is 'technology' evidence of humans currently evolving into whatever comes next?

[stroodle]

is what we perceive as 'technology' (a creation of humans) really just physical evidence of our species evolving into its next form??

in the short term, technology to us, is a creation by us.....but in the long term, maybe technology is an evolutionary step in the graaaaand scheme of things

do you follow?

if our end result is something so advanced, such as floating consciousnesses in the universe....then isn't technology just part of our evolution

i don't think i am explaining this as well as i'd like to, but maybe some of you can elaborate

[Sam988]

Ah! One of my favorite subjects, thanks for bringing it up.


I think with technology we will first create SAI (strong artificial intelligence) and after that we will have a VERY VERY fast technology development.


Our next evolutionary steps is to merge with machines, and after that, the most likely is that we will be able to merge with the air or whatever, we will become beings of pure energy, we will be able to take in whatever shape we want.


Here's something about this

ImmInst.org -> Singularity FAQ for Dummies

[Kiba]

I believe we will merge into machines first. The technology is there already for disabled people, we just need technologies that actually out compete our normal body so there would be compelling reasons to upgrade.

Then strong A.I. will come latter. That's going to open up a whole can of worms.

We still havn't answer the question of when do we know that an AI is really conscious?

An A.I. could just say that.

[ethereal]

I don't think machines will ever match the complexity of consciousness. It can only mimic the linear, logical part of intelligence, but it can't match the nonlinear aspects of awareness and consciousness. Can a machine ever experience life, beauty, love? It is of a different order, different paradigm, different class. Only life has the capability to beget life, as it is of Divine origin. Machines are undoubtedly useful, but IMO it is limited by its own essence and nature.

Regarding the next evolutionary step of mankind...it's already happening right now, in the invisible field of consciousness itself. The emergence of the spiritual awareness, of Christ Consciousness dominating mankind, of the Self-aware man (as opposed to self-aware ego). The new upsurge of interest in spirituality and consciousness is the beginning signs of this transition. We're the leading edge of this transition, being at the forefront and setting examples for those who follow us. Isn't it exciting? I'm excited for sure Can't wait to see what future awaits us

[Kiba]

Originally Posted by ethereal

I don't think machines will ever match the complexity of consciousness. It can only mimic the linear, logical part of intelligence, but it can't match the nonlinear aspects of awareness and consciousness. Can a machine ever experience life, beauty, love? It is of a different order, different paradigm, different class. Only life has the capability to beget life, as it is of Divine origin. Machines are undoubtedly useful, but IMO it is limited by its own essence and nature.

All you need is to do reverse engineer the human brain, then you can have self-aware machines. You'll have machines that can experience emotion, beauty, and love.

After all, the human brain is where all the consciousness happen, right?

Unless you dispute that the human brain is where conscious, awareness, memories, thinking are stored, it can happen.

For some reason, we're really complex to study. There have been medical advancement in technologies and the science but there are a large portion that is still a mystery to us.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by stroodle

in the short term, technology to us, is a creation by us.....but in the long term, maybe technology is an evolutionary step in the graaaaand scheme of things

if our end result is something so advanced, such as floating consciousnesses in the universe....then isn't technology just part of our evolution

A very basic summary of the theory of natural evolution is that it comprises of two processes, random mutation and natural selection. Random mutation is the unpredictable variation of genetic code over time. Natural selection is competition amongst individuals resulting in demonstration of superior attributes arising from random mutations. (there are other processes which are important, but these two are most easily understood)

Thus modification via technology would require a redefinition of evolution since any changes become intended, not natural or random.

So no, technology is not the next natural evolutionary step, but I do think it's a valid step, and would be a necessary one if we were faced with competition which could successfully challenge us (which would not include any life on Earth that we're aware of)

Originally Posted by Sam988

Our next evolutionary steps is to merge with machines, and after that, the most likely is that we will be able to merge with the air or whatever, we will become beings of pure energy, we will be able to take in whatever shape we want.

Have you read Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn series? If not I suspect you'll like it.

Originally Posted by Kiba

We still havn't answer the question of when do we know that an AI is really conscious?

We'd first have to agree on a definition of consciousness, and as many posts on these forums show, we can't agree on the nature of consciousness, nor a definition.

Mind you, if some of us agree on the nature and on a definition, and produce a machine which demonstrates consciousness as much as any human does, then we might settle that discussion.

Originally Posted by ethereal

I don't think machines will ever match the complexity of consciousness. It can only mimic the linear, logical part of intelligence, but it can't match the nonlinear aspects of awareness and consciousness. Can a machine ever experience life, beauty, love? It is of a different order, different paradigm, different class. Only life has the capability to beget life, as it is of Divine origin. Machines are undoubtedly useful, but IMO it is limited by its own essence and nature.

I'm sure people once said machines couldn't count. Or calculate. Quantum computing is pushing the limits of what computers can do, and how they do it. Who knows what the next step will be?

Originally Posted by Kiba

All you need is to do reverse engineer the human brain, then you can have self-aware machines. You'll have machines that can experience emotion, beauty, and love.

There could be more to it than that. There is a lot of evidence that the experience of emotion is reliant on feedback between the brain and the body. If it's true, reverse engineering the brain wouldn't be enough, we'd also have to engineer feedback loops which mimic body and brain interactions.

Originally Posted by Kiba

After all, the human brain is where all the consciousness happen, right?

I think so.

Originally Posted by Kiba

For some reason, we're really complex to study. There have been medical advancement in technologies and the science but there are a large portion that is still a mystery to us.

The reason we seem so complex (in terms of understanding our brain) is because the sheer scale of connectivity within the brain defies intuitive grasp.

In the neocortex alone there are approximately 20 billion neurons, with an average of 7,000 synaptic connections each. Then there are the glial cells, which outnumber neurons by up to 10 to 1. It used to be thought that neurons communicate solely through synaptic connections, but recently gap junctions have been discovered, which can occur at any point along the axon or even the cell body of a neuron. Another recent discovery is the transmission of neurotransmitters without a synaptic connection. And those glial cells? (which most people haven't even heard of) Well, they may also significantly contribute to information processing. And I haven't even mentioned brain waves and the effect they have on the cohesiveness of brain activity.

So there's not only a huge number of cells communicating with each other, but a considerable variety of ways in which they can communicate. It's something that's extremely difficult to truly wrap your head around (pun intended).

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

A very basic summary of the theory of natural evolution is that it comprises of two processes, random mutation and natural selection. Random mutation is the unpredictable variation of genetic code over time. Natural selection is competition amongst individuals resulting in demonstration of superior attributes arising from random mutations. (there are other processes which are important, but these two are most easily understood)

Thus modification via technology would require a redefinition of evolution since any changes become intended, not natural or random.

So no, technology is not the next natural evolutionary step, but I do think it's a valid step, and would be a necessary one if we were faced with competition which could successfully challenge us (which would not include any life on Earth that we're aware of)

Have you read Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn series? If not I suspect you'll like it.

We'd first have to agree on a definition of consciousness, and as many posts on these forums show, we can't agree on the nature of consciousness, nor a definition.

Mind you, if some of us agree on the nature and on a definition, and produce a machine which demonstrates consciousness as much as any human does, then we might settle that discussion.

I'm sure people once said machines couldn't count. Or calculate. Quantum computing is pushing the limits of what computers can do, and how they do it. Who knows what the next step will be?

There could be more to it than that. There is a lot of evidence that the experience of emotion is reliant on feedback between the brain and the body. If it's true, reverse engineering the brain wouldn't be enough, we'd also have to engineer feedback loops which mimic body and brain interactions.

I think so.

The reason we seem so complex (in terms of understanding our brain) is because the sheer scale of connectivity within the brain defies intuitive grasp.

In the neocortex alone there are approximately 20 billion neurons, with an average of 7,000 synaptic connections each. Then there are the glial cells, which outnumber neurons by up to 10 to 1. It used to be thought that neurons communicate solely through synaptic connections, but recently gap junctions have been discovered, which can occur at any point along the axon or even the cell body of a neuron. Another recent discovery is the transmission of neurotransmitters without a synaptic connection. And those glial cells? (which most people haven't even heard of) Well, they may also significantly contribute to information processing. And I haven't even mentioned brain waves and the effect they have on the cohesiveness of brain activity.

So there's not only a huge number of cells communicating with each other, but a considerable variety of ways in which they can communicate. It's something that's extremely difficult to truly wrap your head around (pun intended).

Yeh, amasing, and in the scheme of things, thats not even a speck, on a speck, on a speck and so on, of dust!