Do Robots Make Love?: Transhumanism in 12 questions

by Jean-Michel Besnier, Laurent Belando

Through 12 thought-provoking questions, a philosopher and a scientist explore the real-world ramifications of transhumanism - the tech movement that seeks to improve the human condition through science.

Should we enhance the human condition with technology?
Does anyone really want to live for a thousand years?
Could AI end up destroying mankind?

Discover the incredible potential of mankind's near future as a Doctor and a Philosopher debate the big questions surrounding the incredible potential of transhumanism. This movement - that seeks to improve the human condition through science - has fast become one of the most controversial the scientific community have ever faced. As scientists in California make great strides in using advanced technology to enhance human intellect and physiology, the ethical and moral questions surrounding its possibilities have never been more pressing. Should we change the way we reproduce? Could we enhance the human body with technology to the point where we are all technically cyborgs? Is it possible to make love to a robot?

Doctor and entrepreneur Laurent Alexandre and tech-philosopher Jean Michel Besnier go head to head on the big questions in an entertaining and thought-provoking debate on the fundamental principles of transhumanism.

Genres: Nonfiction, Technology

144 pages, Hardcover

Published October 2, 2018

Reviews

[Heather · Rating 2 out of 5]

So I bought this book for a nuanced and evidence-based discussion about the future of humans and tech and what I got instead was a reminder that the transhumanism debate is consistently controlled by people who literally deify Musk and Gates and all rich Silicon Valley dudes.

Direct quote: "Transhumanism, this almost divine ideology that has come out of Silicon Valley to combat raging and death, is on a roll."

On the other side of the debate is a philosopher who asserts this, out of nowhere: "psychologists... contend that adoption by homosexuals risks causing psychological disturbances in children upon whom an impossible parentage has been imposed."

The problem with these sorts of books is that no one has to show their working out and so Professor Homophobe just says the above and Dr Techtrepreneur just shouts "IN THE FUTURE WE WILL ALL BE CYBORGS" over and over ad infinitum and there's no point to any of it.

To Be a Machine is a much better book on this topic.

[Rama Rao · Rating 2 out of 5]

Transhumanism and the future of humankind

This is a very short and concise book about futurology and transhumanism. Some of the topics included in the discussion are; Should humans be improved? Can the technology fix everything? Does artificial intelligence (AI) will kill mankind? And could we change the way we reproduce? These discussions provide brief introduction to the technological advancement for the future of life.

transhumanists look forward to a time when we can wrest the reins of our nature from evolution using technological enhancements to increase our intelligence, communicate brain to brain, and even upload our consciousnesses into the cloud. We use writing to extend our memories and cooking to improve our diets. But technology provides us with prosthetics that enhances strength, but there is also difference between enhancement and medical corrections that restore “normal” functions. Transhumanism believes that by altering human reproduction, genetically and technologically augmenting the body, human kind will be very different. Technology is expected to offer biological freedom and be masters of our own evolution.

Market forces and the technological advancements will drive humanity to the same end point as the “singularity” of cosmology. At the center of a black hole where matter, energy and time “dissolves” in quantum space under intense gravity. Similarly, AI transcends humanity into a unified human-machine consciousness. This unification will alter human consciousness, physical strength, and emotional state.

Both wearable and implantable brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) are being developed by Elon Musk’s Neuralink, Facebook, and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). For example, when we speak, we are limited by the speed we can speak, but with a computer, we are limited by the speed of typing. But BMIs enable us to communicate at the speed of thought. For example, when we share our vacation experiences, we upload photos and videos. With BMI we can share our sensory and emotional experience during a vacation. We can buy contact lenses that can take pictures or video, and earbuds with the capability of universal language translator that allow us to communicate anywhere in the world.

This book is poorly organized and the style of writing (French translation into English) could have been better. It is not reader-friendly. In fact, there are numerous discussions and blogs on the web that is informative and engaging.

[Owen Townend · Rating 3 out of 5]

A stimulating discourse though it feels surface level.

Do Robots Make Love? broadened my horizons in terms of the philosophical debate raised by technological advancement. Before picking up this book, the terms 'transhumanism' and 'bioconservativism' weren't in my lexicon but now I know them to be two sides of an argument I've been drawn to for some time.

Alexandre and Besnier balance each other out quite well, the former having a largely optimistic view of the NBIC (Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science) movement while the latter is more sceptical on what artificial intelligence will mean for humanity's future relevance. It is apparent that the two theorists respect each other though their opinions on the bigger picture differ considerably.

Between them, Alexandre and Besnier attempt to answer huge questions like 'Do we want to live to a thousand?', 'Is transhumanism just another kind of eugenics?' and, of course, 'Is artificial intelligence going to kill off mankind?' Their responses are always informative and signify an academic approach though I did feel like they could have easily been more detailed while still retaining reader interest. Also I feel like they paid little lip service to AI's capability for creativity, which is often trending in contemporary society. Then again, having been written and published in five years ago, I suppose it's inevitable that the future would defy their expectations in some way.

If nothing else, this book whet my appetite to research what nanotechnology and cyborgs would really look like and how GAFA (Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon) will influence these concepts to augment or redefine the human condition. Suffice to say, artificial intelligence will have a tremendous impact on what it means to be alive.

I recommend Do Robots Make Love? to readers curious to read two sides of the AI issue and begin their transhumanist education.

[Noémie J. Crowley · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5/5

📖 Do Robots Make Love ?
Laurent Alexandre & Jean-Michel Besnier

Vous commencez à me connaître maintenant, le transhumanisme, le post humanisme, les IA, tout ça, sont des sujets qui m’inspirent et m’intéresse énormément. En roman, ils font partie de mes thèmes préférés, et pouvoir en apprendre plus de manière plus factuelle, est toujours un bonheur. SI c’est également votre cas, ce petit livre de 125 pages (en version e-book), construit sous forme de dialogue, est fait pour vous. Parfois un peu superficiel, donc à compléter par d'autres lectures. Une bonne petite addition à votre bibliothèque !

You know me by now, transhumants, post humanism, IAs, all of that, are subjects that inspire and spark my interest quite a lot. As a fiction, they belong fo my favourite themes, and being able to know more about them in a more factual manner, is always a pleasure. If this is your case as well, this little 125-pages book (as an ebook version), built as a dialogue, is made for you. Sometimes a bit superficial, so to be completed by other readings. A nice little addition to you bookshelf !

[Mark Zinck · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was one to make me think, but the two debaters became predictable as the book continued. There was a lot of good insight, but I think I was expecting more.

[Sam P · Rating 4 out of 5]

Part of me wants to give this book 2 stars.

The book identifies itself as “a dialogue […] a conflict, a robust debate, an adversarial dispute” in which the two authors “go head to head”. In reality the authors hardly interact, let alone disagree. They do not look critically at each other’s argument. Instead they merely glance over them before using them as a spring board to dive into their own discussion points. Granted, these discussion points are interesting but there was a distinct lack of “adversarial dispute” that disappointed me.

Ultimately, however, I did give it 4 stars. I did this because this book made me think. It did this by providing me with data and discussion points that helped me to formulate my own opinions, or at least strengthen my underdeveloped ones. At times this was due to me finding some of those discussion points baseless and flawed (sometimes the best way to discover what you truly believe is to hear the arguments of not the side you end up agreeing with, but rather the side you end up disagreeing with). At other times it was because they were points I had not heard before and were genuinely intrigued by.

In the end I came out the other side of this book with more to think about, and I’ll count that as a success.

[Barbara · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found myself reading pages two and three times until the meanings were clear in my mind.And yet,I still have the vague feeling of pretentiousness emanating from the book.Almost as if the authors were using each other’s arguments as jumping points for their own ideas,and completely missing the fact that it was meant to be a discussion. The constant name droppings of other transhumanists and philosophers got tiresome after a while too.

I read this book in order to get a glimpse behind the curtain of transhumanism,but left feeling convinced that these people don’t know what planet they are living on.

Still,after sieving through the nonsense,I managed to understand some off the concepts.Like how far should we go,until our technological accessories become obligatory necessities,are we willing to sacrifice our freedom to an omnipotent AI that will grant us safety?What is the ethical cost of interfering with human physiology?Are we prepared for a colossal upheaval in our economy??Our judicial system??

Food for thought.

Interesting quotes:

“NBIC:Stands for nanotechnology,biotechnology,information technology and cognitive science.”

“Technology is by its nature prosthetic and it has to stay that way:all prostheses are a priori desirable if they replace an extremity that no longer exists or indeed never existed or if it replaces a sense or a faculty that is missing.”

“Negative eugenics:correcting disabilities and bringing about the births of viable individuals with attributes that are common to the species.Positive eugenics:manufacturing human beings according to previously unheard of models and formats that will become the standard.”

“To what extent should we allow technological innovations to eliminate the risks and hazards of communal life in favour of supposed social harmony intended to protect us from self-destruction?”

[Tanishk Panwar · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reunion of the lost stars

We thought we were made of scars,
but they were constellations—
maps leading us back to each other.

And how could I not love a soul
that was carved from the same longing as mine?

You make me feel seen in a world
that so easily forgets my name.
You make me feel wanted in a world
that remembers my hands only in need.

When the hours dissolve into silence,
when screams fade into whispers,
you make me forget the weight of it all.

In the end, our reunion will be quiet—
stars watching,
the breeze gentle,
for the world has finally learned
that peace is long overdue,
and we have suffered enough.

[Aventinus · Rating 4 out of 5]

★★★★ = Memorable

An intriguing discussion between a transhumanist and a bioconservative on 12 topics ranging from the limits of technology and eugenics to cyborgs and religion.

It's concise and serves as a great introduction to anyone interested in such topics. It's not revolutionary or mind-blowing (and it doesn't try to be). Its purpose is merely to lay down the cards of "what's at stake".

[I Read, Therefore I Blog · Rating 1 out of 5]

Laurent Alexandre is a surgeon and entrepreneur with an interest in the trans humanism. Jean-Michel Besnier is Professor of Philosophy at the Sorbonne University and a critic of transhuman utopias. This is a pretentious and yet weirdly superficial look at trans humanism, constructed as a dialogue between the authors and based around 12 questions that left me with little sense of what it was about or what the actual risks/benefits are.

[Carol Zafiriadi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Two persons debate the idea of transhumanism in a cringy and often uselessly bombastic manner. H+ is a fascinating concept with many repercussions for our society, and the book touches on such aspects, but it's awfully disorganized and poorly structured. I ended up being more interested in the "Further Reading" section than the book's own content.

[Kate · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Better transhuman than dead.”

“On no account can one wish to live for centuries without resigning oneself to becoming no more than a creature that is both derisory and pathetic.”

“The future doesn’t need us.” —BJ

“Man created God. The inverse remains to be proven.” —SG

[Marcus Gitau · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good dialogue, however the opposing thinkers could have written with a little more depth

[R-mig · Rating 2 out of 5]

Super boring. A little educational. I wouldn’t recommend. It’s like the authors are having a panel discussion but, for some reason, they chose to make it a written one instead. Very bizarre.

[Christopher Black]

A good read and a thought provoking topic!