale frontier when in fact we should be racing towards it. In the decades to come, the enhanced beings -- post humans who are our progeny -- will look at the mechanical devices we rudely bolted onto our living flesh or buried inside our grey matter, and they will mock us for our crudity. They will look upon what we have made with the same curiosity, the same disinterest, as the pilot of a veetol aircraft would look upon an ox cart.
The future of human augmentation lies in the small - in fact, the smallest. In the next thirty years, the molecular frontier will be broken and true nano-scalar programming and biological reorientation will be possible. There will be no tedious instances of severing limbs to replace them with steel proxies. We will drink in these tiny machines, inject them - and be transformed. - Deus Ex Human Revolution
Why didn't she put her empty purse away?
What bullshit, I can't believe she makes a living out of this.
homo sapiens give other lifeforms cerebral palsy.
Yeah and we need to STOP spending so much time with technology, and just because some one comes up with the word "transhuman" doesnt mean we are ,so stop trying to use psychological tricks on us about since we all have our live on phones and take them everywhere isnt a reason to merge with it , quit trying to make that sound normal... IT ISNT!! i only use my cell phone as a tv and a phone, i always leave it at home, i dont take it on long trips out of state, i dont need g.p.s., i look at a map once then i got it, doesnt anyone use their brain, it can remember stuff you know.
AWFUL QUALITY
absolute drivel... self important content-free blab
Would you buy a car from this woman?
Naturally.
这种口语就别来 TED了 ，，太可怕了。。
这种口音就别来ted了 太可怕了。。。！！！！
毕竟是意大利人来着……听久了还挺有趣的/捂脸/
I'm doing research for a book I'm writing which asks: where will the next stage in human evolution come from? Of course, there is an answer but - why is it that as soon as "post-human" is mentioned there's a big mix up with freaks on one end and computers at the other? Seems like this space, apart from all the retro-philospohical babble and utter meaninglessness, is highly undefined.
You cannot entertain the notion of being a post human in the year 2012. Or 2019. The majority of cyborgs today are individuals with BMIs or prostheses. All we can be, for the moment, are Transhumanists, patiently waiting for a new age in the anthropocene to manifest. RIP FM-33.
She is trying to appropriate words but she broadens their definitions so much that they become meaningless.
New age BS!
What an utterly pointless talk. I can't believe this was hosted by TED. Also, the audio is HORRIBLE!
Yikes. She needs to learn to modulate her voice, and maybe a little less coffee. Maybe a lot less. Not much new here, but a few bits of interest. Sloppy presentation tho.
. .
this is not an idea worth spreading
What exactly is her point? That we are all post-human? Why do I feel like she's surreptitiously trying to sell us on this idea? We don't need a faux Ted lecture to tell us that we're human.
Quantum physics