If I change my hairstyle or facial hair, it changes others' perceptions of me. There is NOTHING special about changing by eyes: it's just a degree of this exact thing.
My eyes are nothing more than one (of many) aspects of my outward appearance (Output), as well as a data gathering device (Input).
So beyond that they are nothing? Your view of the self is that we are nothing more than a passing fancy? Im just trying to get my head round what your saying.
No, it's not that there is no self. The issue is that a concept of "self" that is as volatile as the one you put forth is essentially meaningless.
If I change my hairstyle or facial hair, it changes others' perceptions of me. There is NOTHING special about changing by eyes: it's just a degree of this exact thing.
My eyes are nothing more than one (of many) aspects of my outward appearance (Output), as well as a data gathering device (Input).
Changing your eyes is going to change others' perception of you in a very different and more drastic way than your hair. Right now they make you seem disabled (which is fair, since that's the only use of our current bionic eyes), but looking forward those will change drastically.
I, for example, would look no differently at someone with bionic eyes than without. If we're at a point where they're optional, "just better" replacements, then I'd at most be interested in getting something similar.
I've met elderly people who have just as visceral reactions to earrings, tattoos, and mowhawks. Bionic eyes are no more substantial to people today than other purely cosmetic changes were to people a few generations ago.
If I change my hairstyle or facial hair, it changes others' perceptions of me. There is NOTHING special about changing by eyes: it's just a degree of this exact thing.
My eyes are nothing more than one (of many) aspects of my outward appearance (Output), as well as a data gathering device (Input).
That is a massive over generalisation that only really applies to you or a small subsect. Are you telling me that if you changed your eyes then everyone would be cool with that no one would feel that they lost something of you by not being able to look into your eyes.
It's just a matter of degree.
I, for example, would look no differently at someone with bionic eyes than without. If we're at a point where they're optional, "just better" replacements, then I'd at most be interested in getting something similar.
I've met elderly people who have just as visceral reactions to earrings, tattoos, and mowhawks. Bionic eyes are no more substantial to people today than other purely cosmetic changes were to people a few generations ago.
Really, really? You think we are at that stage yet? Yeah no one we are not. Not in the slightest. People still get get funny over your hair, tattoos, hell people give me odd looks for having a beard. Do you really think that we are ready for bionics? That there would be no prejudice for someone having bionic arms, who could do the work to 10 men. We are of course talking about the whole world not New York.
So beyond that they are nothing? Your view of the self is that we are nothing more than a passing fancy? Im just trying to get my head round what your saying.
No, it's not that there is no self. The issue is that a concept of "self" that is as volatile as the one you put forth is essentially meaningless.
So what would be a better description? And where was I too volatile? So I can know for feature arguments.
There is no such thing as Rym except as an immediate construction, collection of memory, and perception of agency.
The Ship of Theseus shows that the very concept of "self" you tried to describe above is largely irrelevant.
The eyes did nothing but perceive and express. They're IO: nothing more.
The behavior of the immediate construction and what it does with it's agency is guided by the shape of the physical brain, the "collection of memory". That physical aspect guiding all of your actions is constantly altered by it's place in the brain-collectives we call "culture" and "society". Bionic body modification is not a norm in the world of an early adopter, so it would be viewed as a social deviance by your society at large. However subtle it may be, by changing your eyes you are permanently altering your psyche.
In short, you are subject to psychosocial development. I'm in no place to say whether the development from replacing your eyes is negative or positive, but do not deny it's existence.
So the concern is one of degree. The degree of deviance in replacing your eyes changes depending on your social context. For the 25% of the world without electricity it's an extreme deviance, and would cause an extreme change in psychosocial development. It would also be very hard to swallow for the 30% without internet access. In my societal context, middle-class rural southern United States, it would be a significant deviance. As for Rym, I don't know; he could very well be right in saying that, where he exists, bionic eyes would represent an insignificant deviance. I feel that something should be said for the rest of the world.
Young, progressive, technological, high-income, low-context-culture NYC at that. Rym, your argument is valid, but only from a self-centered, ageist, ethnocentric perspective.
Rym is merely stating his own position on the matter. Of course he's going to be right about his own perspective.
Yes, others may feel differently about it, but from what I know of Rym it's likely that he cares little for the opinions of those people who would be strongly opposed to Rym having bionic eyes.
Really, really? You think we are at that stage yet? Yeah no one we are not. Not in the slightest. People still get get funny over your hair, tattoos, hell people give me odd looks for having a beard. Do you really think that we are ready for bionics? That there would be no prejudice for someone having bionic arms, who could do the work to 10 men. We are of course talking about the whole world not New York.
The thing is, those luddites will either slowly change their views, be grumpy about the future, or go live with people who share their views (see: Amish Country). And transhumans will go on modifying their bodies, no matter what the 'old fogeys' (of any age) think. Why should you be socially criticized for having a beard? Or piercings? Or bionic eyes? Fuck those people. You have the right to your aesthetic and functional choices as a sentient being. We need to ask not how we can adapt to tradition and superstition, but how we can change the minds of our fellow people and further our species.
Really, really? You think we are at that stage yet? Yeah no one we are not. Not in the slightest. People still get get funny over your hair, tattoos, hell people give me odd looks for having a beard. Do you really think that we are ready for bionics? That there would be no prejudice for someone having bionic arms, who could do the work to 10 men. We are of course talking about the whole world not New York.
The thing is, those luddites will either slowly change their views, be grumpy about the future, or go live with people who share their views (see: Amish Country). And transhumans will go on modifying their bodies, no matter what the 'old fogeys' (of any age) think. Why should you be socially criticized for having a beard? Or piercings? Or bionic eyes? Fuck those people. You have the right to your aesthetic and functional choices as a sentient being. We need to ask not how we can adapt to tradition and superstition, but how we can change the minds of our fellow people and further our species.
Thats sort of what I was getting at. I don't doubt that this stuff will become the norm and really look forward to it. But I feel that people forget that there is more to the world that a couple of capital cities where this stuff is optimal to work. It is the right train of reasoning to see how we can adapt and gently bring people around to the idea rather than thrust it upon them. There is a far more issues behind this than just the acceptance of having bionic eyes, a large amount of social change would need to happen for this to be the norm and for people to accept it.
Comments
My eyes are nothing more than one (of many) aspects of my outward appearance (Output), as well as a data gathering device (Input).
I, for example, would look no differently at someone with bionic eyes than without. If we're at a point where they're optional, "just better" replacements, then I'd at most be interested in getting something similar.
I've met elderly people who have just as visceral reactions to earrings, tattoos, and mowhawks. Bionic eyes are no more substantial to people today than other purely cosmetic changes were to people a few generations ago.
In short, you are subject to psychosocial development. I'm in no place to say whether the development from replacing your eyes is negative or positive, but do not deny it's existence.
Yes, others may feel differently about it, but from what I know of Rym it's likely that he cares little for the opinions of those people who would be strongly opposed to Rym having bionic eyes.
Stem cell research improves vision from 20/400 to 20/40.