Uh, okay, I think you're just spouting religion. I can't see any empirically valid points in there, and a few that are even philosophically absurd.
But that's besides the point, you're not even on the same argument. Why you keep meandering I'll never know. The fundamental discussion is whether humans are ill-suited to galactic expansion because of their need to bring around their "niche" environment with them.
Absolutely no question of that. We are ill-suited compared to some hypothetical species that are better suited. We are, after all, engaged in an exercise of the imagination here.
You say that a species can re-design itself to live in more diverse environments rather than bringing around that bubble. The only way to redesign yourself and stay a species (as opposed to a machine) is to use genetic manipulation.
Why aren't machines species?
Why is it a good thing to stay the same species?
What's wrong with genetic manipulation? We do it all the time already. How are you going to decide who to marry? Your genes are looking for compatible partners to hybridize with - and you're making conscious designs about a good mate.
Therefore you seem to believe genetic manipulation will trump a non-manipulated species simply using technology.
Er, I do? It's not some kind of schoolyard brawl. I certainly think that better solutions can be found by conscious design than by blind evolution...which is why we as a species are doing okay today.
While I suggest that any intelligent free thinking species would not willingly alter themselves to such a fundamental degree, to do so would they would lose the core of what it means to be what they are.
Why's that a bad thing? Why would we want to keep the core of being something obsolete?
Why would any intelligent free thinking species reject technology and consciousness in favor of their animal roots?
People are afraid of change.
Yeah, I'm kinda seeing that...
Is this thinking a product of our planet? If an animal grew up on another world would it suddenly think differently for no reason at all? The idea that an alien species will think in alien ways is a cop out because there is no evidence supporting it, and a lot of evidence to the contrary. Many animals act like humans, just on a less developed level.
You just argued that animals would be against genetic engineering. There are plenty of humans around you who are pro-genetic-engineering. Just by that alone we can see that there's no reason to believe everyone would be as scared of change as you are.
I wasn't defining humanity I was saying saying without our humanity we are not human. And without our bodies we do not have humanity. Therefore without our bodies we are not human.
Um, what's the problem there...? We aren't homo erectus
any more, I doubt you'd want to go back...
"It's easy to construct a more intelligent human by eliminating or correcting a few common heuristics. We're not very rational organisms yet."
Our irrationality is at the core of being human. The day the human race ceases to be irrational is the day the human race dies.
Why is our irrationality at the core of being human?
Again, what's the problem if the human race dies or speciates? Would you have rather stayed as homo habilis
Death is at the very core of existence of life.
Without the need to "life each day to the fullest", people will create less, do less, advance less. Sure there'll be a few go-getters, but a person cannot remember everything. If you get 25 degrees from university will you remember much beyond the last 2?
Are people more creative if they only have a lifespan of 25 years? 50 years? 100 years? Where does it start dropping off?
It's just a silly superstition.
What would be the purpose of brain implants for higher cognition anyway? Human achievement is the sum of experience not intelligence. That is what fundamentally separates us from animals. We are able through storytelling to pass on what we have learned to future generations. I would argue that the freedom and abundance of information in the modern world has already the potential to make humans more intelligent. Everything we create is based on experience, the more we experience, the more we can create.
Er, so, how do brain implants hurt...? We're better at thinking than homo habilis
Of course then you'll say "well if you can live longer, and have a better brain to experience more then isn't that a good thing?". But again without a finite existence there is no drive to create. And also creation is as much about the lack of information as it is about the existence thereof.
Evidence for any of that? Do uneducated third world sweatshop workers make better poets?
You mostly sound very afraid. Which is fine. Nobody's forcing anything on you.