Will humans eventually live forever? Can we overcome the limitations of the body to create the next step in our own evolution? What will that evolution look like?
These are the types of questions Goh Heng Thean attempts to answer in âImmortality and Intelligence.â Looking at past trends throughout history and what human potential might hold, Thean tries to predict what âimmortalityâ will look like in the future if human civilization continues on the same path of technological advancement.
As stated in the title, Thean's main points focus on human intelligence and what can be achieved with it. As science and technology advances, so does man's ability to take whatever fantasy he may imagine and turn it into reality. Genetic engineering, the elimination of disease and mechanical enhancements to our biological systems are just a few of the advances in technology that are prolonging life and making humans faster, stronger and smarter. Every species is subject to evolution in some form or another; will it one day be possible, with enough advancement, to control our own evolution and overcome death itself?
Thean echoes futurists like Ray Kurzweil by predicting that humans will become more and more integrated with technology of our own creation. The path to immortality lies not in some magic art or fountain of youth, but in a gradual progression of enhancing our bodies until we stop the aging process itself. Thean finishes off the book with an overview of what such a civilization may look like. Developments like relativity and quantum mechanics have spawned from people with IQs from 150-200; what might occur if people started getting IQs of 500-1000 due to enhancements?
While the thoughts in the book are deep and profound, the writing most definitely is not. Reading through it, you can tell that English was not Thean's first language. The book is riddled with errors in grammar, syntax and word choice, to the extent that it does get in the way of the points that are trying to be made. If it had been once every few sentences, it would be readable, but at least every other sentence had a glaring error in it, from subject-verb disagreement to mixing tenses.
If not for the way it was written, I would score this book a 7/10, but the most I can give it is a 4.
--This review was originally written for the Blogger News Network. The post can be viewed here: http://www.bloggernews.net/17349--