Human Exceptionalism

Transhumanism is Really Minushumanism

Transhumanism is like a great old Woody Allen joke:

Agnes is having coffee with her friend Pearl. “How was the new restaurant,” Pearl asks. “Awful.” Agnes responds, “The food was terrible–and such small portions!”

Similarly, transhumanists say that humans are not good enough, smart enough, or strong enough–and we die way too soon!

Consider this piece by my transhumanist pal, brilliant self-promoter, & presidential candidate, Zoltan Istvan, who apparently wants to become a vacuum cleaner.

First, he puts down humanity as not good enough for a truly fulfilling life. From, “Why I Advocate Becoming a Machine,” in Motherboard:

To understand why one’s future self could be markedly improved over one’s current self, consider how we perceive reality for a moment.

Human beings have five basic senses that send signals to our brain, telling us what’s out there in the world. These senses understand only tiny bits of the universe around us. For example, our eyes can only see about 1 percent of the light spectrum.

Our ears aren’t much better: they are unable to register many noises that other animals like dogs, dolphins, and bats can hear. Our sense of touch basically only works if we’re actually touching something.

Despite all these obvious physical inabilities, humans insist what we experience is “reality.” However, reality to someone with built-in microscopic or telephoto vision and hyper-sensitive hearing is potentially many times more complex and profound than anything a natural human being might experience.

Oh, woe is us to lead such limited lives! The solution? Upgrade!

The reality is that many transhumanists want to change themselves dramatically. They want to replace limbs with mechanical endoskeleton parts so they can throw a football further than a mile. They want to bench press over a ton of weight. They want their metal fingertips to know the exact temperature of their coffee. 

But why would that be sufficient or special if everyone could do it?

Think about it: Who do we most admire? Those among us who strive to excel beyond their natural born abilities–whether an Olympian or a Special Olympian.

Transhumanism is a cheap way to excellence–which isn’t excellence.

Istvan ultimate wants us to become machines:

Biology is simply not the best system out there for our species’ evolution. It’s frail, terminal, and needs to be upgraded. In fact, even machines may be upgraded in the future too, and rendered as junk as our intelligences figure out ways to become beings of pure organized energy. “Onward” is the classic transhumanist mantra.

But Zoltan, computing isn’t true intelligence and moreover, machines can’t feel!

No love. No excitement. No fear. No true empathy or sympathy. No grief. In brief, no core humanity.

Indeed, some of the most truly human people I have ever met had Down syndrome–the antithesis of the transhumanist’s Utopian quest for hyper intelligence and longevity.

If we could only channel their purity and depth of love, our world would be better than any that could ever be made by becoming solipsistic machines.

In summary, Z, your fantasy of becoming a transhuman machine would not make you more, but rather, less than human.

I suggest a name change: Minushumanism.

Most Popular


Jonathan Swift in a White Suit

In 1965 Tom Wolfe visited Princeton University for a panel discussion of "the style of the Sixties." The author of The Kandy-Kolored Tangerine-Flake Streamline Baby, published that year, was scheduled to appear alongside Günter Grass, Allen Ginsberg, and Paul Krassner. Grass spoke first. The German novelist's ... Read More

In Appreciation, and against (Too Much) Nostalgia

To put it a little self-pityingly: It seems that my gurus are going, and the world’s. Richard Pipes, the great historian of Russia and the Soviet Union, died on Thursday; Bernard Lewis, the great historian of the Middle East, died yesterday. We had them both for a long time. Pipes was born in 1923, Lewis way ... Read More
Law & the Courts

This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—May 20

1996—What’s one way to deal with unhelpful precedent? Just ignore it entirely, as Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in Romer v. Evans does. In 1986 the Supreme Court ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick that it is constitutionally permissible for states to make homosexual conduct criminal. A decade later, the Court ... Read More

Comedians Are Catching On

The comedians are beginning to catch on. Over the weekend -- just one week after featuring a bevy of top-line Hollywood stars impersonating members of the Trump administration, as well as a cameo by a vengeful Stormy Daniels asking for President Trump’s resignation -- Saturday Night Live finally acknowledged ... Read More
PC Culture

The Nature of Progressive Insensitivity

Former vice president Joe Biden is back in the news yet again. For a second time, he seems surprised that poor residents of the inner city are capable of doing sophisticated jobs: We don't think ordinary people can do things like program, code. It's not rocket science, guys. So, we went and we hired some folks ... Read More

The Feminization of Everything Fails Our Boys

Let me share with you two troubling — and, I believe, closely linked — news reports. The first, from this weekend, comes courtesy of the American Enterprise Institute’s Mark Perry. In one chart, he highlights the dramatic and growing gender gap in higher education. In short, women are dominating: ... Read More