I don’t see a problem with it outside of the context of capitalism. I’d absolutely love to extend my vision to see other spectrums, or to have a brain computer interface that would expand my cognition. As long as these modifications are done voluntarily and are entirely under the control of the person deciding on them, it would allow us to widen our perspective and potentially live in environments like space.

The way you describe it, is sounds like they’re like the solarpunk people, as in, “I want stuff that’s utopian under liberalism” “Good news, you can have it in communism” “But <cia talking point>”

Hyperindividualistic nonsense. If applied widely, it would of course be amazing. Their goal is to maintain what they see as key individuals that are just blobs of assets not some kind of civilizational lynchpin. If they have any success with it they’ll extend these offers to their courtiers and cultural figures they want to manipulate. Think Selena Williams Ozempic ad but for the whale serum from Avata—never mind. It will never improve the human condition until it is like you said part of a socialist healthcare model

The thing is, “improving lives of humans” from like quality of life, public health, and life expectancy is things that dotps care about already, markedly at a demographic level (like it’s already baked into “public health”). The self-appointed transhumanists (primarily of the western techbro variety) have the hyperindividualist approach to these things and rationalize that their forays into x or y technologies to this end, that only the most privileged can even access, will “eventually” “trickle down” to the hapless and the poors and undeserving masses. Often the rationale includes mumbling the “rule” that technology gets cheaper as time goes on, all the while guarding and preventing downward/cheapening transfer/wider access by using social technologies like the institution of intellectual property.

Pretty sure it won’t even matter for like 200 years

Personally I think it is very human to live a life from beginning and end. Dying itself is part of the human experience and removing our ability to die to me seems like removing the essence of being human. I like that my life has an end. It gives much more meaning to all the things I am experiencing in my life, because my ability to experience is limited. My life will end. I don’t know when. Realistically within the next 50 years, I guess. I hope to live in a healthy way for as long as possible, but I really do want it to end at some point.

Until/unless we have global communism (which likely won’t be in my lifetime), I would find it very hard to trust any of it. I just know the MKUltra-brain types would be salivating at the idea of using body/mind alteration to induce mind control and the capitalists would be salivating at the idea of using it to further the transformation of a person into a commodity. Until those types are utterly gone from the world, it’s something I cannot even begin to imagine aiding in normalizing.

I draw a line with it that I don’t with AI because AI is still an external tool, not an injection into our biology. I also distinguish it from medicinal solutions which are aimed at healing a person, as opposed to trying to “upgrade” them in a mechanistic way. What matters to me is a view of mind/body that is aimed at healing illness, disability, etc., rather than trying to transform us into something else when we don’t even understand the current form all that well to begin with.

Also, the largest problems we face are from large scale social contradictions, not from not having good enough minds/bodies. Trying to transcend that with fundamental changes to the individual seems like the same nonsensical thinking as people who think AI will develop into the singularity and then somehow become hyper intelligent in a way we can’t understand and take over. When I wear sunglasses, it helps me deal with sunlight. Would there ever be a reason I should need to inject sunglasses capability into me, so I can turn it on and off at will?

The flexibility of external tools has taken humanity very far in development. Any fundamental change made, setting aside the various problems of manipulation or poor design, would need to be worth the permanence and something would be different in the process. You can’t just change the human form and be more capable now without any tradeoffs.

If any of you have read the manga Pumpkin Scissors, I do believe Transhumanism weighs some valid points in making knowledge as universal as possible and eliminating barriers such as intellectual property and patenting. Transhumanism, as a philosophy, has not been properly fleshed out and has no historical record of implementation or consolidation of power and has so far proven to be just theory without praxis. I mean sure you can incorporate some aspects of it but it doesn’t really have a consistent underlying philosophical framework to it.

I dislike it because of my metaphysical fear of transcending my human condition.

Transhumanism is, in a way, a modern take on a very ancient pursuit of longevity, immortality, or superiority of being over other people.

It is an inherently individualist philosophy and one that is primarily driven by narcissism.

In a communist society, with equal access to treatment, and with societal management of equal “improvements” and “sidegrades”, sure, why not use medical technology to improve lives with, IDK, better muscular health into old age or changing your natural hair color or whatever.

The cyberpunk artistic tradition focuses on the effects of augmentation in capitalism as a lens to explore the contradiction between human labour and fixed constant capital in capitalism (and other contradictions in capitalism) by heightening it through moving it into our bodies.

I am ok with extending my life, but I did to not want to implant machines into my body especially ones created by greedy corporations.