Debating Extreme Human Enhancement Over at Slate Magazine


Back off bub.

Just want to tab the beginning of what will likely be a fascinating discussion of Transhumanism and the prospects of radical life extension over at the online magazine Slate. The first entry is by Kyle MunKittrick, the proprietor of the always interesting PopBioethics blog. MunKittrick asks:

But the big question is: Do humans want to be transhuman? That is, presuming that genetic engineering, cybernetic augmentation, cognitive enhancement, and the cure for aging are all technologically possible in the next 50, 100, or 200 years, are they something people will want to use? And is enhancement something people should want?

The he gives the right answer: 

Short answer: Yes, absolutely. I think humans do want to transcend biological limitations and become better than our bodies and genetics currently allow.

His fellow discussants are Brad Allenby who is co-author with Daniel Sarewtiz of The Techno-Human Condition; and Nick Agar, author of Humanity's End: Why We Should Reject Radical Life Enhancement

With characteristic immodesty, I will also suggest that H&R readers might want to take a look at the December, 2007 Cato Unbound where theoretical biogerontologist Aubrey de Grey, bioethicist Daniel Callahan, political scientist Diana Schaub and I debated the question: Do We Need Death? Spoiler alert: The right answer is no

Kudos to Ted Weinstein.