Moderate and Radical Transhumanism

Aim. To present the authors’ solution to the problem of establishing the probable result of transhumanist transformations of a person.

Methodology. The article provides a philosophical analysis of various concepts of transhumanism. Comparison methods are used, as well as abstraction, induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis and mental modeling.

Results. Among the numerous concepts of transhumanism, the authors identified two groups: a group of moderate transhumanist teachings and a group of the radical ones. Moderate transhumanists believe that the result of the modification of human nature will be a neo-human who will preserve and develop the human essence while modifying its material carrier. According to radical transhumanists, the result of the application of NBICS-convergent technologies will be a hypothetical posthuman with the essence different from an unmodified human. The posthuman will share the worldview of radical transhumanism, which is fundamentally different from humanism. The authors show that only radical transhumanism is incompatible with humanism. This circumstance is not considered by bioconservatives who do not recognize the need for transformations in human nature. Hypothetical variants of the creature of the future are considered: a genetically modified and technically improved individual, a nanocyborgized individual and a virtual digital (incorporeal) individual.

Research implications. The results obtained allow humanity to make a choice in favor of moderate transhumanism. Humanity will not accept its own disappearance, even if it results in the emergence of a new kind of sentient beings. Our future is not a posthuman, but a neohuman – an individual with a human essence and a physical body.

1. Boström N. Superintelligence. Paths, Dangers, Strategies (Rus. ed.: Filin S., transl. Iskusstvennyj intellekt. Etapy. Ugrozy. Strategii. Moscow, Mann, Ivanov i Ferber Publ., 2016. 496 p.).

2. Dubrovsky D. I. [Human Nature, Anthropological Crisis and Cybernetic Immortality]. In: Global’noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyuciya [Global Future 2045. Convergent technologies (NBICS) and transhumanistic evolution]. Moscow, MBA Publ., 2013, pp. 237–252.

3. Dubrovsky D. I. [The Main Question of the Consciousness Problem]. In: Filosofskie nauki [Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences], 2017, no. 1, pp. 57–70.

4. Nesterov A. Yu. [The Problem of Man in the Light of the Ideology of Evolutionary Transhumanism]. In: Global’noe budushchee 2045. Konvergentnye tekhnologii (NBIKS) i transgumanisticheskaya evolyuciya [Global Future 2045. Convergent technologies (NBICS) and transhumanistic evolution]. Moscow, MBA Publ., 2013, pp. 183–192.

5. Nikiforov A. L. [What Kind of Future is Humanity Consigned to by the Scientific and Technological Progress?]. In: Vestnik Rossijskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Filosofiya [RUDN Journal of Philosophy], 2023, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 123–137.

6. Niyazgulova A. A., Melnik G. S. [The Philosophy of Transhumanism in Media Discourse]. In: Gumanitarnyj vector [Humanitarian Vector], 2022, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 144–153.

7. Razin A. V. [Computer and Mind: The Problem of Qualia]. In: Filosofiya i obshchestvo [Philosophy and Society], 2023, no. 1, pp. 42–56.

8. Tikhonova S. V. [The Transhumanism, the Science and the Pseudoscience: in Search of Neomodern]. In: Voprosy filosofii [Questions of Philosophy], 2021, no. 10, pp. 29–39.

9. Toynbee A. J. A Study of History (Rus. ed.: Zharkov E. D., transl. Postizhenie istorii. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1996. 608 p.).

10. Fediulina E. V. [The Idea of Human Technological Immortality]. In: Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya [Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Philosophy], 2020, no. 4, pp. 84–91.

11. Cheremnykh L. G., Gubanov N. N. [Posthuman Concept in the Modern Philosophical Discourse]. In: Gumanitarnyj vestnik [Humanities Bulletin of BMSTU], 2023, no. 1. Available at: http://hmbul.ru/ catalog/hum/phil/820.html (accessed: 10.08.2023).

12. Shilovskaya N. S. [From the Society of Humanism to the Society of Transhumanism?]. In: Filosofiya i obshchestvo [Philosophy and Society], 2013, no. 3, pp. 141–150.

13. Yudin B. G. [Transhumanism: is it Overhumanism or Antihumanism?]. In: Bioetika i gumanitarnaya ekspertiza. Vyp. 7 [Bioethics and Humanitarian Expertise. Vol. 7]. Moscow, Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2013, pp. 10–24.

14. Bess M. D. Icarus 2.0: A Historian’s Perspective on Human Biological Enhancement. In: Technology and Culture, 2008, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 114–126.

15. Graham E. L. Representations of the Post / Human: Monsters, Aliens and Others in Popular Culture. Manchester, University Press, 2002. 259 p.

16. Huxley J. New Bottles for New Wine. London, Chatto & Windus, 1957. 318 p.

17. Pepperell R. The Posthuman Condition: Consciousness Beyond the Brain. Bristol, Intellect Books Publ., 2003. 203 p.

18. Walker M. Enhancing Genetic Virtue: A project for Twenty-First Century humanity? In: Politics and the Life Sciences, 2009, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 27–47.

19. Wolf C. What is Posthumanism? Minneapolis, University Minnesota Press, 2010. 392 p.