Why You Don't Have to Be a Transhumanist to Support Unlimited Lifespan Extension

Transhumanism gives many people the chills. Although not all transhumanists hold the very same ideas and fundamental life views, they do share one common desire: that of transcending the human status (in one way or another) and of comfortably settling into a territory that goes beyond the confinements of humanity. According to some views, transhumanists aim at replacing people with some sort of superior entities, the transhumans. This is scary for many because these transhumans are so different from regular human beings that there can be no feeling of collectivity and togetherness between the two groups. Other transhumanist interpretations, however, rely heavily on the idea of speeding up and directing evolution in such a way as to improve humans in some key core capacities. Now it is regular humans like you and me who, in becoming enhanced versions of themselves, might as well be called transhumans.

I will refrain from casting any value judgment on transhumanism in this post. What I want to emphasize is that not everybody embraces transhumanist principles and, moreover, whenever transhumanism backs up a certain set of ideas, those ideas fall into popular disgrace  due to their association to transhumanism. Most likely, there are other elements at play in building up such a reaction, but it is fairly obvious that the status quo bias is in many cases stronger than the desire to transcend humanity.

One area that is strongly associated with transhumanism - up to the point that no transhumanist would fail to support it - is anti-aging and extreme longevity research. Now, you see, as it is not exactly right to judge a person by looking at her parents and family, it is similarly wrong to dismiss the attempt towards unlimited lifespan extension just because it is backed up by some framework that does not correspond to your life views. At the end of the day, unlimited life span extension and transhumanism are not one and the same thing.

Because longevity research is aimed towards protecting people from the horror of death, I take it to be one of the most humanistic endeavors that we have ever pursued throughout our history. Postponing aging and the diseases associated with it is meant to enable humans to flourish and to seek and possibly obtain (if they have enough time) the happiness that derives from their conception of the good life.  It is related to offering autonomy and liberty in making decisions of the utmost importance. It is nothing if not human loving. What can be more humanistic than that?

If you reject the thought of unlimited lifespan extension because you feel that it is too alienated from your definition of a typical human being, please think again. Could it be that the extent of our lifespan is such a crucial element in determining who we are? Or maybe there are other deeper traits that we should take into account, like our capacities for reasoning and feeling such a vast array of emotions? Remember, there was once a first person to live up to 60, 70 or 80 years of age and he/she was still considered a human like all the rest. With one exception, though: a luckier and possibly happier one.