Playing Against the Trend: Non-Villainous Anti-PSR, Reactionary etc. Characters

[mindstalk]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

I'm not sure what you mean by people who oppose the idea of 'transcending the human condition.'

In fact, I'm not really sure what 'transcending the human condition' is supposed to mean.

The natural human condition includes universal death of old age if not other causes; death by disease of a large percentage of children; pregnancy as a significant and irreversible risk of standard sex; significant risk of death in childbirth; common senses; an envelope of possible mental function which is hard to describe but familiar via experience, including a boatload of cognitive biases; an assumption that everyone is one of two sexes, though some cultures have a third intersex gender; that children have mothers, and in most cultures fathers (some cultures give more of a role to uncles); that maternity is certain but paternity isn't; children as random genetic samples of their parents; raising children is hard work; more.

Technology has changed many of these already; one could argue no one thinks of birth control, anesthetics, and low mortality rates as transcending the human condition, but they're certainly changes. THS offer cloning, designer children, children with mechanical 'mothers', non-human intelligences, naturally sexless intelligences, intelligences with wildly different senses and mental patterns, the (mostly illegal) ability to duplicate entire minds, the abolition of old age (at least for ghosts; I forget what the biological longevity limit is).

When you go from people living by their sweat of their brow, working hard to raise children who often die, before they die of old age, to quasi-immortal intelligences who can live off of solar electricity maintained by automation and who can reshape their own minds and design perfect compansion... well, the "human condition" has certainly changed a lot. Quite likely the latter might view themselves as part of "the human condition" but nonetheless they've transcended most of the concerns of the former, call it what you will.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by mindstalk

The natural human condition includes universal death of old age if not other causes; death by disease of a large percentage of children; pregnancy as a significant and irreversible risk of standard sex; significant risk of death in childbirth; common senses; an envelope of possible mental function which is hard to describe but familiar via experience, including a boatload of cognitive biases; an assumption that everyone is one of two sexes, though some cultures have a third intersex gender; that children have mothers, and in most cultures fathers (some cultures give more of a role to uncles); that maternity is certain but paternity isn't; children as random genetic samples of their parents; raising children is hard work; more.

Technology has changed many of these already; one could argue no one thinks of birth control, anesthetics, and low mortality rates as transcending the human condition, but they're certainly changes. THS offer cloning, designer children, children with mechanical 'mothers', non-human intelligences, naturally sexless intelligences, intelligences with wildly different senses and mental patterns, the (mostly illegal) ability to duplicate entire minds, the abolition of old age (at least for ghosts; I forget what the biological longevity limit is).

When you go from people living by their sweat of their brow, working hard to raise children who often die, before they die of old age, to quasi-immortal intelligences who can live off of solar electricity maintained by automation and who can reshape their own minds and design perfect compansion... well, the "human condition" has certainly changed a lot. Quite likely the latter might view themselves as part of "the human condition" but nonetheless they've transcended most of the concerns of the former, call it what you will.

But all that sci-fi stuff is imaginary, except of course that the human cloning bit is possible if you don't care a fig about ethics. You have missed the context, I'm afraid. I was discussing the real world with a real world person in the post you quoted. It was tangential to the main topic.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

But all that sci-fi stuff is imaginary, except of course that the human cloning bit is possible if you don't care a fig about ethics. You have missed the context, I'm afraid. I was discussing the real world with a real world person in the post you quoted. It was tangential to the main topic.

With modern understanding of epigenetics, cloning as originally thought is not actually possible.

The human condition is a catch all term for everything good and awful about being human. I know that I would love to have a break from many such human features.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

You mentioned a general 'abolitionist' trend to the subforum.
(You also allowed that it might not be such a clear or strong trend).

I wonder, how many people actually play THS who don't post here?

Are THS fans mostly adherents of a 'transumanist' ideology, or at least sympathetic to such a view, in real life?


Do a lot of guys simply think THS is a fun game setting, even if they don't think the setting material presents a plausible future history or a particularly desirable state of affairs?


I love Call of Cthulhu; but I am hardly burning with desire to see the return in eldritch glory of the Great Old Ones.

I like Twilight 2000, at least in concept (haven’t played it) but I certainly don’t want a nuclear war to trash Europe and the Russian sphere so that Vicky and I can wander around Central Europe looking for old tires to recycle, trying not to die from radiation or tainted rat meat, and dodging patrols of insane Russian bandits.

I even enjoyed playing Vampire the Masquerade, yet I'm not a huge fan of sympathetic vampires in literature or film. The politics were fun.

This may help you place it in context, Mindstalk.

Jeff had written a reply to the query posted above, describing why he thought that some gamers had personal reasons to find appeal in the make-believe setting of THS. He mentioned the 'human condition' and 'transcending ' it in the context of the real world, which necessitated my request for clarification of what he meant.

I wasn’t asking about imaginary technology or imaginary life/AI in in THS.
I can see how you became confused about the sub-topic. Posts are broken up by other unrelated posts, and the thread is getting long.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Owen Smith

Absolutely. I'd give a lot for just a week without constant back pain.

Pain for you; fear for me, anger, or sadness, for others. As said in other threads, once you can choose your emotions, they become something different than human.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

With modern understanding of epigenetics, cloning as originally thought is not actually possible.

The human condition is a catch all term for everything good and awful about being human. I know that I would love to have a break from many such human features.

Right, the idea that a clone will turn out to be be exactly the same is not correct.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by mindstalk

The natural human condition includes universal death of old age if not other causes; death by disease of a large percentage of children; pregnancy as a significant and irreversible risk of standard sex; significant risk of death in childbirth; common senses; an envelope of possible mental function which is hard to describe but familiar via experience, including a boatload of cognitive biases; an assumption that everyone is one of two sexes, though some cultures have a third intersex gender; that children have mothers, and in most cultures fathers (some cultures give more of a role to uncles); that maternity is certain but paternity isn't; children as random genetic samples of their parents; raising children is hard work; more.

I don't agree with all of that. That is, to be sure, the baseline human condition, as found in hunter/gatherer societies through the vast majority of the human timeline. But not all of it is true of us now. I count three items that are not true in the rich countries now.

The natural human condition, it seems to me, is the condition that results from human nature, when it has not been modified—for example, when it has not had the genome edited, or new genes spliced in. Between the limits of biotechnology and the limits of legality, human nature has not been changed. Transhuman Space envisions a near future where it has been, through the creation of upgrades and parahumans. That's a meaningful difference.

Of course, that creates a paradox: What is natural to us is whatever we can do with the inherent capabilities of our species as determined by our genome; but that includes creating technology that may let us create different sapient beings with different natures, whose condition will not be the natural human condition. But I think "human" may wear the pants there. The condition of a metanoia parahuman is a natural parahuman condition; it's just not the natural human condition. It may be natural to us to create beings with other natures, in other words; that's what THS envisions.

Bill Stoddard

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Pain for you; fear for me, anger, or sadness, for others. As said in other threads, once you can choose your emotions, they become something different than human.

Not entirely true. I just listened to a long series of Joni Mitchell tracks, partly while writing this; I found tears coming to my eyes when I listened to "Coyote" and "Judgment of the Moon and Stars." But I chose to listen to them and thus I chose my emotions, in some measure.

What we cannot do is choose our emotions and have them change by the simple act of choice. If we want them to change we have to work to change them.

Bill Stoddard

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

This may help you place it in context, Mindstalk.

Jeff had written a reply to the query posted above, describing why he thought that some gamers had personal reasons to find appeal in the make-believe setting of THS. He mentioned the 'human condition' and 'transcending ' it in the context of the real world, which necessitated my request for clarification of what he meant.

I wasn’t asking about imaginary technology or imaginary life/AI in in THS.
I can see how you became confused about the sub-topic. Posts are broken up by other unrelated posts, and the thread is getting long.

I love THS even though I find a bunch of features impossible and others merely obscenely improbable.
There aren't that many internally consistent truly alien settings out there that I've found.

I sometimes like a good old hack and slash as a way to deal with real life stress that can't just be smashed through. That's the whole reason The Hulk continues to appeal to crowds.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I love THS even though I find a bunch of features impossible and others merely obscenely improbable.
There aren't that many internally consistent truly alien settings out there that I've found.

I sometimes like a good old hack and slash as a way to deal with real life stress that can't just be smashed through. That's the whole reason The Hulk continues to appeal to crowds.

Hulk smash!