Should Atheists Be Transhumanists?

The “visionary” and “philosopher” Zoltan Istvan says that, as an atheist, he must be a transhumanist.  You probably  think I’m going to start mocking transhumanism again.  Once again, you’ve misjudged me.


I actually think what Ishtan says makes some sense.  Atheists of old didn’t think transhumanism—or moving beyond mortality--was possible.  So they thought of themselves as living beyond hope and fear, knowing that they were stuck with all the inevitable consequences—beginning with death—of being defined by natural necessity.   Being an atheist, being a philosopher meant learning how to die. 

The pleasure of insight, for the philosopher, it a compensation for rational awareness of one’s own impending death.  It would, it seems, still be better not to die, because dead men don’t philosophize.  Someone might argue that dying is the precondition for insightful pleasure.  But that doesn’t mean that someone would choose to die just to experience it.  The choice of mortality for philosophers didn’t come up, except in this way:  By freeing myself through reason from all illusions about immortality, I really see my death for what it is.  The choice was self-conscious mortality versus some kind of religious illusion.

But the transhumanists promise that that through our techno-inventiveness we will soon be able to choose against death.  That might be bad for being a philosopher or being a lover.  But who cares?  It’s death we’re getting out of, after all.

Some say that the only way we can make our days count is to be able to count our days.  It’s the necessities connected with our scarcity of time that lead us to rank our activities, to really deliberate about how to live seriously. But that kind of thinking, although more right than not,  doesn't really seem to do justice to our capacity to be in love in the present, to be free from being burdened by consciousness of time and still be rational and relational beings.

Others, in a more Darwinian or naturalistic or generational mode, talk about living a complete life.  It’s true enough, from the point of view of the species, that I’ve done my duty once I’ve pair-bonded, spread my genes, and raised my young.  But it’s just not true that we self-conscious mortals experience such a sense of natural completion that we’re ready to let go.  Just because we generate replacements doesn’t mean we want to be replaced.   And that’s not just the result of our narcissism.  We want to stay around in love and being lovable.  Those who love me as a particular, relational person don’t want to let me go.  

The theologian Gilbert Meilaender, in his Should We Live Forever? The Ethical Ambiguities of Aging, notices that each of us, in truth, has a “two-sided being.”  As long as the transhumanist promise of immortality or at least indefinite longevity doesn’t kick in, “we move inexorably through life toward old age and death.”  But we also “quite  naturally—and it seems rightly—long for more time, more life.”  That longing is natural because it’s the result of the capacity members of our species alone have been given for profound self-consciousness, for being aware of time, personal contingency, and one’s own death. 

Virtuous men and women through the ages—the sages and saints or even quite ordinary people--have “displayed patience and humility in the face of life’s limits.”  But that doesn’t mean they were happy to be stuck with those natural limits.  That’s why, Meilaender acknowledges, we also  “strive to discover ways to retard aging and prolong life’s banquet.” 

The Christian theologian Meilaender’s thought is that the natural experience of the incompleteness of particular human lives means that we’re on a journey that points beyond this life. 

The transhumanists disagree on the nature of the journey, but they too long to be freed from their natural limits.  The theologian is right to criticize their hope that endless life would somehow be paradise, and he adds that what we really long for is immortality not of our own making.

The transhumanist atheist doesn’t have to disagree with the theological criticism of endless life of our own making.  He just has to add that incompleteness of endless life is better than the abrupt finality of no life at all.

It seems to me, however, that a philosopher today would still be on firm ground in thinking that transhumanist hope of particular persons around today is no more reasonable that the Christian hope for personal salvation.  From that view, transhumanism isn’t really so atheistic.  The hope is that we can transform ourselves into the functional equivalent of gods.  The philosopher, I think, still knows that there is no techno-remedy for the misery of our mortality.  On that point, he agrees with the theologian.

The genuine atheist, such as Christopher Hitchens, thought he was tough enough to die without the solace of either form of hope.  There’s an old-fashioned atheist for you!   Hitchens, of course, moves us because he was so clear that he would have preferred, for himself and those he loved, not to die.

Yug, age 7, and Alia, age 10, both entered Let Grow's "Independence Challenge" essay contest.

Photos: Courtesy of Let Grow
Sponsored by Charles Koch Foundation
  • The coronavirus pandemic may have a silver lining: It shows how insanely resourceful kids really are.
  • Let Grow, a non-profit promoting independence as a critical part of childhood, ran an "Independence Challenge" essay contest for kids. Here are a few of the amazing essays that came in.
  • Download Let Grow's free Independence Kit with ideas for kids.
Keep reading Show less

Four philosophers who realized they were completely wrong about things

Philosophers like to present their works as if everything before it was wrong. Sometimes, they even say they have ended the need for more philosophy. So, what happens when somebody realizes they were mistaken?

Sartre and Wittgenstein realize they were mistaken. (Getty Images)
Culture & Religion

Sometimes philosophers are wrong and admitting that you could be wrong is a big part of being a real philosopher. While most philosophers make minor adjustments to their arguments to correct for mistakes, others make large shifts in their thinking. Here, we have four philosophers who went back on what they said earlier in often radical ways. 

Keep reading Show less

What should schools teach? Now is the moment to ask.

The future of learning will be different, and now is the time to lay the groundwork.

What should schools teach? Now is the moment to ask. | Caroline ...
Future of Learning
  • The coronavirus pandemic has left many at an interesting crossroads in terms of mapping out the future of their respective fields and industries. For schools, that may mean a total shift not only in how educators teach, but what they teach.
  • One important strategy moving forward, thought leader Caroline Hill says, is to push back against the idea that getting ahead is more important than getting along. "The opportunity that education has in this moment to really push students and think about what is the right way to live, how do we do it and how do we do it in a way that doesn't hurt or rob the dignity of other people?"
  • Hill also argues that now is the time for bigger swings and for removing the barriers that limit education. The online space is boundary free and provides educators with new opportunities to connect with students around the world.

Keep reading Show less

Here are 3 things white people can do right now to help #BLM

Remaining silent is being complicit.

Demonstrators pause for a moment of silence during a protest over the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis Police officer, in McCarren Park in the borough of Brooklyn on June 3, 2020 in New York City.

Photo by Scott Heins/Getty Images
Politics & Current Affairs
  • Protests around the world are demanding an end to police discrimination and violence against black citizens in America.
  • Author and activist Dax-Devlon Ross offers advice on how white people can help during this moment.
  • Ross's suggestions include thinking and voting locally, supporting black-owned businesses, and practicing self-reflection.
Keep reading Show less
Scroll down to load more…