Why is almost every other transhumanist I meet online utterly batshit? I mean, the most famous transhumanist on this website alone has some kind of human pet fetish.
I don’t think I’m crazy
Wait, you’re transhumanist, too? Ah, so that makes you pretty much the only other sane transhumanist I’ve met over the internet so far.
My biggest statement/sentiment is “Never gonna die”, either through technological lengthening of centomeres, the digitization of the mind (Yes, I know that I have a 50/50 shot of actually living forever with that method, but it’s still me), or the replacing of organic components with technological ones.
My biggest reservation is the matter of security.
I’m a transhumanist and the concept of extended/infinite life for human beings is absolutely terrifying. Bring on the cyborgs and cool prosthetics and personhood for artificial intelligence and all that jazz, but when humanity overcomes aging we are absolutely fucked as a species. We will see inequality the likes of which we cannot even fathom today, and there will be no end to it.
The march of progress treads on the back of death and it will grind to a halt. Violence will be not just a valid political tactic but in many cases the only tactic. Sustainable living will be impossible; human economy will be based by necessity on endless growth. Innovation will stagnate as fresh perspectives fade away; undoubtedly, the loss of aging means a decline in the birth rate. Along with that, the youngest generation will be more powerless than ever before, and the oldest generation more entrenched in power than they could ever dream of today.
The good will still die young, and the bad will live forever. People do not understand how beneficial it is to humanity that all men must someday die. Seriously. It’s not worth it. The adult lifespan of a human being is already very long, just make it count.
The reason people get set in their ways is precisely because of aging They feel like crap, their energy levels get low which means far less creative thinking. Also people are far less willing to take risks when they have neither the time nor the energy to start new careers over again from the bottom.
Eliminate that, plus the direct physical effects of aging on the brain, and people absolutely would keep innovating as long as they lived.
Also, birthrates are already declining, and they’re declining far more among smart people than anyone else. A cure for aging would mean that we stop losing the smart people we have, and is therefore vital for continued innovation.
Also, if people in power had a direct, personal reason to give a shit what the world will look like in 50 years, you’d be more likely to see sustainable policies, not less.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. And furthermore, birth rates are only declining in first-world countries – i.e. among rich people. Family size kind of directly correlates to wealth in general. In the modern era, children help offset low per-capita wealth by adding more hands to the labor pool, providing more connections in times of need, etc. They definitely are not declining among “smart people” – that’s an incredibly classist view of the world. Having a large family does not make you dumb. Living in a poor country does not make you dumb. That’s a short road to talk of racial superiority. People with a lot of wealth have more opportunities to make the most of their intelligence.
The reason that young people are more open to new ideas isn’t that they’re vigorous and healthy. It’s that they are inexperienced and undergoing rites of passage and growth. Once you’ve lived in the “real world” for 20 years or so (i.e. double the amount you had previously been alive), you have formed concrete opinions that you don’t give up on, whether you live for 30 more years or 50. There are biological and psychological factors at work here (like critical periods) which simply extending lifespan won’t affect at all.
People in power don’t give a shit what the world will look like in 5 years, much less 50, except insofar as it benefits them. Most ultra-wealthy people have some heirs to pass their wealth and power down to. They feel themselves protected from the consequences of their actions (where they even acknowledge they exist) regardless of age.
Margaret Thatcher wouldn’t have been any less awful if she had lived for 50 more years.
Don’t delude yourself. And until you’ve done a little more research into anthropology, I don’t trust you to make an informed decision on this – I suspect that, like many transhumanists, you are interested in it for selfish reasons and don’t put much thought into the impact it might actually have on the world.