In a letter to Max Born (source), Albert Einstein quoted ”the beautiful proverb: Junge Huren – alte Betschwestern (young whores – old bigots)”.
We have seen it happen so many times: once upon a time there was a wild teenager, sometimes naive but full of creativity and enthusiasm. Then (s)he has to learn some hard lessons, like that you are supposed to show at work at 8am in a formal suit. And then (s)he falls in the dullest mediocrity, forgets all wild and creative ideas of the past, and begins wearing formal suits even on Sunday mornings. (S)he may even, and this is really sad when it happens, become a boring, self-righteous, pompous and intolerant old bigot who hates teenagers for still having the aliveness that (s)he has lost.
Most wild teenagers avoid this trap, but some don’t. And I am sometimes afraid that transhumanism, once a wild and frighteningly brilliant teenager, may become a hopelessly dull old bigot.
A few years ago I used to say that the transhumanist movement had to grow up from its “nerdy sci-fi roots” and become an influential voice in the mainstream world. The metaphor I used was the same I am using now, a wild teenager who grows up and goes to business meetings in a formal suit. I also used to say that the transhumanist movement should not focus only on nerdy sci-fi stuff like immortality, conscious AI, brain implants and mind uploading, but also on the problems of today’s world and the attempts to find viable solutions. I still say and believe it: we should be part of progressive mainstream thinking, wear formal suits if it helps, and even get our hands greasy with the messy details of practical policy making and politics.
But, and this should go without saying, without giving up the core elements of our worldview. We, or at least most of us, *are* sci-fi nerds. I am certainly one. I believe that developing and deploying advanced technologies for human enhancement, without self-imposed a-priori artificial “ethical” limits, will make the world a better place and improve the quality of life and happiness of everyone on this planet and beyond. Which is, I believe, the only things that really matters. Of course I am not at all against practical ethical considerations related to the quality of life and happiness of actual, concrete persons, but I am very much against abstract “ethics” -what god does or does not want, absolute truths, objective morality, vague notions of human dignity, if it is moral for flying donkeys to discuss number theory with crystal pigs, and all that.
A few years ago we founded the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies as “a mainstream transhumanist think-tank in a formal suit”. Then we stopped using the T label, which was felt as too limiting, and invited non-transhumanist thinkers to join the IEET. Under the executive leadership of James Hughes, the IEET has carved itself a niche as a left-wing, transhumanist-friendly technoprogressive think tank. This is an important role that will, I hope, result in radically technoprogressive ideas of human enhancement becoming more and more accepted in mainstream policy.
Why am I writing this? Because I hear proposals to water down transhumanism to the point of becoming unrecognizable. And I am not referring to the predictable broken-disk anti-transhumanist rants of well known bio-luddites, but to ideas put forward by people close to transhumanism and even by declared transhumanists. They seem ashamed of radical transhumanist ideas and mainly wishing to sound reasonable, “ethical” and politically correct to win the approval of the anti-progress bio-luddites out there. Pleeease! Give me more of the old nerdy sci-fi stuff anytime.
To be clear: I am a left technoprogressive and very concerned with the problems of today’s world. But when I want to say or do something in support of food and clean water for everyone, affordable health care, education for all children, reduction of the digital divide, BIG, reduction of the North-South gap, world peace, civil rights, etc., I do so in other contexts, activist movements or political parties. Who is concerned about, for example, the environment, should join an environmental movement or a green party and *do* something, instead of trying to transform transhumanism into an environmental movement…
I want transhumanism to remain transhumanism. Perhaps even with some kind of “return to the origins” and some more sci-fi nerdiness to correct what I am beginning to perceive as the political correctness of old bigots.
[editor: this essay was written in 2007, but today it is still applicable, perhaps even more so]
This essay first appeared in Giulio’s blog, HERE
* hero image used from here http://iamawildteenager.blogspot.com/
October 20, 2014 at 7:07 am
Excellent Article, Giulio.
Many of the points you make here i have tried to emphasise for a while myself.
“the transhumanist movement had to grow up from its “nerdy sci-fi roots” and become an influential voice in the mainstream world” – to me that includes engaging politically as some of us are now beginning to do. Guessing from the amount of political comments by some well known transhumanists i encounter on g+ and fb there is already a growing realisation about the eminently political nature of our core beliefs.
“the problems of today’s world and the attempts to find viable solutions” – this is the point i have tried to make in “Be Here Now”. Many of us are engaged in such activities within the private and nongovernmental sectors, and i think it is time to stop avoiding the TH label on personal and organisational levels.
I also agree with your use of the technoprogressive label which largely overlaps with the TH one.
“But when I want to say or do something in support of […..], I do so in other contexts, activist movements or political parties” – here i only agree in the sense that there are no TH contexts yet in which to say it. There are plenty of groups that deal with these issues and probably the most effective way to engage is to work within the appropriate issues. But this shows a weakness due to the immaturity of transhumanism. All of the issues you list here are essential to the realisation of our vision, which is not the escape into virtual reality, but to improve (post)human conditions, and that can not be done unless the foundations are in place.
What we need to do is include and address these problems within our TH program; if they continue to grow we may experience civilisational collapse in our lifetimes and then we can kiss our visions a long goodbye.
October 21, 2014 at 5:20 am
Frankly, the below definition (which comes up when I google the term, which in my book makes it the gold standard) seems very reasonable. Wish people would quit trying to load baggage onto it, and also quit trying to water it down.
trans·hu·man·ism
tranzˈhyo͞omənizm/
noun
the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology.
I would like to contrast Transhumanism with Humanism. Transhumanism stresses evolution especially by means of science and technology, whereas Humanism stresses the potential value and goodness of human beings emphasizing common human needs.
hu·man·ism
ˈ(h)yo͞oməˌnizəm/
noun
an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems.
October 21, 2014 at 6:39 am
Yes Brad, good definitions. But both leave out crucial points.
The first one omits saying that the ‘human race’ has been doing just that since it began, albeit without being too aware of it.
The second that being the product of the enlightenment it was a reaction and final push against the then still dominant shackles of theistic thinking.
Transhumanism rest firmly on the humanist tradition.
October 21, 2014 at 1:55 pm
Well said. People seem often to try and fit in more with established mainstream rather then to actually try and change it.
When transhumanists need to do it to be able to spread our ideas and such in a way that people will understand, not to dilute it until its nothing left.
We need to be radical, but in a good way, not a hostile opposing way. We need to show people that there can be huge progress, for all of us, if we simply want it and work towards it. The benefit will be for all.
It is easier said than done, of course. People are generally so absorbed into established society that they are scared of anything different and reject it without thought.
October 21, 2014 at 5:19 pm
I think there is a danger in to much radicalism. we need to be gentle in working with the larger consumer demographic I think to slowly draw them in with logical analysis and solving real world problems for them. Otherwise we risk a back lash from some of the out moded thinking prevalent in that same demographic.
October 21, 2014 at 6:47 pm
Funniest thing i ever heard from H+ for years : 1) ok we got the point of acceleration as a global, distributed, retrospective trend, made without any H+ whatsoever so … now we as observers can 2) we can predict it and 3)control and direct it.
Thats a unstopable LOL.