Book review: 'More Than Human'
| The Erowid Review - a book review blog focused on psychoactive-focused tomes and related works - just published a review I originally wrote for The Entheogen Review in 2005. It's for a very interesting transhumanist work by Ramez Naam, entitled More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement, a book which offers quite an enlightening take on how our future might evolve:
Psychonauts throughout the years have often used the phrase “consciousness expanding” to describe the effects of psychedelic substances. It seems implicit to some people that the alchemical mystery which unfolds when a person’s nervous system encounters drugs like LSD and DMT is a dissolution of the typical constraints of human awareness; we temporarily enhance our understanding, our empathy, even, potentially, our capacity for serenity and peace. Arguments can be made that the psychedelic experience is not inherently expanding or enhancing anything, let alone consciousness, but that’s not really the point; on a person by person basis, the experience is so subjective and ephemeral that who can truly arbitrate the question?
Well, as it turns out, science is rapidly catching up to that question; with every passing year, we learn more and more about the inner workings of the brain. The quest begins with the desire to heal, but then quickly moves past healing the sick to enhancing the healthy. What would you do, then, in a future world where a single pill might produce beneficial effects to your mood – your consciousness – for months at a time, by altering an aspect of your genetic make-up? How would you react if you learned that technology existed to reliably trigger psychedelic experiences simply by delivering a precisely targeted electrical impulse to your brain – and what would you do if you knew that experience could be recorded and transmitted via the Internet to a pal in Kuala Lumpur who intended to play it back and experience it, just as you experienced it? How much more expanded would your consciousness be in a world like that?
In his remarkably entertaining new popular science book, More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement, software engineer Ramez Naam walks us through a giddying array of possible futures, all of which have very real and very clear roots in the science of the present day. In chapters such as “Choosing Our Bodies,” “Choosing Our Minds,” and “A Child of Choice,” Naam offers case study after case study demonstrating how techniques originally intended to heal will eventually be used to enhance the human experience.
For instance, in the quest to slow the onset of Alzheimer’s, researchers have learned that implanting modified neurons into the brain of a 60-year-old woman successfully stimulated overall neuron growth. There is a continuum here all the way to faster learning and augmented memory in the healthy. Naam points out that “smart drugs” – and he means reliably, measurably effective “smart drugs” like Ritalin and Adderall – are already incredibly common in our society; he quotes psychologist Ken Livingston, who says, “Even if you have never been diagnosed as having a problem paying attention, many of these drugs will improve your focus and performance.” What if we could engineer the same “performance enhancing” experiences without any of the nasty side effects, by using gene therapy to mimic the useful actions of these drugs in our brains? As we continue learning about the genes involved in personality, Naam notes, “This accumulated knowledge base could be used to create new drugs that sculpt or alter any aspect of human behavior: infatuation, pair bonding, empathy, appetite, spirituality, thrill seeking, arousal, even sexual orientation.” Try that on for consciousness expanding.
» More ways to bookmark this page
|
Recently @ DoseNation
|
|
Who would get access to "enhancement" drugs and technologies? Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure not all people. Thus the humanity would be split even more - not only in rich countries versus the "Third World", but even in superhumans versus humans?
Once I argued that in case of severe genetic diseases - ones that lead a child to be born almost healthy and then through some 10 or 20 years watch itself slipping into death - it would be the best solution to genetically examine all girls and women from families with such diseases and if they are carriers of the gene, advise them not to have their biological children - just for the sake of these children (I support adoption much more than in vitro technologies because it reduces the number of unwanted people. And parenthood is about responsibility, not "blood"). But at the same time I'm even afraid of a world where every illness, every imperfection would be eliminated. Wouldn't it be a world of cyborgs? Wouldn't all discontent and the essentailly human need to move forward be eliminated by eliminating discomforts which have been a part of human life for millenia? And - as probably not everyone would want to use the new technologies - how would the "New People" (when I use this phrase, I also implicitly think about totalitarianism) understand the ones who are still "imperfect"?
Wouldn't governments feel tempted to elliminate all "wrong" thinking, having such devices in their hands? If they already have the audacity to force "hyperactive" children to have their cognition modified by Ritalin, if they don't shiver at the thought of dominating other countries by forcing drug prohibition on them?
In the particular case of psychedelics - wouldn't the experience lose much of its SUBVERSIVENESS if it were foreseeable and reproducible? Would it still be a perfectly individual journey into the unknown (into this forbidden world we have inside - isn't "know thyself" what is truly forbidden, and the prohibition of psychedelics just a means to achieve this end?), but rather a - maybe even tolerated - amusement?
Therefore I hope "human enhancement" technologies will be developed only to a limited extent. Even though I suffer from quite an unpleasant disease - very strong allergy - I'm not looking forward to a world without diseases; would I ever become a philosopher if I were "perfect"? At the same time I stress that I'm not really angry with such publications. More dicourse, more brainstorming is what we need. :) That's why I "publish" my own criticism.
The comments posted here do not reflect the views of the owners of this site.