We humans have had it pretty good for a species that is so sure of itself that it calls itself the “wise, wise guys.” However, we may soon have to hand the torch over to someone else, perhaps even something we build from scratch. Ten options are presented here.

10. Raised Creatures1-animals

It all started with H.G. Wells, who had the brilliant concept of trying to breed animals with human intellect. “The Island of Dr. Moreau” by H. G. Wells. In the works of Cordwainer Smith and David Brin, we see uplifted animals as a powerless minority demanding equality; in the Uplift series, we see intelligent dolphins and apes accompanying humanity on galactic explorations; and according to some theorists, like George Dvorsky, we have an ethical obligation to bring other species up to our level of intelligence as soon as we develop the technology to do so. In light of current campaigns to give great apes the legal right of “personhood,” Dvorsky argues that it is only fair to endow non-human animals with the cognitive capacities necessary for self-determination and social engagement in a sentient creatures’ community. It is our moral obligation to grant non-humans like apes, dolphins, and elephants the cognitive abilities necessary for political participation, since our exclusive possession of sentient thought gives us an unfair and unjust advantage over our animal neighbours. On the other hand, there are many who believe that this obligation should not be extended to humans alone. According to Alex Knapp, the price in terms of animal lives lost is just too high to be justified. Improving a species would require modifying its DNA at the embryonic stage, which would inevitably result in several failed attempts before we succeeded. After that, there’s the matter of how to guarantee that an embryo that has been successfully transferred can be carried to term. It is morally unacceptable to experiment on intelligent animals because of the risk of physical deformities and early death that could result from human interference. The social and emotional demands of an intelligent chimpanzee, bonobo, or parrot would be too much for humans to handle, even if we were to succeed. That is to say, some people are concerned that certain species’ problematic traits, like chimpanzees’ aggressiveness or dolphins’ propensity for rape, would persist into their intelligent forms, and that raised animals may suffer from emotional trauma as a result of humans’ insensitive attempts to care for them. The extinction and subsequent assimilation of our Neanderthal and other cousins is supposedly explained by the fact that intelligent self-awareness occupies an ecological niche that can only support one species. Introducing possibly traumatised beings with mental processes and value systems that humans might not fully understand into the evolutionary arena might pose a threat to humanity’s dominance in the animal kingdom.

9. In the Borg2-borgStar race

An assimilationist cyborg race was presented in Star Trek with the goal of merging all sentient beings into one collective intelligence. While most would think this is a horrible idea, there are some who disagree. The emotionless, lifeless image of the Borg, according to Travis James Leland, is merely Luddite propaganda, and progress towards collective intelligence may lead to individual happiness and freedom within the hive. Internet and social media have brought people together for many reasons, but one of the main ones is the desire to become closer to one another as a species.

Technology and connectivity do not diminish uniqueness; rather, they facilitate the expression and connection of personality within the emerging global collective consciousness. Some think that we now have the technology needed to build a “telepathic noosphere” using current technologies. Electrodes have already allowed us to transmit audio, video, and control signals for motors to the Internet from the brain, and the data transfer capacity needed for a hive mind is potentially within reach. Though initially it would be incredibly clumsy and lacking in quality, the technical infrastructure utilised for contemporary telecommunications and the wireless Internet may be enhanced to provide neural interfacing. Some people think these hypothetical hive minds should be created for social and political reasons; they call them “borganisms.” A hive mind consciousness could have some benefits, since it would basically become a superhuman entity that could accomplish things that individuals couldn’t. While there would be many benefits, such as improved coordination for large-scale projects and easier planning for complicated goals, and people would become more empathetic towards one another, there would also be many drawbacks. An emergent hive mind from social media is a distinct beast from a hive mind of soldiers and secret police developed by the military-industrial complex. Existential fears of losing one’s identity to the mass consciousness are present alongside early-stage system threats of viruses and hackers and concerns over who will control the technology. Some contend that advanced borganisms would have even more flaws, like being vulnerable to dangerous memetic infections (which would necessitate strict “mental hygiene”), prone to group-think, and struggling to cope with hive-inside selfishness and social parasitism.

8. Three types of genetic castes

Francis Fukuyama, a political scientist, thinks transhumanism is a very hazardous concept. Attempts to improve upon our core humanity, in his view, pose a fundamentally serious threat. Factor X, as he terms it, “cannot be reduced to the possession of moral choice, reason, language, sociability, sentience, emotions, consciousness, or any other quality that has been put forth as a ground for human dignity,” he argues. The combination of all these traits in a human being is what he calls “Factor X.” In his view, creating genetically modified humans would put an end to the liberal principle of universal political equality. Having the ability to make designer offspring with considerable advantages over the less genetically fortunate masses might lead to the establishment of genetic castes and weaken our common humanity if genetic modification technology were to become widely available. Even though he is a conservative, Fukuyama shares the concerns of many liberals. The Centre for Genetics and Society is a political organisation that was established in the late 90s by left-wing bio-Luddites who were worried that “technoeugenics” would create a gap between the “GenRich” and the “GenPoor.” However, there are many who believe that this outcome is highly improbable due to the complexity of genetic modification and the cultural stigma against child experimentation. There are many who argue that this would not inevitably lead to political inequality even if it were to materialise, on the grounds that political rights are not dependent on one’s physical attributes. Still some contend that, in light of reproductive rights and the inherent parental responsibility to do what is best for their children, parents should be able to choose for their offspring the most favourable physical and mental characteristics. There is existing scientific evidence of “designer babies” in the form of in vitro fertilisation and pre-implantation genetic testing, which have broad support for protecting against hereditary illnesses; this evidence might include choosing for intelligence, height, gender, and even skin colour. Banning the technology because to concerns about genetic classes could make things worse, according to some, since the rich can always move to a country that doesn’t have a ban on designer kids.

7. Goliath GooMedical device

Concerns about a nanotechnological uprising against humanity were voiced by engineer Eric Drexler in 1986. In spite of his extensive list of nanotechnology’s possible advantages—such as the elimination of cancer cells and the repair of DNA—he voiced concern that tiny, self-replicating robots might start to outcompete real plants and microbes, colonise every ecological niche, and eventually deplete Earth’s resources—a scenario referred to as the “grey goo” or “global ecophagy.” In response to these predictions, Prince Charles and Prey by Michael Crichton convened a “nanotech summit” at Prince Charles’s Gloucestershire country estate. The “molecular manufacturing” required to construct these nanobots, according to nanotechnologists like Richard Smalley, is just not feasible from a scientific standpoint. There just isn’t enough space at the atomic level for molecular assemblers to use extra manipulator “fingers” to work with atoms, which are very sensitive to the electrical bonds of their neighbours. We call this the “fat fingers” issue. The “sticker fingers” issue also needs to be considered; in this case, the manipulators would cling to the atoms they are moving around, and there would be no practical way to free them. In response, Drexler stated that Smalley’s scepticism of molecular manipulators stemmed from his desire to allay public fears and safeguard funding for nanotechnology research. One possible countermeasure to the dangers of grey goo is blue goo, an alternative type of nanotechnology that could serve a useful purpose. To combat mischievous and autonomous grey goo, the police force could use these self-replicating nanobots. On the other hand, they should be able to withstand the effects of the grey goo, be powerful and resilient, and be entirely controlled by humans. Some possible constraints on the dissemination of grey goo include finite replication capacity, extensive dispersion, energy and chemical element demands, or the utilisation of rare elements like diamond or titanium in molecular assembler construction. On the other hand, if the blue goo were to be undermined or surpassed by the grey goo, it may also turn against us. Even though they might devour our cellphones, the slime probably wouldn’t turn on us because humans don’t possess nearly enough of these uncommon components. A post-human, post-ecological world of (perhaps competing) swarms of nanobots could emerge if these safeguards failed.

6. Artificial Intelligence5- artificial intelligence

The branch of computer science known as “artificial intelligence” focuses on teaching computers to mimic human intelligence. Theoretical artificial intelligence can be either broad or strong, with the former referring to a more specific type of AI. Soft AI takes its cues from the human brain but doesn’t try to imitate it; instead, it’s an algorithmically-oriented kind of AI that can play chess, answer Jeopardy questions, take bookings, and provide GPS directions, among other things. Strong AI aims to imitate human intelligence in reasoning, planning, learning, perception, and natural language interactions; nevertheless, it does these tasks in ways that are hardly comparable to human thought patterns. Achieving singularity, the point at which machine intelligence equals or surpasses human intelligence, is the goal of strong AI advocates. Once achieved, technological progress will accelerate at an unprecedented rate, leaving us utterly bewildered about how civilization will evolve in the years to come. Elon Musk, an entrepreneur, has been outspoken about the dangers of AI, saying, “In the movie Terminator, they didn’t create A.I. in order to achieve an unexpected result similar to that of Terminator. No one sees the Spanish inquisition coming, which is like the Monty Python sketch. He’s not alone; it’s just that—you know—you have to be careful. Even Stephen Hawking, who has warned that “the primitive forms of artificial intelligence we already have, have proved very useful,” shares Bill Gates’s fear. However, I fear that complete AI development might be the end of our species. Once AI is created, it will quickly evolve and adapt to new situations without human intervention. The development of artificial intelligence is being portrayed by some as a threat to humankind, although many scientists see this as an exaggeration and think that machines will augment human intelligence rather than completely supplant it.

5. Six terminals for wires

A person who uses electric current to stimulate the brain’s pleasure centre, especially someone who is hooked to it, is referred to as a “wirehead” in science fiction. This idea was prevalent in cyberpunk literature and made its 1970s debut in Larry Niven’s Known Space series. These theories probably originated from 1950s rat research in which James Olds implanted electrodes into the animals’ mesolimbic dopamine circuits. The rats starved to death because they prioritised self-administered bursts of pleasure over eating and sleeping. The same experiments were conducted on other animals and humans by Olds; the latter described the experience as “orgasmic.” Some think this technology could help end human suffering without hurting anyone else or the environment. This is the ideal society that the so-called Abolitionists hope to achieve through a combination of genetic engineering, designer medications, and wireheading. It would have to be changed, though, because the record shows that pure orgasmic pleasure would probably cause the end of the world. Thync is a wearable gear that lets you change your mood and state of mind for vigour or calmness—without the narcotics’ side effects or addiction. Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is the foundation of this technology. It is a cheap method of electrically stimulating the brain to enhance cognition, learning, alertness, and memory. On the other hand, some futurists have voiced concerns about TMS, another type of mind-altering technology, and its purported ability to alleviate chronic pain, depression, fibromyalgia, Parkinson’s disease, and schizophrenia. By momentarily disabling the amygdala region responsible for processing fear, this technology can induce psychopathy while maintaining the clarity and confidence of intoxication. Concerns about the potential consequences of tinkering with the human brain stem from the idea that it could lead to a future where people can control their emotions and even disable their empathy and terror responses when it suits them. Even if these entities share no genetic material with current humans, they may find themselves in social and emotional environments that are completely foreign to them.

4. This is the infomorphs7 page.

A book by Charles Platt, The Silicon Mind, published in 1991, described an immortality quest in which computers were programmed to mimic human minds, leading to the creation of entities known as “infomorphs.” In 1996, a Russian AI theorist named Alexander Chislenko used the term to describe a distributed intelligence-based theoretical entity. Because they are not constrained by physical bodies, these networked intelligences would perceive many human ideas as strange, irrelevant, or even charming. They would be able to share information and experiences far more easily than humans can, which would cause huge shifts in how we think about identity and personality. It can also refer to the practice of transferring human brain data to computers in order to make mental copies of people. A person’s mental structure is said to be transferred from a biological matrix to an informational or electronic one. There are many possible problems with mind uploading as a way to transcend the limitations of our human form, but the benefits include increased economic growth, the ability to reprogram ourselves for greater intelligence or happiness, less environmental impact, and freedom from the laws of physics and the certainty of personal death. One technical argument against it is that we still don’t understand how consciousness exists. Another is that it would be hard to recreate human intelligence, which is based on unpredictable and nonlinear interactions between brain cells. The development of the technology also raises ethical concerns. Consider the following example: how can we know if uploaded minds are indeed conscious or merely imitative duplicates acting like an individual without any actual interior mental state? This makes it impossible to determine the efficacy of the system. Another important worry is the potential for infomorphs to be abused or manipulated.

3. Creating Humans with Modified Genomes

A transgenic animal is one that has a foreign gene intentionally implanted into its genome. Glofish, a kind of genetically modified fish with luminous colours, and glow-in-the-dark mice are both products of this technology. The use of transgenic monkeys to study human nature is a contentious topic, and the technology has already been utilised to try to bring the woolly mammoth back to life. In addition, there’s the possibility of transgenic humans, who may gain genetic benefits from other animals. However, there are a lot of processes involved in turning this idea into a reality. In order to insert a specific transgene into a human cell cultured in a controlled environment, it must first be identified and engineered to express itself at specific times. A transgenic human cell’s nucleus might be transferred into an enucleated egg cell and then let to develop and multiply. To bring the embryo to term, it would be placed in a womb while it is still developing. The necessary technologies have been developed, and there is a mix of human and non-human genes resulting from stem cell and in vitro research. Some believe that by modifying humans with transgenes, we can gain abilities that other animals have naturally, such as sonar, acute senses, and the ability to photosynthesize or produce our own essential nutrients. Concerns about human dignity, which is associated with our reasoning capacity rather than our genetic makeup, would take a back seat to the potential benefit. While it’s tempting to think that we may improve our memory, planning, and muscular efficiency by stealing DNA from chimpanzees, the potential consequences are just as frightening. Some are worried about the potential use of “harvest transhumans”—humans intentionally developed and reared for the sake of transgene-related medical investigations. Another concern, “species anxiety,” is the fact that certain states and Canadian provinces have passed legislation prohibiting the hybridization of different species. But science is moving forward, and who knows, in a century from now, we might all share a DNA fingerprint with a chimpanzee, a bat, an octopus, or a mouse.

2. The ninth cyborg

Published in 1960 by Manfred Clynes and Nathan S. Kline, the term “cyborg” was initially used in that year. With the ultimate aim of enhancing humanity’s capacity to explore space, they were conjecturing on pharmacological or electrical techniques to improve unconscious self-regulatory control capabilities, which would allow humans to better live in a variety of environments. “If man in space, in addition to flying his vehicle, must continuously be checking on things and making adjustments merely to keep himself alive, he becomes a slave to the machine,” they wrote. The idea behind the cyborg and his homeostatic systems is to create a system of organisation where robotic functions are handled automatically and subconsciously, allowing humans more freedom to explore, create, think, and feel. This term was later used to describe people who rely on prosthetics and implants in medicine, and it is now used culturally to describe our growing reliance on technology. Bionic arms, an electrode system that links the nervous system to computers, a prosthetic eye camera, and a very literal “thumb drive” are all examples of recent investigations into practical cybernetics. In 2015, Professor Yuval Noah Harari of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem predicted that, within 200 years, humans will evolve into godlike cyborgs as a result of our incessant desire to improve ourselves. Among the policies advocated by Transhumanist Politic Party founder Zoltan Istvan is increased public funding for the research and development of bionic hearts and cerebral implants that can detect medical emergencies and decrease criminal activity. In the meanwhile, DARPA, the US military’s research wing, has established a Biological Technologies Office (BTO) to “explore the increasingly dynamic intersection of biology and the physical sciences.” The goal is to create technologies that future soldiers can rely on, such as cybernetic solutions to problems like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and blood loss. Another DARPA project that could have civilian applications (or terrifying consequences) is the creation of artificial chromosomes. They dream of a future where warriors can see in the dark, don’t need food, and don’t need sleep. The proposed name for the hybrid species that would exist after humans and machines merge is Homo electricus.

1. Various Homo sapiens species10-many humans

A common ancestor species gives rise to several offspring species through a process known as speciation. Last and First Men, written by Olaf Stapleton in 1930, was the first fictional exploration of the idea. The novel spanned the following two billion years and chronicled the emergence and extinction of eighteen separate human species, culminating in our migration from Earth to Venus. A more contemporary work that delves into the same idea was Man After Man: An Anthropology of the Future by Douglas Dixon. In this hypothetical future, genetic engineering causes a collapse of civilization 200 years later. Some people take flight into space, and when they come back a few million years later, they find that mankind has split off and evolved into a plethora of different (often non-sentient) forms. If this trend in human evolution continues, there may be more than one species of humans in the future, though most people think it’s highly improbable. Natural selection is starting to favour shorter, stockier women because of ovulatory features, according to a 2009 study out of Yale University. This suggests that these women are bearing more children than average. While we’ve discussed potential future steps in human evolution, evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller thinks that, because to modern society’s improved sexual selection and the advent of genetic engineering, development will speed rapidly. An evolutionary anthropology doctorate candidate and researcher at the Global Brain Institute named Cadell Last thinks that, due to technological advancements, our species may soon undergo a new great evolutionary transition in which we live longer, have fewer children, and have a greater impact on cultural practices. Because human civilization is so vast and interdependent, the possibility of speciation into numerous human species seems remote. There is no historical evidence of a single human population going through the Galapagos scenario of speciation. On the other hand, if we spread out to other solar systems and planets, we could see the emergence of new human species better suited to different environments. Of course, they wouldn’t be able to take Earth with them unless they return four million years later with an army. That they would, without a doubt.

SEE ALSO: Top 25 Greatest Churches In The World