How to Stay Human in the Face of Radical Progress
An intro to the manifesto of a new (counter)revolutionary organization
By MARTIN REZNY
Is being human a good thing, or should we try to do better? That is the central question of the burgeoning transhumanist movement. Or rather, the answer of transhumanists to this question is that we most definitely can and should try to do better. As part of our world saving efforts, Luke and I aren’t so sure about that. We do believe we can do better, as human beings.
Given the growing number of increasingly dire risks associated with technological progress, we decided to propose as one of the pillars of protopia a new institution — Society for the Global Ethical Application of Revolutionary Sciences, or SGEARS for short. In this article, I will cover the first foundational principal of this organization:
Humanity Shall Not Be Replaced
In common language, to call someone or something “human” is to give them or it the highest compliment. At the same time, we tend to think of the human condition as a flawed state of being, both in terms of our tendency to make errors and in terms of human life being fraught with difficulties. The whole premise of our program is to strive to improve the conditions of living as a human, but we believe it is of key importance to never lose sight of what makes us who we are.
Within futurism as an ideology and movement, one of the more prominent ideas is the so-called transhumanism, or the notion that we can and should use science and technology to evolve or transcend our physical and mental limitations. To an extent, we have always been doing that, to our great benefit as a species, but there’s a difference between unlocking or freeing human potential, and becoming something not human anymore. As we progress, we must not abandon core human capacities.
There are many ways in which this could hypothetically happen that have been explored in science fiction, and undoubtedly many more that we haven’t thought of yet. That’s why, for both of these reasons, thinking about this seriously should be someone’s job. There should be a number of philosophers employed by this organization, tasked with continuously questioning and formulating the nature of humanity and how it relates to ongoing scientific or technological progress.
Here are some major defining features of humanity and how they’re threatened:
- Individuality — ever since the rise of global communication networks, the term “hive mind” keeps getting thrown around. On the internet, social media have already become integrated into almost every aspect of everyday life, exerting immense social pressure and making the concept of privacy almost extinct. Assuming we decide to go down the route of neural cybernetic augmentation, human brains can be directly networked in ways that will make a private existence or independent decision making effectively impossible.
- Embodiment — embodied cognition is a theory that describes how cognition typically involves acting with a physical body on an environment in which that body is immersed. In the not so distant future, it may be possible to separate the brain or the mind from the body and move it into a different body or environment, or to redesign human bodies altogether. Having a different body, especially if it’s immersed in an alien environment, may result in dramatic changes to one’s sense of self or the way we think at the most basic level.
- Forgetfulness — modern information technologies are exceptionally good at gathering all kinds of data and storing it in ways that make it very easy to search and access anywhere in the world. This may present a problem in that any youthful indiscretion or embarrassment may remain in global public record forever. This technology may also be used to directly augment human memory, potentially replacing it altogether. Without the right to be forgotten or the capacity to forget, forgiveness may be lost to us. Conversely, collectively shared memories can also be collectively altered or deleted at mass scale.
- Birthright — perhaps the most dangerous Pandora’s box among all of the futuristic technologies within our reach is genetic engineering. In the most objective sense, human beings are defined by their DNA, the human genome. There are also the natural principles of mutation and evolution through natural selection that all human beings are currently subject to equally. With sufficiently advanced genetic engineering, none of that remains set in stone. A political shift toward eugenics can result in any number of horrors, including bioweapons, supersoldiers, a slave race, sterilization, abuse of cloning, etc.
- Conflict — war, or violent, destructive conflict, is something that humanistic futurism aims to overcome, at least on any larger scale, but the will and capacity to fight seems to be an important part of the human spirit. It’s quite likely that even if we stop fighting amongst ourselves, there will always be something to fight for or against in the universe. However, if the future society ever becomes pacifistic to a point of humans losing the capacity to defend themselves against an adversary, it would eventually mean our end.
- Toil — one of the main defining features of humans throughout history which is very much at odds with most utopian futuristic visions is that we have to work for a living. This doesn’t appear to be the case only to the extent to which we have to work or are forced to work. Human beings tend to want to be useful and productive. For this reason, technology effectively making human beings useless wouldn’t be a good thing, much like reducing human beings to just workers isn’t a good thing. If the right balance isn’t struck, we may be “terminated” by robots, become truly useless, or become only robots.
- Conscience — one of the main philosophical underpinnings of modern science is determinism. The main problem with determinism from the humanistic point of view is that if one’s actions are only a result of inevitable natural forces and unconscious processes, then no one is personally responsible for their actions. As scientific predictive models or cybernetic means of social control improve, likely with the use of advanced computing and artificial intelligence, scientific determinism may become more than just a philosophy. A highly technologically advanced society with a legal system based on ideas like precrime that counter our intuition of conscience could be quite inhuman.
- Finality — given the explicit goals of this program, there’s an important distinction to be made between the concepts of life extension and immortality. Arguably, the most fundamental attribute of human existence is the fact that it is finite. This pushes us to do things, makes every moment precious, and ensures the obsolescence of outdated ideas. This wouldn’t be changed by a cure for all diseases including aging, that would just make it so that nobody will have to suffer illness or die of natural causes, specifically. Obsession with true immortality would be a true departure from humanity, likely resulting in vampiric elites refusing to ever be ousted from a position of power.
- Joy — this may be more a feature of ideal human experience rather than merely a capacity, but however you look at our desire and ability to enjoy life, life without joy isn’t quite human. As science and technology progress, there is a clear tendency to label a growing number of enjoyable human experiences as vices that are unhealthy, inefficient, archaic, or otherwise irrational. To a degree, perhaps we would be better off letting go of some of our more toxic or barbaric pastimes. Then again, where will this sanitization or censorship of human experience end? All humor can be declared offensive and hurtful, all thrilling activities include needless risk, and most fun-having is wasteful.
- Strife — while the general goal of all utopian futurism is to make life easier, it would probably be a bad thing if it would mean that there would be no challenges left in life. This is not so much about making life difficult for the sake of making it difficult, as it is about the way in which limitations put constructive pressure on character development. The term used to describe people who get everything for free without any effort is “spoiled”, after all. It’s possible humanity would reject such world and life, but if it were altered by this new reality, it could lose motivation or ability to sustain life over time.
- Vision — the whole idea of futurism is rooted in the human capacity to imagine that things could be better than they are. While science and technology are to an extent the main driving forces of progress from what is to what could be, technology can also be used to constrain human imagination and resist, reverse, or subvert progress. The artificial intelligence as it exists now is imitative, not creative, and it is developed mostly by interests that wish to gain more control over people. This is making it harder for us to imagine a better future or make it happen, resulting in entropy, not progress.
- Fantasy — most scientific or technological visions of a futuristic utopia are based on rationalism, and some explicitly predict that as humanity progresses, it will shed archaic notions like religion. However, assuming this actually happened, it’s not clear at a level of scientific proof that this would be a good thing. The capacity to believe against all odds in things that aren’t demonstrably real may be one of the fundamental human capacities. This can manifest as spiritual faith, but it can also manifest as secular hope. Maybe it is beneficial to survival to believe you have a chance when the numbers say you don’t.
What do you think? Let us know if you have any ideas on how to improve our recommendations, or if you want to get involved in any way. If you want to learn more about the organization, you can read the whole manifesto on its webpage:
