Page 2 of 3

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 6:41 pm
by Arizona Nova
You know, this really seems like more a general thread than a spam thread. o_O

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 9:59 pm
by Central Facehuggeria
My society has aspects of both. Mainstream Facehuggerian society is very far right trancend, where the ubertech is as common as dirt, the population is biologically immortal, everyone lives in great utopic arcologies wearing white togas and sipping ambrosia-like wine. The divergence from right trancend comes if your body is destroyed. -Your consciousness still exists so long as your neural lace is still intact. Indeed, Facehuggerian troops will go to great lengths to recover the laces of their fallen comrades. A new body will be created for you. However, culturally, Facehuggerians tend to encourage sticking with a single body as much as possible.

And then there's the groupmind/star system of Odon, which has even more advanced technology, but which for the most part refuses to use it.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:02 pm
by Sskiss
The Sskiss are definatly subtranscendent. For them, there is essentually no other choice!

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:18 pm
by Skeelzania
Skeelzanians are subtranscedant, and aren't at all impressed by those who are. Especially as many 'immortals' come across as moral vacuums who barely classify as humans, if they did at all. Besides, I've mentioned before that immortality would cause a gigantic clusterfuck within Skeelzania. You simply can't have a hereditary power delineation system where the person at the top lives forever. Unless they were castrated, it would only be a matter of time before some heir or another gets tired of waiting for an abdication and launches a violent coup.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:29 am
by Kanuckistan
In that case, I'd say right-leaning semi-transcendent - yes, you can live indefinitely, have multiple bodies, mod it all out, change species easily, own a planet-cracker, kill yourself skydiving in a gas giant and come back physically at a Shrine of the Dead, etc., etc., but people are still people and while there are more options and things are cheaper, motivations are essentially similar - friends, family, community, prosperity, freedom, faith.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:34 am
by Metallinauts
Center Left:
We are rarely seen anymore, our technology is subject of fear, wonder and controversy. The one solar holding we own is maintained by AIs, and other than that we are out in the Void where no one can get to us unless they knew how to get there. Or ships rarely come into this realm, and if they do it is to put some punk race in line that is fucking with the STC or the like. Generally speaking we are quite aloof. However the race is by no means immortal, the average life span is roughly 125-150 years so that is what brings us to the center.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:49 am
by Xenonier
Obviously left transcendent. Xenonian technology is not so much well hidden as it is avoided by the majority of non-Xenonians, but there's still an aura of that mystery. Immortality is very much the go, even if the majority of Xenonians don't take to 'physical' bodies as much as they do everything else. However, there's no conscious effort made to maintain any of the archetypes people have about Xenonier. It has more to do with it's disconcerting speaking to one since chances are they've been around and done a whole lot more than you, and you're going to get mocked relentlessly.

That tends to make the average person avoid Xenonier after a while, which has made mythologies about it etc.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:56 am
by Kostemetsia
As a matter of fact, the left-transcendent archetype was based around the Xenonian nation, so a left-transcendent attribute makes sense.

Also fyi, the right-transcendent one is a rough approximation of Cypria.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:36 am
by Hyperspatial Travel
Solar Communes wrote:-snip-
I love the Man Who Was Thursday. Brilliant. More (actually, less) importantly, I'd say we're centred. A lot of our technology is accessible, but we're very secretive about it. Mind-uploads exist, but simultaneously most people are physical, and in a single body.

Re: Transcendent or Subtranscendent?

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:45 pm
by Solar Communes
More seriously speaking, I think Solar Communes would be Post-Transcendent.

Post-Transcendent: Where people who give a shit about their technological advances, consider immortality and body modifications as banal as Viagra and are heavily nihilists to even call themselves post-transcendent at all enter. People who see a post-transcendent world will be more impressed by the suicide rates and by the quantity of orgies and drugs than by its technology.