Some authors such as Nick Bostrom see transhumanism as a loosely defined movement that has undergone its gradual development over the past decades. In his same essay (Human Genetic Enhancements: A Transhumanist Perspective, Bostrom 2003) he indicates that transhumanism promotes an interdisciplinary approach to understand and evaluate the opportunities that have been opened for the improvement of the condition and the human organism itself thanks to advances in technology.
Attention is paid to both current technologies, such as genetic engineering and information technologies as well as those that were then seen as the future, such as molecular nanotechnology and artificial intelligence.
Before going deeper, I would like to stop precisely at this point to analyze the premises that have been taken into account by the transhumanist movement.
The first premise that can be seen in this kind of definition is to understand that the human condition and its own biology are not limited to natural evolution itself, but are susceptible to being altered, in this case, improved by artificial means, It is technological.
The second premise that I appreciate is that it defines the transhumanist movement as loosely defined, which indicates that it is susceptible to being changed, expanded, nuanced in the light of new advances, reflections, or objectives. That is, the transhumanist movement understands humanity (or the human being) as a work in progress or something that has not concluded its evolution.
Another secondary premise, although not minor, is that the objective is "good", that is, it is in favor of the human species itself when speaking of improving its condition. This entails allowing humans to reach capacities superior to their own biological condition (natural) as well as increasing their capacities to modify their environment, making responsible use of scientific and technological advances.
In this way, the transhumanist movement relies on its fundamental premises to achieve its objectives of human improvement, with the support of information technologies, engineering, and biological sciences. One point of analysis is on the range of "human enhancements" that the movement has as its objectives.
On the one hand, we have the radical extension of the scope of human health, the eradication of disease and elimination of all unnecessary suffering and on the other the increase of the physical, emotional, and intellectual capacities of humans.
Going to the limits, some transhumanist proposals speak of altering the human condition to enable space colonization or the creation of superintelligent machines and even cyborgs (human-machine hybrids). The approach is not only focused on improvement or evolution but as a means for the very survival of the human species, due to events such as climate change or cosmic cataclysms that prevent us from living on Earth.
In those scenarios, we humans would not be prepared with the current physical and mental conditions and it would then be necessary to change or rapidly evolve our biology and our minds and consciences to adapt to new environments.
The transhumanist movement is very broad and also includes elements of cultural, psychological, economic, social, and institutional change.
In this way, certain believers in transhumanism are taking measures to try to survive that moment in which it is possible to transform into post-humans, choosing a healthy lifestyle or preparing their cryogenization to maintain their body until it is possible to be reborn in a time where they can repair their body or even rejuvenate it and thus have a new opportunity to live another improved life.
Once we have taken the first steps in the exploration of the transhumanist movement, I would like to detain my analysis on the two levers on which it supports the achievement of its objectives:
- The repair of our biology through genetic engineering and nanotechnology; and
- The extension of our capacities beyond our genetic, species, and consciousness limits.
The repair of our biology through genetic engineering and nanotechnology
With the first of the levers, dedicated to the repair of our body, the objective is to offer us the extension of our lives beyond the biological limit imposed by our genetic coding and exposure to the environment that causes the oxidation of our cells, degeneration, mutation (cancer) or sensitivity to viruses, bacteria or parasites. The main role here is played by the life sciences (with biology, medicine, and chemistry as central axes), their advances, and the different specialties and applications (including genetic editing) that allow improving the quality and standard of living of men.
The extension of our capacities beyond our genetic, species, and consciousness limits
The second lever, dedicated to the extension of our human and physiological capacities, is where we can glimpse a quantitative and qualitative leap. In this important leap, it is no longer a question of repairing or avoiding wear or damage to the tissues and organs of our body (which would lead us to push the genetic capacities of our species to the limit) but to provide added value, a kind of transformation, either in an organic way (by genetic reprogramming) or a hybridization with technology. This would lead us to form new entities, no longer human in the strict sense of the definition since the acquired capacities or characteristics would be well above those corresponding to the natural development of our species at present.
The debates provoked by the transhumanist movement and its objectives are innumerable. Concerns are raised regarding human consciousness itself, which would transform into another yet unexplored state. Also about the decision about which body improvements should be implemented and which ones should not, about who should be the recipient of those improvements and with what priority (equity, fairness, ...), about the vital moment to make the improvements (only before birth, during life, after maturing, when the signs of aging appear, ...). There is also debate about whether the improvements influence our genetics and reproduction and the ethics that should govern those decisions or possible alternatives or who or what entity would decide them. Perhaps the debate is more philosophical or more scientific, but what is clear today is that we have no answers or indications of the future of our species.
The appearance of life and the evolution of species is estimated to have started about 3.8 billion years ago, about 700 million years after the formation of the earth. Taking that reference, it seems to us that the evolution towards more varied and complex life forms is a growing trend, however, we have examples of massive extinctions of species and already in the history of humanity we have observed the elimination of entire civilizations.
Why should life remain and life evolve sine dies on Earth? And the human species? We lack references in cosmic times and the ability to understand the universal mechanisms to be able to make that statement and therefore we can only speculate with what we know and what we expect (or wish) to happen.
Another point of view is, without entering spiritual or religious realms, if we truly have the ability to perpetuate their existence as a species, even in non-biological ways, avoiding the rules that may govern our existence in the universe. This is again an unanswered question, although it is worth asking it to reflect on the possible impediments that may exist to achieve it. The first impediment mentioned is our physical limitation and dependence on the environment, where many actions could be considered to overcome it.
Another impediment could be the limitation of our mental capacity and of conscience to understand concepts or superior existences, the point where also ways to overcome the obstacle can be proposed.
Cognitive Science
Additionally, we could introduce in the reflection the purpose of convenience of this supposed perpetuation of our species. Is it really the purpose of humanity to perpetuate itself as a species? Are we humanity a species or are we part of something greater outside of our understanding?
The influence of cognitive science on transhumanism is in the context of the second-mentioned lever (dedicated to the extension of our human capacities) where the paths of the transhumanist movement intersect with those of the cognitive sciences. The efforts of the cognitive sciences are focused on studying the mind and its processes to understand the principles that govern intelligence and thus be able to improve learning and ultimately be able to increase intelligence (human, animal, or machine). ).
The link between the transhumanist movement and the interdisciplinary study of cognitive sciences is in the human mind and the understanding of its internal mechanisms or processes, its development, and evolution.
Transhumanists aim to achieve an enhanced version of a human, but what would an enhanced human be without an enhancement of his mind and his intellectual abilities? It is precisely the mind (and the brain) that is the key element that allows us, humans, to transform our environment and therefore our existence.
With the interdisciplinary approach of cognitive sciences, it is intended to understand the nature of what we call human intelligence, revealing its physiological and functional mechanisms and the springs that intervene in the cognitive processes (information processing) that make up our reality as living beings such as the perception, consciousness, memory, calculation, reasoning and inferences, decisions, imagination, emotions, etc.
At this point I propose a reflection exercise where we ask ourselves if to achieve that longed-for post-humanity, it is first necessary to improve or expand our mental capacity before tackling the task of expanding our physiological capacities. The current situation shows us that the issue of genetic improvement raises many ethical debates in the scientific community (and the general one) and we may be at a point where our current intellectual capacities do not allow us to understand the big picture and be able to decide the next steps in our evolution or to discern what will or will not be good for our species.
Following this line of argument, the objective and object of study of cognitive sciences (improving intelligence, through the understanding of the principles of intelligence through the study of the mind and its processes) would be obliged to become the first objective of the transhumanist movement and therefore the main efforts should be focused on achieving it.
The sequence of action is clear; thanks to a greater mental capacity, we will be able to better understand what is convenient for us as a species and we will be able to conceive objectives of the physiological improvement more in line with that vision. An example would be that with this new clairvoyance we decide that the best thing is to have three arms or legs or on the contrary that it is a useless ability to have technology that allows us to move or even that we do not have to move in any way because we are mentally connected to a computational matrix and that we can interact with the physical world through our robotic technology to obtain the resources we need.
Another element for reflection is the evolution of human consciousness and the very definition of humanity. It is true that progressively, but especially in recent decades, humans have experienced changes in our way of understanding and relating to the world, society, and ourselves, promoted or facilitated by technology. We live longer and better, we experience experiences that are beyond those that nature does not offer and we even have an image of ourselves, our society, and our physical environment conditioned by artificial means. We have achieved all this by means external to ourselves, that is, without genetic modifications or operational links to thinking machines, always using our natural senses as interfaces.
The Transhumanist Transition
Indeed, we are currently living a kind of transhumanist transition in which more and more we use the knowledge we have developed to manufacture drugs that cure us or vaccines that immunize us from diseases, or we use prostheses, pacemakers, valves, or transplanted organs, or we move in artificial means of transport and we use machines to transform our means and the natural environment. Of all the changes that humanity has undergone in recent decades, without a doubt the one that is revolutionizing our lives and also in a short time is the one that has to do with computers and communication networks.
We have reached the point of delegating certain mental functions to our computers, including issues of social or personal relationships, we work, play, trade, study, and research through technologies, we monitor our health and well-being, we record and we remember our experiences and endless new uses of technologies where more and more we are in the process of digitizing our lives.
What will happen when we get to digitize all aspects of our life? (heard recently about the Metaverses?) Will our personal consciousness change? And the collective conscience of society? Will our bodies then be relevant, beyond the physical support of our mind and senses? What if we get to digitize our consciousness? Could we still be ourselves without our bodies? (see embodied cognition theories). What would happen if a new collective consciousness arose from the union of all the digital consciousnesses of the world? What if we created an independent digital consciousness, without physical-corporal support? How could we define “being human” in those hypothetical future scenarios?