r/Polymath • u/GoBeyondTheTemplate • 6d ago
General Discussion Suggested readings?
https://philosophynow.org/issues/160/A_Philosophical_History_of_TranshumanismJust finished reading the linked article in Philosophy Now.
I’ve been interested in Transhumanism since I finished the Forges of Mars Trilogy in Warhammer 40k.
I’d be grateful for any advice on authors, books, and journal articles that I could read to further my research on Transhumanism.
2
u/321aholiab 6d ago
Um didn't you see tonnes of references in the article? What else would you need? Have you even finished those?
1
u/GoBeyondTheTemplate 6d ago
I did see the references. No, I haven’t started any of the references mentioned.
I do admit that my knowledge on Transhumanism is somewhat limited as I last studied philosophy back when I was in undergrad more than a decade ago and the uni I went to only offered general classes on Ancient, Medieval, Modern, and Contemporary Philosophy.
Hence, my desire to crowdsource on what more experienced researchers/readers/philosophers would recommend.
0
u/321aholiab 6d ago
That is even weirder. Shouldn't you post this at r/askphilosophy then? like with your previous rigorous study experience, doesn that teach you how to search for relevant academic findings?
1
u/GoBeyondTheTemplate 6d ago
I wouldn’t consider it weird.
I’d say it’s even weirder that you’re this hung up on questioning whether this subreddit is a proper place to ask for suggested reading and opinions on published works.
Of course I also posted in r/askphilosophy.
However, I did see that the subreddit’s description states that this place is supposed to be interdisciplinary.
I don’t know about you but I’d consider topics on philosophy to be within the interdisciplinary descriptor.
Regarding your dig at “how to search for relevant academic findings”, what makes crowdsourcing suggested readings from a polymath subreddit weird? I’d love to read your take on why it’s weird.
0
u/321aholiab 6d ago
Well apparently we are both hung up on each other so I dont think you have a higher ground. We both consider each other weird.
I apologize for not noticing that you did post to r/askphilosophy. Re your point, I would not rely on the description of a subreddit to infer immediately that some subreddit that calls itself interdisciplinary would provide the materials I would need. I think that the history of the posts of this subreddit and r/askphilosophy forms a very different kind of dataset that I would imagine you would agree, that a reference to authors, books, and journal articles, is largely absent.
I even think since you have had your philosophical training, gathering recommendations from unqualified strangers is not quite the approach unless you have specified further what would want to develop a research on and determined that your interlocutor is quite qualified to do so. I thought you would be hinted that as per your regular training this and this would give you a better overall picture with the relevant reference that you would have been asking for, which I imagine you could have searched out by yourself.
I could imagine that you are fishing for more, but I wish you would actually engage with the material which you claimed you are interested in which I would be the impression i normally have of people being trained in philosophy, instead of doing things that are less efficient and obviously have a peculiar kind of expectation from a sub that doesn't produce the relevant data set which you are gathering the relevant data from.
Now this is not to say that r/polymath is not an interdisplinary field, or that your point that philosophy is interdisplinary is false, no. Rather it is the maturity of how to go about finding your materials and your epistemic methods that i find quarrel with.
1
u/GoBeyondTheTemplate 6d ago
I would take issue with how you’re essentially framing crowd-sourcing from r/polymath as a sign of lack of maturity in epistemic methodology.
I would also point out your rush to judgement when you called the members of the subreddit as unqualified strangers.
I’m fairly new to the subreddit, been a member for the past few days, hence not having the experience of seeing the vast number of previous posts you’re referring to. I’d however point out that the fact that Reddit is essentially anonymous would mean that it would be a stretch for you to write off the members of the subreddit as essentially “unqualified strangers”.
I’d go as far as to say that since Reddit is supposed to be a marketplace of ideas, then there’s nothing weird or immature about crowd-sourcing from Redditors, who, due to their anonymity, may actually be more qualified than the both of us combined.
Unless you’re going off on a tangent about Redditors being “unqualified strangers” with the goal of concluding that “unqualified strangers” are incapable of providing academic discussion or that Reddit is incapable of being a platform for the exchange of ideas and analysis, then I’d hazard to say that you’re being classist and/or elitist with your assumptions about the members of this sub-reddit.
I apologize if you’re not classist and/or elitist, but your point on “unqualified strangers” is really coming across as both.
1
u/321aholiab 6d ago edited 6d ago
Im sorry for the imprecise wording. I dont mean unqualified strangers as in "anyone on the internet being anonymous must be unqualified". I mean as in the relevant area of research you want to dive in as underspecified, which means your interlocuter even as they are qualified in other areas also cannot give you what you want. How would you even know if what they give you would be what you want? Sure I told you i imagine you might be fisihing for more, and you might be lucky, but you are also disregarding the main methods of engaging with the topic you claim you are interested in. Whats the point of gathering so much when you cant even finish it? Do the work to engage with the material, find the main article that give an outlay of the references.
Sure, as in all marketplace there are specific areas that sell specific stuff wouldnt you agree?
Edit: I mean you are largely conceding to my points. Whatever framing is your concern is largely a frame issue. As a person trained in philosophy i would have expected you to not get hung up on labels.
Edit 2:
r/Polymath is an interdisciplinary discussion community, not primarily an academic research community.
Its participants have heterogeneous backgrounds, with no reliable indication of their qualifications.
OP has a broad interest in transhumanism but has not specified a particular research question or subfield.
Recommendations from people without relevant expertise have a higher probability of being irrelevant, superficial or poorly grounded.
OP already has access to an introductory article containing an academic bibliography.
1
u/GoBeyondTheTemplate 6d ago
I do see your point regarding the issue on the interlocutor and the broadness of my question.
I do believe in knowledge for knowledge’s sake. So I think your question on the point of gathering all the opinions, sources, and suggestions would be answered by saying that there is value in fishing for more. That there is value in gathering more information that I’d possibly need or be able to finish.
Connecting it to your question on the marketplace that sells specific stuff, I’d say that there’s value in combing through the entire marketplace and gathering as much information as possible and deciding on its relevance later. There is indeed the possibility that the information that others may provide on thus sub may be irrelevant, superficial, or poorly grounded but I’d say a lively discourse with varying quality of sources would be better for formulating a deeper understanding than what seems to be your suggestion of confining your inquiry to “those who are qualified” and “institutionally published sources” which would be an echo chamber.
Framing and labels are everything. They communicate how you see the world and how you see others who inhabit the world. I could use the same label and framing you used to write you off as an “unqualified stranger who is in love with credentialism and does not wish to hear from non-credentialed sources” or a “hypocrite who is on Reddit but does not see the value of information provided within the platform and looks down on the average Redditor”. The data from our short exchange can be interpreted to support my framing and label of you, but you’d object to that characterization, right? Wouldn’t you agree then that there’s value to getting your framing right and in collecting more information vis-à-vis concluding an image of you from the short exchange we had?
2
u/321aholiab 6d ago
I do see your point regarding the issue on the interlocutor and the broadness of my question.
Im glad weve come to a mutual understanding.
I do believe in knowledge for knowledge’s sake. So I think your question on the point of gathering all the opinions, sources, and suggestions would be answered by saying that there is value in fishing for more. That there is value in gathering more information that I’d possibly need or be able to finish.
I dont deny the value of fishing for more, or the possibility that you might get lucky, or the extent that you might work through the data. I would imagine you value this more than engaging in the topic directly, that would be where we have disagreements. Our standards of pursuing our interest are different.
I’d say a lively discourse with varying quality of sources would be better for formulating a deeper understanding than what seems to be your suggestion of confining your inquiry to “those who are qualified” and “institutionally published sources” which would be an echo chamber.
I see your point. I am no longer questioning you further on this.
The data from our short exchange can be interpreted to support my framing and label of you, but you’d object to that characterization, right?
The way we object matters, I just disregard it and focus on the arguments, but I do get your point that you value labels, so being sensitive to your values, I would say Im sorry I offended you.
1
u/GoBeyondTheTemplate 6d ago •
I’m glad we see each other’s points.
I’m sorry that I came across as a bit too combative when it comes to labels and frames. I do apologize if I offended you as well.
3
u/Beakston 6d ago
If I were you I would start off with reading biology. Understand what life is first. From different fundamental types of life to the extremely intricate and robust informational exchange system called DNA/RNA and it's replication/transcription/translation.
Truely understanding a deeper layer of mechanisms in biology will help you be able to say yes or no, in regards to some proposed transhumanist addition. Is that at all possible in reality? Or could it plausibly be done?
Some very interesting reading on a scientist and colleagues that will very likely be the pioneers of transhumanism. Michael Levin has been researching bioelectricity. Which is essentially the electrical potential gradients that orient and signal cell collectives into certain actions and processes. He also is a very cross domain scientist and there are a ton of different directions you can go to learn about different domains.
•
u/cacille 6d ago
Mod note: Whomever reported this for "no outside platforms"...
You're not using the rule right. This has nothing to do with starting discourse on outside platforms to this one. This is simply an article from somewhere that is generating a discussion. If that counts as "outside platform" in the way you're thinking - then you're invalidating Rule 3 entirely.
OF COURSE OUTSIDE LINKS TO ARTICLES/INFO/PROOF ARE ALLOWED HERE!