|
|
Post by todd on Apr 12, 2023 12:45:07 GMT
I wonder, for that matter, whether Kat will soon forget about the Loup, Court, and Omega problems that were the whole point of this venture, amid her excitement of exploring her new abilities (much like how her robot project soon came to be for its own sake rather than providing a new body for Robot).
|
|
|
|
Post by fia on Apr 12, 2023 13:45:21 GMT
Forum Q: Did Kat become non-human when she pressed the button that led to needing the reboot? Like, is she non-human now? As a philosopher, my personal answer is YES. Because on top of an extended mind, which she had already begun to have before, she is fully beyond ordinary human capabilities now, and able to see and hear and "move" beyond her own body. But I guess some subset of her present being still involves a human body, so I'm open to contrary opinions. I...I get where you're from here, bud, but I think you should know that as a disabled person, any argument that says a character is officially "non-human" due to having physical and/or mental powers "beyond ordinary human capabilities" makes me WILDLY uncomfortable, because it kinda unconsciously implies that if some has a body and/or mind BELOW "ordinary human capabilities", then they are officially less than human, and that kind of logic has, uh...not exactly been used for anything good, historically. Just saying. Oh gosh I can see how it would be read that way but I didn't mean that implication! I actually teach disability theory (just did a bit of it two weeks ago even) and I don't want to imply persons or humans are identical with a certain set of necessary and sufficient abilities. Being in a human body is enough for being human, no matter the range of ability. (And it goes without saying that being human is enough for being a person; there are also persons that are non-human.) But there's also the important point that it does not follow that just because you're ontologically different that you would automatically have a different moral status. I have many angry things to say about, for example, Peter Singer. I am an ethical vegetarian but I categorically reject consequentalist ethics. I meant as in the question of, if you can basically run around in the digital cloud even when your body is "offline," you are at least one full human, but –– speaking of her realization base, the matter or substance, she has more than one human body. Most of us do not, even when we use tools or have extended bodies, for the most part (open to correction here but I'm pretty sure The Singularity hasn't happened yet) we don't have our consciousness realized outside of our human one. Metaphysically I'm suggesting Kat is a new kind of being. Like... a deity is one possibility, I guess. A demi-god. Or she's possibly a Techno-Human, a new type of being (or a new type of human?) that can extend their consciousness into another physical part of the universe outside if their human body. |
|
|
|
Post by ctso74 on Apr 12, 2023 14:18:25 GMT
I...I get where you're from here, bud, but I think you should know that as a disabled person, any argument that says a character is officially "non-human" due to having physical and/or mental powers "beyond ordinary human capabilities" makes me WILDLY uncomfortable, because it kinda unconsciously implies that if some has a body and/or mind BELOW "ordinary human capabilities", then they are officially less than human, and that kind of logic has, uh...not exactly been used for anything good, historically. Just saying. Oh gosh I can see how it would be read that way but I didn't mean that implication! I actually teach disability theory (just did a bit of it two weeks ago even) and I don't want to imply persons or humans are identical with a certain set of necessary and sufficient abilities. Being in a human body is enough for being human, no matter the range of ability. (And it goes without saying that being human is enough for being a person; there are also persons that are non-human.) But there's also the important point that it does not follow that just because you're ontologically different that you would automatically have a different moral status. I have many angry things to say about, for example, Peter Singer. I am an ethical vegetarian but I categorically reject consequentalist ethics. I meant as in the question of, if you can basically run around in the digital cloud even when your body is "offline," you are at least one full human, but –– speaking of her realization base, the matter or substance, she has more than one human body. Most of us do not, even when we use tools or have extended bodies, for the most part (open to correction here but I'm pretty sure The Singularity hasn't happened yet) we don't have our consciousness realized outside of our human one. Metaphysically I'm suggesting Kat is a new kind of being. Like... a deity is one possibility, I guess. A demi-god. Or she's possibly a Techno-Human, a new type of being (or a new type of human?) that can extend their consciousness into another physical part of the universe outside if their human body. I'm with saardvark. I'd say she's trans-human, or human+ Philosophically speaking, some could consider "transhuman" as relative. We could be seen as transhumans, when compared to people a century ago. They didn't have antibiotics or antivirals. We can't exactly selectively program are immune systems(yet), but we can customize it, far beyond what people could in 1923. I hope 50 years from now, people can be seen as H+, when compared to us. |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Apr 12, 2023 19:42:46 GMT
The GCU has gods. They can use bodies to do stuff in the same manner as a human or animal but more importantly they can do things that transgress what humans consider to be the laws of nature as an act of will. They can perceive and understand by will, and what they know is Truth even when it directly contradicts the Truth of another god. It appears that the ether, and potentially the etheric bureaucracy, mediates which Truth wins out when and where. If I understand the last few pages I think Kat is still using her mind, along with her devices and tools, rather than learning and doing as an act of will. One or more of these devices and/or tools is etheric tech and therefore she can do magical things. The implanted chip and its hard link is the beginning of changing that, blurring the line between where her brain ends and her system begins, but I think the current interface isn't sufficient to call Kat a transhuman, at least not so far. Her brain will naturally adapt to using the current interface and that will blur the line further. She could probably design a new interface that removes the need for her mind to compose instructions to the devices at all (thus causing things to happen by her will) but even then Kat won't be a god, since her system is still there as an intermediary between her and her magic, so to speak. Or perhaps I should say that won't make her a god right away. Given enough time the ether will make Kat's system superfluous.
|
|
|
|
Post by blahzor on Apr 12, 2023 23:45:01 GMT
The GCU has gods. They can use bodies to do stuff in the same manner as a human or animal but more importantly they can do things that transgress what humans consider to be the laws of nature as an act of will. They can perceive and understand by will, and what they know is Truth even when it directly contradicts the Truth of another god. It appears that the ether, and potentially the etheric bureaucracy, mediates which Truth wins out when and where. If I understand the last few pages I think Kat is still using her mind, along with her devices and tools, rather than learning and doing as an act of will. One or more of these devices and/or tools is etheric tech and therefore she can do magical things. The implanted chip and its hard link is the beginning of changing that, blurring the line between where her brain ends and her system begins, but I think the current interface isn't sufficient to call Kat a transhuman, at least not so far. Her brain will naturally adapt to using the current interface and that will blur the line further. She could probably design a new interface that removes the need for her mind to compose instructions to the devices at all (thus causing things to happen by her will) but even then Kat won't be a god, since her system is still there as an intermediary between her and her magic, so to speak. Or perhaps I should say that won't make her a god right away. Given enough time the ether will make Kat's system superfluous. I agree. I think this is a step and Robot making sure the NP keeps getting made is what will push it over the edge to the point she will do something huge and not realize that she didn't do it consciously |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Apr 13, 2023 0:09:44 GMT
Additionally:
Consider a hypothetical dude in the GCU who finds a magic sword by chance. The dude is able to use it and while using it gains magic powers, and after a while gets better at using it, but he remains a human. He's just using a magic tool, the same as someone who uses a crystal ball or a magic wand. The sword is magic, not the dude (at least at this point). After a while maybe the dude can even use the power of the sword while it's still in its scabbard... or even if he drops it or otherwise briefly loses it. However, if after many years of using the magic sword the dude becomes famous, and everyone knows he can use those powers, he might be able to still use some of the magic powers even if he permanently loses the sword and someone else is now using it. The dude has bent or broken the rules of the sword and has become magical. At that point the dude can be said to have transcended the limits of humanity, possibly. The same argument could be made for someone who learned spellcasting to the point where they can just do things at will.
Now consider a dude who was fated to find a magic sword. Maybe the dude was prophesied to obtain it and do something, or maybe the dude just fits a generic-sounding prediction and there's initially an argument about the dude being the dude of prophesy or no. Either way if enough time passes and the dude's claim on the sword remains unchallenged (or at least not successfully challenged) I think the dude would be the dude of prophesy regardless. Like the first dude, say second dude retains the sword for a long time and becomes skilled with the use of its magic. The prophesy would shorten the time it would take for the dude to become famous, then mythic, which would shorten the time before the dude is able to use the magic even when not using the sword, then without the sword entirely.
I think Kat's case is like the second dude except that we're talking about godlike powers and not just some magic sword. She's the Angel regardless and she's fast-tracked for something like mythic status. Divine status isn't out of the question, though on principle I think that there the question of if it's really Kat or if a new entity was generated by all this etheric business will remain unknowable. Either way I think Kat's development will follow this common-sense sort of path.
|
|
