Skip to content
U.S. Transhumanist Party – Official Website
  • Home
  • Posts
  • Values
  • Platform
  • Leadership
  • Advisors
  • Candidates
  • Highlights
  • FAQ
  • States & Allies
  • Free Membership
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Search Icon

U.S. Transhumanist Party – Official Website

U.S. Transhumanist Party – PUTTING SCIENCE, HEALTH, & TECHNOLOGY AT THE FOREFRONT OF AMERICAN POLITICS

The Right to Die – Article by Martin van der Kroon

The Right to Die – Article by Martin van der Kroon

May 29, 2017 Martin van der Kroon Comments 3 comments

logo_bg

Martin van der Kroon


The U.S. Transhumanist Party is, among many other things, concerned with life extension, health, and in general the well-being of people. If life extension can be stretched to virtual immortality, that would be even more amazing, but should it be mandatory?

This post is my personal view, and I have proposed a Plank regarding this which has been added to the Exposure Period for Platform Vote #5. I’m not trying to convince people, but I would like to open the discussion on a topic that we may reasonably call controversial.

The idea of immortality is a powerful and ancient one, and I too would be tempted to take the opportunity to become immortal, or live far beyond the scope of what we now consider “normal”. Not everyone shares this ideal though, and I think that is their right to not want this.

Who doesn’t want to live forever?

That is an interesting, but maybe also a bit of a naive question. I can imagine that some religious people, might at some point, even if they have enjoyed a longer life, wish to join the creator they believe in. Is it our place to deny them the chance to meet their God, regardless of whether this entity exists or not?

However, let us set religious aspects aside. Perhaps over the course of a very long life, one might have accomplished everything he or she wanted to do, seen everything there is to see, read, studied, written books, and so forth. What if a perpetual boredom sets in? Perhaps closer to home, we have all experienced things that are unpleasant, and some of those may be traumas. Perhaps carrying several lifetimes of traumas could give someone a sense that it is time to rest. 

I’m quite confident that there will be amazing things to see and do in the future, and that our skills and expertise in supporting people in any way we can, including with regard to mental health issues, will become much better. In the end it boils down to one’s personal freedom to have agency over themselves, as long as they do not hurt others in the process.

The loss of a loved one does in fact hurt, often a lot. The grief can be devastating, and no one ought to suffer this pain. The question here is: Is it acceptable to take someone’s agency away to spare others from having to grieve?

Currently we concern ourselves with death penalties, and ‘life-in-prison’ sentences, but likewise, ‘imprisonment to a sentence to live’ might not be the Utopian ideal we think it is.

Although I think it would be great if everyone could quite literally live happily and healthily ever after, I cannot speak for others, nor is it my place to decide or limit whether someone else wishes to die. I think that a wish to stop living is about as personal as it can get.

We are horrified when someone’s life is taken away by someone else, we should be equally horrified if we would allow the choice to die to be taken away by someone else.

Of course I’m not supporting that people commit suicide. I think, first and foremost, that people, when confronted by such thoughts of ending their lives, should seek help wherever they can – be it from family, a good friend, or a professional. If you are reading this, and you have thoughts of suicide for whatever reason, The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline wants to help and support you when you most need it!

The right to decide on the continuation of one’s own life may be counter to many people’s views, but it is an aspect we should consider and think about regardless of the conclusion we may draw from it.

Martin van der Kroon is the Director of Recruitment of the U.S. Transhumanist Party.


Guest Articles
agency, assisted suicide, autonomy, freedom, immortality, life extension, Martin van der Kroon, Religion

Post navigation

PREVIOUS
U.S. Transhumanist Party Interview with Kevin Baugh, President of Molossia
NEXT
U.S. Transhumanist Party Opposes Mandatory Minimum Prison Sentences

3 thoughts on “The Right to Die – Article by Martin van der Kroon”

  1. B.J. Murphy says:
    May 30, 2017 at 1:01 am

    Hi Martin,

    I’d actually written an article on this very subject, which was published on IEET. If you don’t mind, I’m going to paste it below as a comment.

    Let me know your thoughts on it:

    https://ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/9754

    On November 1, 29-year-old Brittany Maynard took medication to end her life. This wasn’t an act of cowardice, nor due to some psychological condition. She ended her life because she wanted to die on her own terms, rather than suffer the eventually-fatal torment of terminal brain cancer. Her ability to legally commit suicide – or what she referred to it as “death with dignity” – was due to the state of Oregon’s “Death With Dignity Act.”

    As a result, the entire nation is starting to talk about the right-to-die, or what is also commonly referred to as physician-assisted suicide. This isn’t even a new idea, either. Indeed, this very topic was heavily debated and talked about throughout the country nearly 20 years ago after Dr. Jack Kevorkian was arrested for providing voluntary euthanasia for his terminal patients.

    Dr. Kevorkian became a revolutionary to one section of the population, and the devil incarnate to the other. In fact, to this day, only 4 states out of 50 have officially legalized physician-assisted suicide (Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Montana), following Dr. Kevorkian’s footsteps in providing the moral alternative for terminally ill patients.

    But the tides could be turning in Dr. Kevorkian’s – and, yes, even Brittany Maynard’s – favor, as Brittany became the face and voice of a modern day “Death with Dignity.” Because of her sacrifice, in the coming years more and more terminally ill people may very well be legally allowed to die on their own terms.

    So where should Transhumanists and Longevity advocates stand on this particular topic? At first glance, one would assume that we Transhumanists would oppose suicide, given its clear conflict with that of longevity – a cause in which most Transhumanists are dedicated to. After all, one of our goals is to achieve indefinite life extension, or as Dr. Aubrey de Grey calls it negligible senescence. And for someone to commit suicide would be to give up on life – an act contrary to that of a Transhumanist.

    But then this assumption is erroneous, for it subsequently bases itself on another false assumption: that Transhumanists seek immortality.

    We’ve heard it, time and again, by anti-Transhumanist intellectuals and otherwise. Read it throughout the web, from newspapers to blogs. We Transhumanists are on a fool’s journey to achieve immortality. And yet, speaking as a fellow Transhumanist, I must come as a bearer of bad news to them: we do not seek immortality. In fact, immortality is a red herring of what we’re actually hoping to achieve – indefinite life extension.

    But what is the difference? If life is indefinitely extended, have you not achieved immortality? Not quite. The idea of immortality is the incapability of death, for if someone is capable of dying, they’re deemed mortal. In other words, immortality is a very authoritarian bond over the human will to make choices of their own. With indefinite life extension – the ability to remain young and healthy; to not age – we’re giving each individual the right to decide how long they wish to live, with the subsequent right to live indefinitely if they so wish.

    Unfortunately, many anti-Transhumanists and anti-longevity thinkers refuse to comprehend this simple understanding, and instead criticize indefinite life extension with nonsensical justifications – overpopulation, becoming bored, loss of resources, and so on. Either they adhere to neo-Luddism or Malthusian logical fallacies.

    ​Which brings us back to the topic of suicide. For Dr. Kevorkian, whenever a patient was medically diagnosed with a terminal illness, he knew there were only two options said patient could opt for: either they remained alive long enough to suffer until death relieved them of their pain, or they choose to die on their own terms, rather than suffer needlessly. Death was no longer dictated by a person’s biological clock, but instead became a choice for each individual to decide.

    And yet 46 states of the U.S. maintain a policy of criminalizing physician-assisted suicide. For Transhumanists and Longevity advocates, this should be very worrisome. After all, our quest to achieve indefinite life extension is merely an added chapter to Dr. Kevorkian’s book of right-to-die. We’re simply adding “-or-live” to the end of it. Speaking as a Transhumanist myself, despite my advocacy of indefinite life extension and support for anti-aging research, I also support right-to-die.

    This is something in which all of us Transhumanists and Longevity advocates must comprehend: if we support the right of individuals to decide how long they wish to live, rather than be dictated by their biological clocks, then we must equally support the right of individuals to decide when they wish to die.

    In essence, the goal of a Transhumanist and Longevity advocate is to ensure that all future deaths are suicides.

    “If you don’t have liberty and self-determination, you got nothing. That’s what this country’s built on and this is the ultimate self-determination: to determine when and how you’re gonna die when you’re suffering.” – Dr. Jack Kevorkian

    Reply
    1. Martin van der Kroon says:
      May 30, 2017 at 6:21 am

      Hi B.J.,

      Thank you for your comment. I think your article is spot on! You are correct on the immortality part as well. I hadn’t intended it in the superman or deity type fashion, rather as a more colloquial ‘indefinite life extension’.

      Perhaps as Transhumanists, we should not only strive to transcend our physical state of limitations, but also transcend the stigmas we face today, such as being able to talk about one’s wish to die with dignity, and perhaps accepting this person ought to be allowed to act upon it.

      Reply
      1. B.J. Murphy says:
        May 31, 2017 at 10:50 pm

        I couldn’t agree more. This should definitely extend upon our quest for indefinite life extension. This is about uplift individuals to decide their own fate, on their own terms.

        We can’t talk about giving people the right to choose life, while at the same time taking away their right to decide when they wish to die.

        Reply

Leave a Reply to B.J. Murphy Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social Media

Constitution of the U.S. Transhumanist Party

Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 3.0

U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook Feed

Victor Run Virtual Race – June 4-6, 2021

Free Transhumanist Symbols

Guidelines for Community Conduct

SUBMIT A POST

Recent Posts

  • Universal Sign Language – Transhuman / Transhumanism / Transhumanist – Post by Art Ramon Garcia, Jr.
  • The Anti-Aging Manifesto by Mat Alex Richards
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Makiko Yoshioka – June 5, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Mark Hamalainen – June 12, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Sharif Uddin Ahmed Rana – June 19, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Kai Micah Mills – June 26, 2022
  • Transhuman Club Launch – U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon – July 3, 2022
  • Debate: Should US/NATO Support Immediate Negotiated Peace in Ukraine? – Nathan Boyd & Maty Aksenton – July 10, 2022
  • Transhumanist Party / World Talent Economy Forum Debates: AI and Space Colonization – December 24 and 31, 2021
  • The First 3 Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salons – Highlights (2017-2018)
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Fred Zhang of LongevityDAO – July 31, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salon on CureDAO: Lukas Vogel, Andreas Melhede, Mike P. Sinn – August 7, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salon with James Strole – Pursuing Immortality – August 14, 2022
  • “Break the Rules” / U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion on Artificial Intelligence & Transhumanism – July 1, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Jules Hamilton – August 28, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Mati Roy – September 4, 2022
  • The Fourth and Fifth Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salons – Highlights
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Report from Longevity Summit Dublin – Day 1 – September 18, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Daniel Twedt – September 25, 2022
  • U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Sophie Jones – October 2, 2022

Recent Comments

  • Miriam on U.S. Transhumanist Party Action Items for New Members
  • Daniel Twedt on Declaration of the Chairman of the United States Transhumanist Party on the Re-Formation of the New York Transhumanist Party
  • Dan Kilian on Benefit for U.S. Transhumanist Party Members: Discounts Offered for Treatments from AmpliCell Medical
  • Cheryl Knepper on The U.S. Transhumanist Party Endorses Daniel E. Twedt for City Council in Thousand Oaks, California
  • Carlos on U.S. Transhumanist Party Vote on the Question of Endorsing Daniel E. Twedt for City Council in Thousand Oaks, California

Archives

  • March 2023 (2)
  • February 2023 (12)
  • January 2023 (24)
  • December 2022 (2)
  • November 2022 (2)
  • October 2022 (3)
  • August 2022 (3)
  • July 2022 (2)
  • May 2022 (6)
  • March 2022 (3)
  • February 2022 (4)
  • January 2022 (7)
  • December 2021 (11)
  • November 2021 (4)
  • October 2021 (5)
  • September 2021 (2)
  • August 2021 (2)
  • July 2021 (4)
  • June 2021 (2)
  • May 2021 (6)
  • April 2021 (7)
  • March 2021 (4)
  • February 2021 (5)
  • January 2021 (6)
  • December 2020 (10)
  • November 2020 (4)
  • October 2020 (2)
  • September 2020 (1)
  • August 2020 (4)
  • July 2020 (5)
  • June 2020 (6)
  • May 2020 (3)
  • April 2020 (3)
  • March 2020 (6)
  • February 2020 (1)
  • January 2020 (6)
  • December 2019 (3)
  • November 2019 (2)
  • October 2019 (9)
  • September 2019 (10)
  • August 2019 (12)
  • July 2019 (18)
  • June 2019 (17)
  • May 2019 (12)
  • April 2019 (8)
  • March 2019 (12)
  • February 2019 (7)
  • January 2019 (13)
  • December 2018 (9)
  • November 2018 (5)
  • October 2018 (9)
  • September 2018 (5)
  • August 2018 (10)
  • July 2018 (13)
  • June 2018 (14)
  • May 2018 (8)
  • April 2018 (8)
  • March 2018 (10)
  • February 2018 (15)
  • January 2018 (17)
  • December 2017 (8)
  • November 2017 (17)
  • October 2017 (19)
  • September 2017 (11)
  • August 2017 (11)
  • July 2017 (16)
  • June 2017 (15)
  • May 2017 (10)
  • April 2017 (7)
  • March 2017 (8)
  • February 2017 (16)
  • January 2017 (8)
  • December 2016 (6)
  • November 2016 (5)

Categories

  • Allied Projects
  • Announcements
  • Art
  • Candidates
  • Discussion Panels
  • Distributed Computing
  • Exposure Periods
  • Foreign Ambassadors
  • General Discussion
  • Guest Articles
  • Inclusion
  • Interviews
  • Official Ballots
  • Petitions
  • Platform
  • Presentations
  • Press Releases
  • Research
  • Sample Ballots
  • Science Fiction
  • Statements
  • Tolerance
  • Virtual Enlightenment Salons
  • Vote Results
  • Working Groups
© 2023   Copyright - U.S. Transhumanist Party - All Rights Reserved | WordPress design: Art Ramon Paintings