BBC Focus Magazine

[Chimera]

hi

recently, I was asked a question about how far humanity should go to improve itself? (hypothetical future situation, as technology isnt quite advanced enough yet really)

this is divided into two main categories: first, should we use mind enhancement drugs to make us quicker thinkers and cleverer?
and second, should we use drugs and implants to make us physically stronger/better/fitter?
for both of these questions, how far should we go, and why? feel free to disect the questions...

my own opinion is that using mind enhancement drugs shouldnt be allowed at all, as its like trying to get the reward without any work. Then you wont have the character to deal with the improvement properly. The whole system is then open to abuse. I think you should make the most of what youve got and improve it with hard work on your own part.
i feel about the same regarding physical implants as well: unless you are like born with no legs/require an amputation (basically have a genuine medical need) then you shouldnt be able to 'upgrade' yourself. To prevent people abusing this and cutting their limbs off/blinding themselves just to have 20/20 vision with infra-red night vision and heat scanners etc. or run at 40 mph and be able to lift 5 tons without breaking sweat 9still running at 40mph) then i think technology in this area should be limitted to making replacements as developed as a typical human.

anyway, those are my initial thoughts- how about you? do you think this should be our natural evolutionaary progression? Should we constantly be looking for the latest upgrade, like in computers? do you want the latest 100x magnification option upgrade on your eye?

[M Paul Lloyd]

Hello and welcome (back?) Chimera, an interesting subject, but one fraught with ethical issues I fear.

I too do not see the use of mind enhancing drugs as a good idea, the chances of it all backfiring are far too great.

However I have no objection to genetic manipulation although I'm not sure that greater intelligence should be seen as a priority.

Maybe if we could look to a more well rounded future human race that was stronger, longer lived, healthier, happier and smarter........... but without any nasty side effects like a need to drink human blood or such like.

[Colm]

Mind Enhancement drugs? Hah! You may think you're philosophising the solutions to all the world's problems, but actually you're just talking a load of b******

Seriously though, is there such a thing as mind-enhancing drugs? As in actual mind enhancing, not just in the "hippie" sense?

All that will end up happening is everyone taking them around exam time which will make exams pretty pointless...
Can you imagine a company requiring its employees to take these drugs to become better at their jobs?

[The Beige Avenger]

the guy that discovered LSD described it as "a vitamin for the mind". Various drugs are shown to improve the performance of people in given situations with stimulants such as caffeine, cocaine and amphetamines significantly reducing the reaction time of a person.

I'm up for some cybornetic enhancements... could do with some new knees and yeah, an eye that can see wavelengths from radio to gamma rays with the ability to select certain wavelengths (predator style) would be sweet.... it would be pretty hard to maintain eye-contact, if you get my meaning....

In a way we are already 'tampering' with ourselves. Recreational and prescription drugs altering the state of mind as well as bio-engineering creating new materials to augment or replace existing native materials present within the body.

[Liam Sheppard]

see below

[Liam Sheppard]

Gattaca type futures seem a boring place, but then I moan about fat people not exercising and that in a 'wild' natural world natural selection would have picked them off!

so I dont know, natural selection or artificial (unnatural?) selection?

we do it with race horses, improved the species by a thousand years in a hundred through selective breeding.

pigeons/carp/tulips/carrots etc etc... whats the difference between selective breeding and Genetic tampering?

[Chimera]

"Mind Enhancement drugs? Hah! You may think you're philosophising the solutions to all the world's problems, but actually you're just talking a load of b****** "

er... i assume that you were being sarcastic/joking by this, but I cant really tell, cos you could interpret that in many different ways. If you werent, then I wasnt actually even attempting to philosophise the solutions to all the worlds problems (I am against this after all) and im not talking crap either.

There are such things being developed, and I dont mean in a caffiene/LSD kind of way. Its in a new field called Synthetic Biology, and theres loads of different parts of it. For example, I have lately been working on a hypothetical idea of making anti-malarial drugs available to every African who needs it for free using Synthetic Biology. But there are also projects underway involving improving the efficiency of Biofuel extraction and it also ties in to creating mind-enhancement drugs. Im not talking about temporary drug highs, but more of a permanent thing for improving things like speed of cognitive processes and IQ.

I was hoping people would bring up the issue of overlap: where and when should we say no? i personally think taht the further away from commercial use of these enhancement drugs we draw the line
the better as then there is less of a (possibly unethical, dangerous or unfair) grey area/less risk of moving that line.

[M Paul Lloyd]

I'm sorry Chimera but, well, I thought we were actually in the process of discussing said "overlap: where and when should we say no?" but you must be patient as we all have to get in tune with your mindset before moving on.
It is, after all, a very big subject with lots of potential avenues to explore.

[worldmaker]

"If a congress of gorillas, apes and monkeys met to decide on the future evolution of the ape species, would they come up with a human being?"

If we try to decide on the future of the species, on "upgrading" mankind we will always suffer from the prevailing fashions and attitudes of society, politics, religion.

Only when we have "evolved" beyond these petty idea to stand above them and look objectively at our world, the universe and ourselves will be able to begin the process of upgrading ourselves to something greater.

Mind enhancing drugs can take a number of forms, from the surreal "trips" of the psychodelic ages through to sharpening your mental outlook and function - like being on a permanent battle-adrenalin arousal. The problems at both extremes are the amount of physical harm the rest of your body suffers unless it too is enhances to tolerate heightened mental arousal.

However, one form of drrg, "the tripper", can be just as effective in "enhancement" as the the other, "the awakener". Many of the greatest creative inspirations have been born out of stress, surreal moments of illness or madness, just as many of the greatest moments of productive efforts have been born out of a tightly focused buzz of intensity.

Mind altering drugs? Are they really needed when we have so many people in our society already "altered" by what the idiot "normals" call madness.

Maniac depression and autism are both said to have made remarkable contributions to the evolution of the human race, by kicking the normals in the pants, or pushing them out of the way of the "progress" of the mad.

I don't think any committee of normal people ever invented the wheel, mastered fire, dream of starships or more.

Meanwhile the normals are repressing progress to force the universe of man to conform to their dull dreams.

Time to wake up.



Now, as for physical implants. I read a brief article on the Mirror this morning, about the differences between modern athletes and ancient men. Being accustomed to a more rugged and demanding world out ancient ancestors were faster, fitter, stronger than the pathetic weaklings we've become.

So you don't need enhancements, just a change in social attitudes in favour of a leaner, fitter and friskier lifestyle- fewer couch potatoes and more hunters.

Of course that will threaten the status quo for the normals in our society, as a brighter, healthier society will be more mentally aware and stronger - to enquire into and challenge the established global world order of the normals.

Bread & Circuses were used by the Roman emperors to turn the mob into pacified sleepwalkers. I don't think our modern emperors will take kindly to any plans to wake Man up to something likely to threaten their power.

[Shadowwolf]

Are they really needed when we have so many people in our society already "altered" by what the idiot "normals" call madness.

Maniac depression and autism are both said to have made remarkable contributions to the evolution of the human race, by kicking the normals in the pants, or pushing them out of the way of the "progress" of the mad.

I don't think any committee of normal people ever invented the wheel, mastered fire, dream of starships or more.

Meanwhile the normals are repressing progress to force the universe of man to conform to their dull dreams.

Scuse me?

I mean first of all just what is a 'normal'? You give the impression that it is some shadowy cabal intent on beating humanity down; which is a tad reaching lest one has any actual evidence for such an organised repression.

There is no repression of progress, no calculated planet-wide limiting of anyone, no desire by whatever a 'normal' is to maintain their 'dull' dreams. Fact is you do not know who invented the wheel or mastered fire, you don't know what their dreams were or what drove them; they might just have wanted to be warm when cold and noted how warm the wildfires were, hardly lofty dreams and hardly opposed by some group of 'normals' that wished to remain cold. You may fancy that only some creative genius could only have come up with it but that's a long way from fact. Now there are unfortunate people who at some stage or maybe for all their lives cannot look after themselves, may even harm themselves or harm others and do live in quite delusional realms completely divorced from reality. They are not all paragons of incredible creative genius and their care — which may also include protecting the wider populace from them — is not a work of calculated repression by the 'normals'.

Btw I believe what is meant by mind altering drugs are those that would increase cognitive ability like raising IQ and perhaps increasing speed; not trip inducing pharmaceuticals.

Now, as for physical implants. I read a brief article on the Mirror this morning, about the differences between modern athletes and ancient men. Being accustomed to a more rugged and demanding world out ancient ancestors were faster, fitter, stronger than the pathetic weaklings we've become.

Speak for oneself as I don't consider meself a pathetic weakling. The obvious reason that they were stronger and fitter is that the times and conditions of their environment demanded it. For instance those that were not fit enough simply died due to the lack of modern health-care or lack of societal concern such as Sparta; weak and infirm were tossed into the cold to die. Plus where does the comparison stop, cave men would have been hardier than those of ancient Rome say; so does it really matter who was the hardier? The environment changes and so we adapt to where we find ourselves and currently this means that we are not as hardy and fit as we were; we do however manage with certain crises better, we live longer, infant mortality is much, much better and we are not as prone to dieing from something as piffling as a cut. That's not a handicap.

So you don't need enhancements, just a change in social attitudes in favour of a leaner, fitter and friskier lifestyle- fewer couch potatoes and more hunters.

One cannot uninvent all the technology that has brought us to this point to force the entire planetary population to adopt what some people declare to be the ideal state. Some live that fitter, healthier lifestyle and some don't, that's their choice; we have enough social attitudes marginalising people because they do not fit some pre-determined level of acceptability without adding more.

Of course that will threaten the status quo for the normals in our society, as a brighter, healthier society will be more mentally aware and stronger - to enquire into and challenge the established global world order of the normals.

Bread & Circuses were used by the Roman emperors to turn the mob into pacified sleepwalkers. I don't think our modern emperors will take kindly to any plans to wake Man up to something likely to threaten their power.

Threaten the status quo, challenge the 'normals'?

Well seen as that cabal of 'normals' does not actually exist I think we have little to fear and no global world order to be overthrown or even challenged.

As for the Romans, bread was used to feed the poor, what was the alternative, to let them die in the street? It also served to essentially buy the loyalty of those fed, this is power politics not some subterfuge to stunt the dreams of the masses. As for the games, yes they were used as a distraction, to keep the populace entertained and diverted so that certain folks could more easily maintain their power; nothing to do with repressing the creative spirit of the population I'm afraid.

[Colm]

Wierd I thought I had already replied to this!

"Mind Enhancement drugs? Hah! You may think you're philosophising the solutions to all the world's problems, but actually you're just talking a load of b****** "

er... i assume that you were being sarcastic/joking by this, but I cant really tell, cos you could interpret that in many different ways.

Yeah I was joking, about the habit of psychoactive drug-takers saying their drugs are "mind-enhancing", and then while high thinking they are saying the most profound things but actually just talking rubbish!

But let's for a moment assume that we had a real mind-enhancement treatment, that makes you learn better and quicker thinking, and more able to think "outside the box". Also assume that it's guaranteed risk free. This would create a huge division in society though, even greater than the one between rich and poor. Now you would have the division between smart and normal.

There would be people who wouldn't take them either because they are not available in their country/area or because they can't afford them or because they have some kind of old-fashioned beliefs... or because their parents have some kind of old-fashioned beliefs! You could say people like this choose their own fate but it's still bad for society to have such a division.

If cheap and available, it would become a requirement to compete in the modern world, whether that be by exams / college application / job application. It would be sort of like if they allowed performance enhancing drugs in the olympics - everyone would have to take them.

Now I hate the idea of letting drawbacks like the above getting in the way of true progress, something that can make things better being halted because we're worried about the people who won't use it. The "just because everyone can't have it, that means no one can have it" is a bit of a poor argument.

But this is a major problem IMHO.

[Shadowwolf]

Now I hate the idea of letting drawbacks like the above getting in the way of true progress, something that can make things better being halted because we're worried about the people who won't use it. The "just because everyone can't have it, that means no one can have it" is a bit of a poor argument.

It is certainly a poor reason against progress but one that must be kept mindful lest yet more lines of division are to be created; largely those lines along the haves and have nots through wealth. They could easily lead to the additional division of the stupid poor and the well off intelligentsia.

[worldmaker]

Threaten the status quo, challenge the 'normals'?

Well seen as that cabal of 'normals' does not actually exist I think we have little to fear and no global world order to be overthrown or even challenged.

You are indeed quite correct, there is no cabal of normals and to use the word cabal implies that the original writer, me, is some kind of conspiracy nut, which would be a false assumption.

The normal people frown upon anyone who is different, anyone too alien, too non-conformist, and by their slow glacial resistance tend to wear all but the most resilient innovator from pushing mankind forward.

How many great artists or scientists gave up, or were crushed by "normal/conventional society"? Care to name a few? Begin with Alan Turing.

They are the silent majority, the mob, the people who like a nice quite life, at the back of the cave.

This is not meant as an insult to anyone wanting a quite life, life can be too testing and troublesome for most, but society should not necessarily be defined by the mass at the centre, but its boundaries.

Which leads me to another point, the nature of "boundaries" in our mental outlook on the universe, rules, laws, whether of man or physics, tend to restrain our thinking, inhibiting us by the "correct behaviour" from looking outside their comfort zone.

Rules give us structure, but can inhibit our outlook if taken too far, with too many rules or too strict an adherence to them. Yesterday I have a conversation with the local government development agency, and discussed this sense of conventional thinking, or living by the accepted methods of business and the rules, and how it inhibits business innovation when the majority in an industry conform to the "norm". Fortunately we have a "free" economy that liberates evolutionary creativity if you can gain the strength to become a new force of evolution - to break the rules.

Deliberate evolution, man made and intentional, is about pushing those rules. The question is whether we'll learn to moderate ourselves sufficiently to evolve without destroying ourselves in the process. This is something we will have to learn now, as civilization begins at last to gain conscious, deliberate control of our immediate, then greater universe, through science to modify the world or ourselves.

A theme I tentatively explored in my story Dragon's Vale.

[Shadowwolf]

You are indeed quite correct, there is no cabal of normals and to use the word cabal implies that the original writer, me, is some kind of conspiracy nut, which would be a false assumption.

That is most good, I was a little thrown by the content of that other post that seemed to be implying a deliberate, organised action of widespread suppression.

The normal people frown upon anyone who is different, anyone too alien, too non-conformist, and by their slow glacial resistance tend to wear all but the most resilient innovator from pushing mankind forward.

How many great artists or scientists gave up, or were crushed by "normal/conventional society"? Care to name a few? Begin with Alan Turing.

I disagree, yes many frown upon difference of many kinds, nationality, colour, creed etc but this is not some nigh on insurmountable wall against innovation. Some may encounter more obstacles than others but by and large innovation happens and not at the hands of spectacularly resilient people; nor is every non-conformist or alleged innovator bringing us something useful, there are many just plain wrong ideas and they encounter proper skepticism, not repressive suppression to maintain some status quo. Part of science is the subjecting of claims to rigorous cross examination, if it falls then it is discarded.

I don't know how many, no one could and such speculation would be largely of no use, what with lacking any way to know or quantify. What happened to Turing was a travesty and insult to his contributions in breaking Enigma, however it did happen after his contribution and I am not aware if he was working on anything at the time. Nor was he really crushed by conventional society, he was found in breach of the current laws governing that society and broke under the strain that exacted on him.

They are the silent majority, the mob, the people who like a nice quite life, at the back of the cave.

I think you have this mistaken, these majority are the people who must do all the ordinary tasks that need to be done so that there may be a society. This is not a mob but a necessity or there will be no place for innovation nor reason for it to take place.

...but society should not necessarily be defined by the mass at the centre, but its boundaries.

Various elements that effect society at large will always be defined by that which comforts the most, it should never be in the hands of the few which in addition to your progressive innovators, also includes the foaming at the mouth religious fundamentalists.

I guess what I am saying is that I don't see the stifling you believe is there, I don't think you have shown anything that would suggest such; I may be worng but I just don't see it yet.

[Reginald Dalton]

Hi everyone

I personally am not a big fan of artificial upgrading, this whole need of humans to tinker with what nature has given us seems to me to only be causing problems... If we keep going like this we'll be left with an empty planet with only genetically modified beings on it that we decided were satisfactory, and what do we do then when we find out we've forgotten something that keeps the whole ecosystem going...

Reg

[Shadowwolf]

Welcome aboard Mr Dalton

Indeed there would undoubtedly be problems with tinkering with ourselves but I don't think this would endanger the eco-system unless we mess with that also.

[M Paul Lloyd]

Hello and welcome Reginald, I am inclined to agree, at least for those who chose to stay on the home-world but for those who choose to take off into the vastness of space it may well become essential.

[Thinker]

If I could take a drug that could make me think and learn more efficiently, with no short or long-term side effects and to no danger to my health, I would take it. Does such a drug exist? Of course not. No one can be absolutely certain that such and such drug has no side effects because everyone is different.

All augamentations of any kind must be scrutinised to a certain extent, but not to the point where we will never be able test new and exciting technology. If someone wants to take that risk and have electrodes attached to their brain, then let them. Just make sure you keep them in a padded room.

[Shadowwolf]

I wonder though, if everyone had access and took some learning and / or IQ boosting pharmaceutical, would anything really change? What I mean is that there still would be those who have little interest in learning anything beyond the basic requirements.

[Thinker]

I think it would definately only appeal to people with an active interest in learning about the world around them. What would be the use of taking it if you didn't? You don't drink alcohol unless you have a keen interest in feeling slightly pissed do you?

For the 'norms' or 'easy lifers' or whatever word you choose to use, I assume they would become experts in whatever their hobbies are. So if they like their 'Hello' Magazines they would know the ins and outs of Jordan's knicker drawer. OR if they were couch potatoes in front of the TV, then they would know every reality tv listing. But on the other hand, if they are documentary lovers, then they would be leaving with a wealth of knowledge.