Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

2

selver wrote

I agree with everything you said here, I've made the same criticisms many times myself, I just don't think it's an argument against anarcho-transhumanism. It's an argument against non-radical transhumanism. A transhumanism that accepts the complexity of the situation and attempts to deal with that, while also pursuing technological freedom as an important principle, in not inherently anti-anarchist.

As for the singularity bullshit, I definitely wouldn't defend that, but I don't think it needs to be a core element of anarcho-transhumanism.

3

Dumai wrote

my problem is i don't know what a transhumanism that doesn't advocate the use of technology to completely transcend suffering would even look like.

5

selver wrote

It wouldn't focus on transcending suffering. It would focus on creativity, imagination, desire, and expanding the realm of what's possible.

3

Dumai wrote (edited )

how is this focus on "expanding the realm of what's possible" still transhumanist if we're abandoning the cure for death and the mechanisation of life?

if we're not doing that, then how are we going to avoid the problems of technological growth that you and i both agree exist, and most transhumanists don't ever seem to engage with?