Is it Possible to be Transhumanist Without Being Humanist?

Korimyr the Rat — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 05:25:00 GMT

This is a question I find myself asking, partially because of philosophical arguments I've had on this forum, but largely due to the existence of such groups as the Prometheists and Transtopians, and others which have used transhumanist language and ideals to cover (or justify) old-fashioned racist and fascist ideologies.

Mr. Blackford recently posted a blog about how nearly all of his friends and former transhumanists occupied the same quadrant on the Political Compass test. It doesn't take very long, when talking to members of different transhumanist organizations, to see that the vast majority of members are, indeed, some form of social libertarian, regardless of their views on economic politics. This, in turn, seems to derive from a nigh-universal belief that the individual is more important than the society, and that there is no valid moral component to cultural norms.

Many transhumanist thinkers, as well, endorse as a moral pursuit the maximizing of pleasure and the minimizing of suffering, some going so far as to consider it the highest moral pursuit.

My question is, is it possible for a person to be a Transhumanist without accepting these notions?

Obviously, I am committed to the improvement of the human species, and to the pursuit of more meaningful and interesting lives for the members of that species. I want to see us transcend the limitations of our natural intelligence, our natural longevity, and our natural fragility. I want to see us expand beyond this planet, beyond our species, and even beyond our conventional understanding of what it means to be "alive".

But I do not think it is possible for individuals to reach these heights without a strong and vital society to support them, and I do not think such a society can exist without a common identity, a strong moral consensus, and the willingness to make sacrifices-- to endure pain and suffering and loss-- for the good of the whole. I think the law is a necessary and useful tool for cultivating these qualities in society and in individuals.

My experiences, both in the gym and in mystic practice, have also taught me that growth is not possible without pain and sacrifice. In order to experience greater pleasures, understand deeper mysteries, and wield greater power, it is necessary to push ourselves beyond our limits-- a process that, while deeply fulfilling, is also painful in many different ways. And, since pain is necessary to provide context for pleasure-- and vice versa-- I do not see how any sentient being cannot heighten one without deepening the other. It strikes me that seeking either to minimize pain or to maximize pleasure is a pointless goal, as it is always compensated by the other, and I would argue that heightening pleasure and deepening pain is a natural consequence of any kind of progress in making ourselves stronger, more intelligent, or more sensitive.

This is what I consider the ultimate goal to be; not immortality, not bliss, and not freedom, but vitality and power. Breaking the natural limits of our biology, and the artificial limits of our fears-- and reveling both in the pleasure and the pain that inevitably follow. I want to become something more than I currently am, and use that power to create something that is greater than I could hope to be-- even if that means that some of us, even myself, might be trampled into dust.

I'm not trying to argue for my points here. I have been doing that in our forums for as long as I have been a member. What I am asking is, is there room beneath the Transhumanist tent for these beliefs? Or does the label require us to be peace-loving libertarians?