Yeah, I was thinking a similar thing when I was originally having this discussion with Mag: "WHY would anyone want to pursue this line of inquiry"? Developing 'superior beings' that could/would destroy/humiliate humanity, what exactly would that achieve? Establish that Freud & Lacan were right when they posited a human 'death drive' or an (irrational) drive towards some kind of "annihilative transcendence?"This stuff was fun when it was science fiction, 10 years prior. Now it's just lunacy.
We're going to pursue this at the expense of what?
If there's any misunderstanding about what people like Neil DeGrass Tyson really represent, it ought to be made abundantly clear. They are anti-human because they stratify human existence into it's utility towards this end and belittle the values that would {edit} limit scientific inquiry.
...but I didn't ask him that ... perhaps i was afraid it would get personal.