U.S. Transhumanist Party General Discussion Thread for the Fourth Quarter of 2018

U.S. Transhumanist Party General Discussion Thread for the Fourth Quarter of 2018


The purpose of this post is to facilitate member comments pertaining to transhumanism and the U.S. Transhumanist Party, which might not specifically fit the subjects of any other post or article on the U.S. Transhumanist Party website. This is the place for members to offer suggestions or converse about any areas of emerging technologies and their political, moral, societal, cultural, and esthetic implications. The general discussion thread is also an ideal location to suggest or propose platform planks that may be considered for future platform voting.

The U.S. Transhumanist Party will endeavor to open one of these general comment threads per quarter. This comment thread pertains to the months of October, November, and December 2018.

Type in your comments below. Please note that, to protect against spambots, the first comment by any individual will be moderated. After passing moderation, a civil commenter should be able to post comments without future moderation – although we cannot guarantee that the technical aspect of this functionality will work as intended 100% of the time.

2 thoughts on “U.S. Transhumanist Party General Discussion Thread for the Fourth Quarter of 2018

  1. I would like to take this opportunity to raise several questions regarding the stance Transhumanists ought to take in controversies surrounding the place of genetics in society.

    The importance of genetic information will only increase in importance over time as the cost of genome sequencing declines 4 times faster than Moore’s Law, as computation expands exponentially to keep pase with this explosion of genomic data, and as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, prenatal screening, post-natal screening and CRISPR enable us to increasingly choose our own genes. If put towards the fulfillment of humanistic ends, these technologies have great potential for the early diagnosis, treatment and even complete prevention of a myriad of genetic diseases, as well as the enhancement of quality of life above that which is now considered normal.

    At the same time, the genomic revolution present certain ethical questions which must be addressed. If these questions are not addressed it may enable bioconservatives to restrict or ban new genomic technologies, or for reactionary movements (e.g the Alt-Right) to use such technologies for unethical ends. For example, regardless of which side one takes on of the scientific debate about the nature of intelligence, recent (1990s-present) proposals for racially discriminatory immigration restrictions (justified on the basis of IQ differences) should be flatly rejected. The first half of the twentieth century demonstrates the dangers of embracing technology without humanistic values.

    As for convincing bioconservatives. There are a number of ways to frame this conversation, with some approaches working better than others depending on the audience. Conservatives who may find themselves more open to the use of genetic technologies when framed in terms of parental rights over children and the need to avoid state interference in family matters. On the other hand, Libertarians and Progressives may find themselves more open to genetic augmentation when framed in terms of reproductive liberty, personal autonomy, or even the rights of children.

  2. Particularly in your last paragraph, you hit a very important point. You also illustrate how well our platform can transcend the party philosophies.
    I might offer that the only counter to the bio-conservative fears is to succeed and demonstrate louder than they can pontificate and to do it now. Otherwise we’ll find ourselves locked into another argument like the so-called climate debate.

Leave a Reply

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