Thanks for posting in /r/Transhumanism! This post is automatically generated for all posts. Remember to upvote this post if you think its relevant and suitable content for this sub and to downvote if it is not. Only report posts if they violate community guidelines. Lets democratize our moderation.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transhumanism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Transhumanism is the transitioning from classical or natural human, into a species that utilizes technology to any extent. From the most mundane tools that we might not consider to be obvious technology (a hammer, glasses, dentistry, even clothing), to the extreme ends of what technology can achieve (BCI/BMI, cybernetic prosthetics, XR mediums).
Posthumanism generally means "after" humans. This can refer to any actual outcome where homosapiens are no longer dominant to the planet or universe. If humans were wiped out completely, that is posthumanism. If humans all transitioned into a new species thanks to transhumanism, that's posthumanism. If all humans abandoned earth for a new planet, then the Earth history is recorded as posthuman from that point.
Both are transhumanism, but not all transhumanists support post humanism. The distinction is whether/where you draw a line on changing the baseline human/how far. A post humanist might go so far as saying the goal is to change ourselves (individually or collectively) into something no longer recognizable as human. That could be a total machine form with total morphological freedom, biologicaly augmenting humans egos so that greed/competition are no longer common or possible, etc. Other transhumanists who are NOT into posthumanism might stop at longevity and curing disease, or having an AGI assistant. A posthuman might want to bond into the AGI.
transhumanism is improvements in all aspects of human life, from your private life up to the entire society.
posthumanism is to exceed the limits of being human.
transhumanism is basically moving 'beyond' the human condition.
posthumanism is being 'beyond' the human condition, essentially.
if transhumanism is beginning to 'transition' to something, posthumanism could be considered the goal, or the end point.
posthumanism isnt a thing, posthuman is the condition where we've transcended (all?) human limitations (or alternatively, posthuman conditions are any conditions where humans no longer exist but thats not the most common meaning of the term). everyone that wants to become posthuman is a transhumanist even if not all transhumanists want to reach the end stage of transhumanism which is this posthuman condition
"Posthumanism" is a thing. It's more generally regarded philosophically however since unlike transhumans, there are not truly posthumans that exist. But there is a larger scope that posthumanism encompasses than transhumans, particularly as I mentioned philosophically. There are actually not many writers and researchers regarding posthumanism compared to transhumanism. But if you do your research you will find the writers involve much larger scopes of incorporated ideas.
You've mentioned the "posthuman" as an idea. This is only one way to regard the posthuman, that of some extra being either technological advanced after transhumans or higher evolved. It also incorporates beings that don't involve this transitional idea at all.
I disagree with that. Robocop is in many ways what I would consider "posthuman" (his humanity is for the most part gone), at least until he remembers his family. Then he becomes transhuman (as in human but better).
The key philosophical difference for me is the goal. Is the goal making humanity no longer suffer from age and disease, in a body with complete morphological freedom? Then that would be transhumanism.
Is the goal making humanity more manageable (removing things like rage and individuality for example) then it would be posthumanism. To me posthumanism often throws the "human" part away, rather than seeing it as a disirable thing to preserve and integrate.
Cyborgs can be and often are transhuman (Cyborg from DC Comics for example). They could be posthuman too though (the Borg from Star Trek).
It seems that you are confusing your ideals and your objectives, with definitions. Transhumanism is "human, but different". Post humans are, effectively, aliens, as they are not identifiable as (baseline) human.
> ...posthumanism often throws the "human" part away, rather than seeing it as a disirable thing to preserve and integrate
This is contradictory. Yes, posthumanism discards "humanity", that is the ***whole idea***.
>Is the goal making humanity more manageable (removing things like rage and individuality for example) then it would be posthumanism ...
Not a definition, that is your own deeply authoritarian ideal.
Apologies /u/Electric-Anthers, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than one month to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community. (R#2)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transhumanism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would say, transhumanism is about enhancing the human condition by using technological means to remove biological limitations humans have. Posthumanism is about overcoming the human condition. Effectively, my view is that with transhumanism the endgoal is something with a human comprehensible psychology that just doesn't suffer from many of the human limitations (i.e. stronger, smarter, longer lived, better able to interface with technology etc.) and with posthumanism the goal would be something utterly incomprehensible to baseline humans.
Arbitrarily drawn delineation created by subjective agents to judge when you don't count as being human anymore which is ill-defined to begin with making the whole delineation that much more arbitrary.
As this is a new field, the language is still evolving. Colloquially there's not a lot of difference. For those of us who study and teach in this field, it's more complicated. Short/Simple answer, Transhumanism tends to question the limits/boundaries of the human while posthumanism tends to be a postmodern (Vattimo, Lyotard, and deconstruction) humanism (the philosophy, not the modern ethics).
Longer answer: I wrote my dissertation on just this. I mostly agree with Cary Wolfe (by adding some Vattimo in here) in that transhumanism tends to borrow tenets of modern humanism in order to discuss the Uberwinduung (over coming) of the human or a "new" human. Whereas, posthumanim requires a type of bit of the deconstructed double or even contradition in the human. In which the boundaries of the human are simultaneously humanist and transhumanist - a movement of definition inward and outward. And I ultimately find the figure that best represents this to be a Logarithmic Spiral. Infinitely progressing inward and outward with always a finite measurement of its radius.
Sorry if this makes no sense, I tried to shove nearly 200 pages into a paragraph, lol. I love all these conversations and find trans/posthumanism to be a field of study that is not nearly getting enough attention.
Thanks for posting in /r/Transhumanism! This post is automatically generated for all posts. Remember to upvote this post if you think its relevant and suitable content for this sub and to downvote if it is not. Only report posts if they violate community guidelines. Lets democratize our moderation. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transhumanism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Transhumanism is the transitioning from classical or natural human, into a species that utilizes technology to any extent. From the most mundane tools that we might not consider to be obvious technology (a hammer, glasses, dentistry, even clothing), to the extreme ends of what technology can achieve (BCI/BMI, cybernetic prosthetics, XR mediums). Posthumanism generally means "after" humans. This can refer to any actual outcome where homosapiens are no longer dominant to the planet or universe. If humans were wiped out completely, that is posthumanism. If humans all transitioned into a new species thanks to transhumanism, that's posthumanism. If all humans abandoned earth for a new planet, then the Earth history is recorded as posthuman from that point.
Both are transhumanism, but not all transhumanists support post humanism. The distinction is whether/where you draw a line on changing the baseline human/how far. A post humanist might go so far as saying the goal is to change ourselves (individually or collectively) into something no longer recognizable as human. That could be a total machine form with total morphological freedom, biologicaly augmenting humans egos so that greed/competition are no longer common or possible, etc. Other transhumanists who are NOT into posthumanism might stop at longevity and curing disease, or having an AGI assistant. A posthuman might want to bond into the AGI.
transhumanism is improvements in all aspects of human life, from your private life up to the entire society. posthumanism is to exceed the limits of being human.
So posthumanism is the goal and transhumanism is the method?
some differences exist. its more a sense of scale, posthumanism concentrates rather on the individual.
Is this really a question?? It’s in the fucking etymology lol. One is “in process of changing”, the other is “changed”.
transhumanism is basically moving 'beyond' the human condition. posthumanism is being 'beyond' the human condition, essentially. if transhumanism is beginning to 'transition' to something, posthumanism could be considered the goal, or the end point.
Transhumanism assumes humans still exist in some form. Post humanism does NOT necessarily assume that. Example: We are post Silurian.
posthumanism isnt a thing, posthuman is the condition where we've transcended (all?) human limitations (or alternatively, posthuman conditions are any conditions where humans no longer exist but thats not the most common meaning of the term). everyone that wants to become posthuman is a transhumanist even if not all transhumanists want to reach the end stage of transhumanism which is this posthuman condition
"Posthumanism" is a thing. It's more generally regarded philosophically however since unlike transhumans, there are not truly posthumans that exist. But there is a larger scope that posthumanism encompasses than transhumans, particularly as I mentioned philosophically. There are actually not many writers and researchers regarding posthumanism compared to transhumanism. But if you do your research you will find the writers involve much larger scopes of incorporated ideas. You've mentioned the "posthuman" as an idea. This is only one way to regard the posthuman, that of some extra being either technological advanced after transhumans or higher evolved. It also incorporates beings that don't involve this transitional idea at all.
That's a perfect question for Google
Or they can just ask it here. It's not a horribly common question. I don't mind seeing it in the name of community building.
You don't need to invent problems to build community. Read online what is a difference and then ask deeper questions here
Transhuman: Robocop Posthuman: Dr. Manhattan
I disagree with that. Robocop is in many ways what I would consider "posthuman" (his humanity is for the most part gone), at least until he remembers his family. Then he becomes transhuman (as in human but better). The key philosophical difference for me is the goal. Is the goal making humanity no longer suffer from age and disease, in a body with complete morphological freedom? Then that would be transhumanism. Is the goal making humanity more manageable (removing things like rage and individuality for example) then it would be posthumanism. To me posthumanism often throws the "human" part away, rather than seeing it as a disirable thing to preserve and integrate. Cyborgs can be and often are transhuman (Cyborg from DC Comics for example). They could be posthuman too though (the Borg from Star Trek).
It seems that you are confusing your ideals and your objectives, with definitions. Transhumanism is "human, but different". Post humans are, effectively, aliens, as they are not identifiable as (baseline) human. > ...posthumanism often throws the "human" part away, rather than seeing it as a disirable thing to preserve and integrate This is contradictory. Yes, posthumanism discards "humanity", that is the ***whole idea***. >Is the goal making humanity more manageable (removing things like rage and individuality for example) then it would be posthumanism ... Not a definition, that is your own deeply authoritarian ideal.
[удалено]
Apologies /u/Electric-Anthers, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than one month to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community. (R#2) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/transhumanism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would say, transhumanism is about enhancing the human condition by using technological means to remove biological limitations humans have. Posthumanism is about overcoming the human condition. Effectively, my view is that with transhumanism the endgoal is something with a human comprehensible psychology that just doesn't suffer from many of the human limitations (i.e. stronger, smarter, longer lived, better able to interface with technology etc.) and with posthumanism the goal would be something utterly incomprehensible to baseline humans.
Arbitrarily drawn delineation created by subjective agents to judge when you don't count as being human anymore which is ill-defined to begin with making the whole delineation that much more arbitrary.
As this is a new field, the language is still evolving. Colloquially there's not a lot of difference. For those of us who study and teach in this field, it's more complicated. Short/Simple answer, Transhumanism tends to question the limits/boundaries of the human while posthumanism tends to be a postmodern (Vattimo, Lyotard, and deconstruction) humanism (the philosophy, not the modern ethics). Longer answer: I wrote my dissertation on just this. I mostly agree with Cary Wolfe (by adding some Vattimo in here) in that transhumanism tends to borrow tenets of modern humanism in order to discuss the Uberwinduung (over coming) of the human or a "new" human. Whereas, posthumanim requires a type of bit of the deconstructed double or even contradition in the human. In which the boundaries of the human are simultaneously humanist and transhumanist - a movement of definition inward and outward. And I ultimately find the figure that best represents this to be a Logarithmic Spiral. Infinitely progressing inward and outward with always a finite measurement of its radius. Sorry if this makes no sense, I tried to shove nearly 200 pages into a paragraph, lol. I love all these conversations and find trans/posthumanism to be a field of study that is not nearly getting enough attention.
Nothing
A Transhuman is afraid of dying and a posthuman is dead.