Transhumanism is a movement which
offers progress for all, but inevitable will leave a significant number of
people in the dust. The abbreviation of H+ is enough to show that in a transhumanist
society where some individuals have something extra, there will be those who
have something less. A fundamental focus of the transhumanist movement should be
how those who will be disadvantaged either by choice (luddites) or by
circumstance (marginalized people) should be “handled”. A society where some
need to be handled or given extra attention does not have equality and a shift
to such a society would set the world’s attempt at equality back significantly.
The question then is whether it is worth it for the good of society and
individuals benefiting to make the switch anyway given the possible health of individuals
and the environment. In addition the intellectual and technological
gratification society would receive as a result of the profound progress and
change would be profound.
There is
hardly any question that there are amazing benefits to adopting certain
transhumanist ideals into society in the form of gene modification and
robotics. Robots can be programmed to perform difficult or dangerous jobs that
currently human error or incapability limits from occurring or proves fatal. If
robotic technology was more advanced the gushing wellhead during the BP oil
spill may have been able to be fixed more quickly. As it was the remotely
operated underwater vehicles failed and the oil gushed for three months,
allowing 4.9 million barrels of crude oil to spill into the gulf, killing
countless creatures and causing millions
of dollars in damage and loss of profit. Already robotic technology is being used to supplement human
action in risky and precise brain and other surgeries, where the unreliability
of physical human movement can have terrible consequences. Similarly, the
possibilities avoiding illness and chronic disease through genetic modification
could do wonders for individuals who no longer need to suffer personally or
through a sick family member while also developing the entire human genome to
be free of such biological limitations. These possibilities are somewhat
unbelievable, what would a society benefiting so much from non-human workers
and free from the terrible burden of unexplainable or incurable disease mean
for the humans living in it. With the elimination of chronic disease and the
potential genetic modification methods, it is possible that humans would
approach the elimination of death altogether. This is especially possible when
robotic or computer technology became such that a person’s personality,
intelligence, and genome could be uploaded onto a storage container allowing it
to truly last forever.
The question becomes would this be
a human life? If one cannot die, does one’s life lose value or meaning? Or once
the restriction of death has been lifted, are countless opportunities for
further development and discovery simply opened up? It seems improbable that an
individual living a life with no end in sight is likely to spend every day and
moment productively working for the future. It seems more likely that an
individual would look at the vast empty space of time ahead of them and put off
work until the next day, metaphorically sleep a little longer (assuming the
necessity of sleep has been eliminated). In the area of transhumanist society
wherein some are superior to others it is assumed that lazy humans not taking
advantage of the opportunities given to them because of the hard work of
generations before them would be scorned and inferior. What can a transhumanist
society do with those who do not have energy to work and develop if the threat
of starvation and death is taken away? Another type of inferior individual in
such a society would be those unwilling to change their genetics to be superior
whether for religious, moral, or fear-based reasons. The progressive ideal of
the importance of civil liberty often goes with other progressive ideals shared
by transhumanists such as the elevating of the human race as a whole by raising
individuals beyond their potential. Therefore the preserving of civil liberties
is often a priority, or at least is portrayed as important. In reality it is
likely eventually those in charge will not even pretend to make civil liberties
universal. By that time perhaps the division between those who have embraced and/or
are fully experiencing transhumanist society and those who are not will be so
vast that there will be a separate set of rules, expectations, and
responsibilities for each. The undeveloped souls may need extra help and the
developed may have extra responsibilities. The unanswered question remains is
the good of all humanity worth the inequality that society will be? And beyond
that, how long will it take for people to forget about the importance of
equality all together?
