What is Transhumanism?

Wikipedia says it better than I could:

“Transhumanism is a philosophical and intellectual movement which advocates the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies able to greatly enhance longevity, mood, and cognitive abilities, and predicts the emergence of such technologies in the future.”

How did you first become interested in transhumanism?

For me, it was a process of rediscovery. As a kid, I loved sci-fi. Not just the mainstream stuff, but the really obscure, speculative works. I read constantly. I read before class, after class, and (to the annoyance of my teachers) sometimes during class, when I was supposed to be working.

It’s difficult to single out the specific work that had the largest impact on me. Most science fiction novels are not explicitly transhumanist, and yet transhumanist themes are scattered throughout the genre. It’s just too interesting for any imaginative writer to avoid entirely.

Many people find transhumanism extremely off-putting, if not repulse. Can you explain why that is? Have you ever had the same misgivings yourself? How did you resolve them?

Sure, there are lots of reasons someone might be wary of transhumanism. Something that I like to keep in mind about transhumanism is that it’s a very niche topic that’s far from the mainstream. As a result, it tends to attract eccentrics, who may not be able to empathize with the misgivings most people (rightly!) have about radically modifying their bodies.

When talking to people about the goals of transhumanism, I prefer to ease them in, rather than tossing them into the deep end of the pool.

How do you do that?

I like to talk about the history of medicine, and all of the ways that we already modify our bodies.

Many of the medical procedures that we take for granted today were actually extremely controversial in their time. For example, when open-heart surgery was first performed, people were horrified. Many had this instinctive revulsion against anything so invasive. Some even refused treatment that might have cured them. But, as time went on, people grew more accustomed to it, and it eventually ceased to be an issue. Nobody’s thrilled to undergo open-heart surgery, but most people acknowledge its usefulness.

This is a common pattern in medicine. There’s nothing more personal than our own bodies, and people are naturally apprehensive about some stranger rummaging around inside them.

What about you? Do you not feel worried about “some stranger rummaging around” inside you?

Absolutely! My family is always complaining about how I don’t go to the doctor as much as I should. Going to the doctor is rarely fun.

But I can’t deny that technology has helped me tremendously. For instance, I have terrible eyesight. And I don’t just mean, “I need to squint really hard when I’m not wearing glasses.” Without corrective lenses, I am classified as legally blind. Sometimes I try to imagine what my life would be like if I been born before glasses were invented. It’s not a very pleasant thought.

So, despite my natural aversion to doctors, I have to admit that technology has made an incredible difference in my life. I really couldn’t have lived the life I’ve lived without it.

Sure, glasses are pretty nice, but there’s a big difference between glasses and the weird body modification stuff that transhumanists talk about.

Fair enough. Let’s use a different example. All of us know someone that’s had to use a pacemaker. Pacemakers are about as invasive as it gets. They’re literally sticking a small device inside a person’s chest and attaching it to their heart in order to monitor and, if needed, control their heartbeat. It can be pretty freaky to think about, but people generally understand that pacemakers help. They may not be excited about getting a pacemaker (who would be?), but they acknowledge and accept it.

This is how I think about transhumanism. I view it as simply the continuation of the general trend of technology improving people’s lives. If there’s a technology that can help people live longer, avoid disease, mitigate pain, or cure disability, then it would be immoral to withhold it from them. At the very least, we should offer them options, and let them make their own decisions.

I think that many people are worried that transhumanism will take away their choices, not increase them.

Yes, I hear this a lot too. I think one problem is that people try to imagine transhumanism in the abstract, so it’s easy to go down these mental rabbit holes of all the things that could go wrong. And there are certainly things that could go wrong! We can go into these things in more detail in the future, but for the moment it might be easier to focus on the big picture.

The question was, “will transhumanism take away my choices, rather than increase them?”

First, we have to compare the transhumanist vision of the future to the present. In the present, none of us have any control over our bodies. Sure, there are some cosmetic changes we can make (different haircuts, tattoos, etc.) But we have no control over the important bits. We have no say in whether we’re tall or short, athletic or clumsy. People born with severe disability were not asked for their consent. Even mental faculties like intelligence are governed by genes to a much greater extent than most are comfortable admitting.

And when we say that something is “governed by genes,” we might as well be saying “governed by luck,” since none of us has any control over the genes we inherit.

I see transhumanism as simply a way of letting people make their own choices about the lives they live, without being so shackled to the whims of fate.

That’s all very nice if transhumanist “enhancements” are optional, but what if they aren’t? What if those in power decide that they know what’s best for the people better than they do themselves?

I would point out that authoritarians have been attempting to control people’s lives for thousands of years, without needing to use transhumanism as an excuse. Authoritarianism is scary, period, regardless of whether transhumanism is used as a pretext for control. Authoritarianism must be challenged, period, regardless of whether future societies are transhumanist.

The argument that “we shouldn’t pursue transhumanism because authoritarians might hijack it” could be applied to any technology. “We shouldn’t harness electricity because bad guys might misuse it.” “We shouldn’t invent calculus because bad guys might use it for bad things.”

Yes, bad guys will try to use technology to do bad things. They will sometimes succeed. But if we allowed the fear of technological misuse to paralyze us, we’d still be living in caves. The lesson of history is not to oppose technology, but to oppose those who would use technology to hurt others.

It’s sometimes hard to remember that, for all the bad people trying to abuse technology for bad ends, there are even more good people that oppose them. And over the long arc of history, the good guys have won more often than not.

Okay, I understand what you’re saying. But I’m still a bit worried about this bizarre world that transhumanists want to build.

That’s fine. You’d be crazy to just accept all this stuff uncritically. Luckily, we’ve got plenty of time.