MORE THAN HUMAN:

THE TRANSHUMANIST AGENDA AND ITS EFFECTS ON

SOCIETY, ART AND CULTURE IN THE PRESENT AND THE

FUTURE

BY
LOO CHIN HOCK JEREMY

SUBMITTED IN
PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR OF ARTS WITH HONOURS
IN GRAPHIC COMMUNICATION

SCHOOL OF THE ARTS

LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY
UNITED KINGDOM
DESIGN AND MEDIA DEPARTMENT
NANYANG ACADEMY OF FINE ARTS
SINGAPORE

[8128 Words]

JANUARY 2014
 DECLARATION

I hereby certify that I am the sole author of this dissertation and that no part of this

dissertation has been published or submitted for publication.

I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, my dissertation does not infringe upon

anyone’s copyright nor violate any proprietary rights and that any ideas,

techniques, quotations, or any other material from the work of other people

included in my dissertation, published or otherwise, are fully acknowledged in

accordance with the standard referencing practices.

© COPYRIGHT
by
LOO CHIN HOCK JEREMY
2014
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………..…………… ii

CHAPTERS

1. Overview …………………………………………………………………………1

1.1 Enquiring Minds………………………………………………………………1

1.2 One Small Step ……………………………………………………………….2

2. The Future: Human Nature …………………………………………………….....6

2.1The Extension of Will………………………………………………………….6

2.2All too Human………………………………………………...……………….9

3. The Most Dangerous Idea in the World………………………………………… 14

3.1Supermen……………………………………………………………………..14

3.2 Nietzschean Dilemma: The Moral and Ethical Void…………………………16

3.3 Predicting Uncertainty……………………………………………………….20

4. The Future: Today………………………………………………………….....… 23

4.1 The Seeds of Change: Prosthetics……………………………………………23

4.2 The Role of Art and Media in the Transhumanist Agenda…….………28

5. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………… 32

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………….34

i
 More than Human:

The Transhumanist Agenda and its Effects on

Society, Art and Culture in the Present and the Future

By

Jeremy Loo Chin Hock

January 2014

ABSTRACT

Technology plays an ever increasing role in our lives, more so now than ever in human

history. With advances in the fields of biology, neuroscience, robotics and engineering,

we stand on the precipice of great and exciting change according to some, or a moral and

social pitfall according to others. In this essay, I introduce the reader to the

‘transhumanist agenda’, explore the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche on the quandary of

human purpose and destiny; canvass the different opinions of various authors,

philosophers, scientists and artists on the topics of human augmentation and bring to light

the potential effects such technology might have on society in the future. This dissertation

proposes and argues the need for more public exposure to the concept of

‘Transhumanism’, how mainstream media can help to provide the means to do so, and

why it is important for humanity to ask the relevant questions on its implications at this

present time.

ii
 Chapter 1

Overview

1.1 Enquiring Minds

It is safe to say that no one can accurately predict the future. One can however, with good

foresight and evidence, make educated judgements on the overall scheme of things. The

destiny of humanity; the purpose of man, are questions that have formed the basis of

human culture and civilisation, and are now schisms in humanity that both unite and

divide the population of this world. Enquiring on the future of our existence therefore,

has been the purpose of many a philosopher, theologian, artist and scientist. We can view

what Winwood Reade wrote for example,

‘And then, the Earth being small, mankind will migrate into space, and will cross the airless

Saharas which separate planet from planet and sun from sun. The Earth will become a Holy Land

which will be visited by pilgrims from all the quarters of the Universe. Finally, men will master

the forces of Nature; they will become themselves architects of systems, manufacturers of worlds.’

(Reade, W, The Martyrdom of Man, 1872)

An almost romantic vision, Winwood foresees an interstellar/intergalactic civilisation

spread across the vastness of space, in which his version of humanity has mastered the

laws of physics and they themselves are the creators of worlds. While certainly dubious

when considered from a human perspective of mere years, not millennia, his prediction

might very well become reality in the far future of our species. The Earth is indeed small,

1
and even now we fight over its resources as our population continues to soar. Perhaps, the

only logical conclusion for our continued survival is eventual settlement and the

exploitation of other planets? If this were to come to pass, we might begin to see the first

steps on Winwood’s vision, the first steps of many that herald a myriad of questions.

These future civilisations, these men of the stars, these ‘transient humans’, what will they

be like? What kind of society, what kind of art and culture would they have? Would their

morals be an extension of our own, or would they cast aside the ‘old’ ways of thought and

have systems that we find immoral, unethical and even disgusting today? Would they

even be human anymore?

Of course, this is but one of many predictable scenarios. As mentioned earlier, we cannot

accurately predict the future; but we can with enough evidence, continue in our attempts

to constantly enquire on our collective destiny, if only to inspire, warn and help shape the

perspective of future generations to come. This essay will therefore seek to make said

educated judgments about our near future, and argue the need for increased discussion on

one of the major points of human contention in both the present and the future: the

transhumanist agenda and its overarching goal, transhumanism.

2
1.2 One Small Step

We can perhaps see the beginnings of change in the human condition at this current age.

Technology has become so much more pervasive and intrusive, that some have argued we

have already begun the process of a so called ‘technological singularity’1, in which man

and his nature is supplanted or combined by his own creations to a point where he is no

longer recognisable to present society. The internet for example, an essential part of all

our lives now, is considered by some to be the beginning of said ‘singularity’. Truly, if

one piece of technology can be called pervasive and intrusive, it certainly would be the

internet. Its power, while subtle, is something to behold. Its ability to connect the world

and its potential in educating the masses and giving them a voice is amazing. On the

other hand, it allows governments to spy on their citizens more effectively; it has stripped

away layers of individual privacy and has brought to light human immorality in the face

of complete anonymity.

The internet, while its benefits and disadvantages are up for debate, has transformed

humanity in ways many of us do not yet see. Still, it is but one piece of the overall

transhumanist puzzle. Another example of technology slowly shifting the line would be

the advancements made in human prosthetics and limb replacements. For now, the use of

prosthetics firmly remains a benign one, helping amputees and the sensory impaired to

integrate successfully into modern society. Issues of the moral and ethical kind might

begin to appear however, should the prosthetics themselves become more powerful,

convenient or desirable to perfectly functioning human limbs or organs. Under those

1
Jornod, R. 2013. The Technological Singularity: Heading for Transhumanism.

3
circumstances, it would not be arrogant to suggest that many would prefer to undergo

extensive surgery to improve their own bodies, human nature being such that it is. One

can also predict another camp of opinion forming, made up of those who view such

‘augmentation’ with disgust and adversity. Besides the obvious arguments, one can also

assume safely that a social, cultural and economic backlash would take place when those

who can afford such luxuries become generally more effective at everything they do

when compared to those without said improvements. Where would these people belong

in society, and what will become of the rest of the human population who cannot afford

such augmentation themselves, even if they wanted to?

It certainly seems farfetched, human cyborgs and augmentation and becoming more than

what we are. But the fact remains that technology is the method in which power is

measured. The individual, the company or the country with better, more advanced

technology will always be a cut above the rest. While value can be had in social and

cultural practices, it will generally be technology that paves the way for the progress of

civilisation. Thus the argument can be made that humanity will forge ahead despite its

own misgivings, the consequences of not doing so being becoming obsolete and even

extinct. We might change; some argue we already have. What is certain is that the

quandary of progress will always bring about social and political unrest. We must

therefore inquire on our future constantly; ask the right questions and debate the hard

issues now. As artists, the bearers of meaning, warning and inspiration, it falls to us to

inform and encourage discussion on the premier topics affecting society today and in the

future. Therefore, this essay will seek to show the need for art and media to be at the

forefront of showcasing the transhumanist agenda, and its potential for societal and

4
cultural change argued vigorously across the world.

5
 Chapter 2

The Future: Human Nature

2.1 The Extension of Will

To say that our relationship with technology is one born out of necessity, but also fear,

fear of the elements and more importantly, fear of ourselves, is not so unbelievable. We

have always created tools to make life easier and simpler, to grow crops, tend the land

and to build shelter. We have also used said tools to make weapons to protect ourselves,

to hunt, and to also kill each other in cold blood. We fear each other as humans, and

rightly so. For we are a selfish species by default; we usually take what we want and

need with little regard to our victims or the consequences. Truly, it is prudent to fear our

own nature and ourselves.

The status quo has changed in recent times however. The fact that technology is

currently advancing at a speed that is astounding and yet so terrifying to behold is

enough for concern. The leap in which we have made from steam engines to maglev, the

chasm we have crossed from the discovery of the blood groups in the 1900s to the first

ever human liver grown from stem cells in the year 2013, is nothing short of amazing.

In a single human lifetime, humanity has made into reality the dreams of manned flight

and space exploration. In one generation, we have gone from flying rickety wooden

machines to putting men on the moon, a feat awe-inspiring, and yet to many, extremely

worrisome.

6
 The implications of such advancement at so quick a pace must come at a price certainly,

critics of science and technology might say. For example, one might argue that the

conception of nuclear fission and the atomic bomb allows humanity the option to

destroy itself in its entirety. In making our lives easier with the introduction of nuclear

energy, we have also made it all the more simpler to take it away. The tool has become

something to be feared on its own. Technology, branded by some as the method in

which humanity would destroy itself.

Others might argue differently however, that the nuclear bomb serves as a deterrent

against all potential major armed conflicts in the future. So dangerous the doctrine of

‘MAD’ or mutually assured destruction between participating countries that perhaps, the

concept of World War will no longer be relevant, thereby saving the lives of all those

that might have been lost due to the advent of such dire events. Technology, the tool that

would save its masters from their own demise.

An argument can therefore be made that technology, by itself, is merely a tool, and it is

how we choose to wield this tool that is important and cause for worry. Sean Hurley

makes the point that,

‘Technology is neither good nor bad, and it is not an all-encompassing solution to our

human problems any more than it is responsible for any of our social ills.’ (Hurley,

Sean, 2012)2

Technology is but an extension of our will, an essential part of the human psyche, one

that directly reflects our own fears, desires and dreams. Fearing the tool therefore, is

2
Hurley, Sean, 2012 http://blog.thezeitgeistmovement.com/blog/sean-hurley/technology-tool-not-solution

7
irrelevant. Fearing our own fallibilities and nature on the other hand, seems to be

correct.

The sword is but a piece of metal, but in the hands of man a tool of death. Technology

isn’t inherently dangerous, humans on the other hand, are.

8
2.2 All too Human

‘Man seems to be entering one of the major crises of his career. His whole future, nay the

possibility of his having any future at all, depends on the turn which events may take in

the next half century. It is a commonplace that his is coming into possession of new and

dangerous instruments for controlling his environment and his own nature… Before he

can gain clear insight, he may lose himself in a vast desert of spiritual aridity, or even

blunder into self-destruction. Nothing can save him but a new vision, and a consequent

new order of sanity, or common sense.’ (Stapledon, O, Cyborg: Evolution of the

Superman, 1965, p36)

We have always been killing each other even before the dawn of civilisation. The only

difference now is that technology has advanced to a point in which it allows us to destroy

human civilisation in its entirety. We wield the power to potentially affect the planet and

its inhabitants in a permanent fashion, for good or worse. Therefore, if humanity is to

walk forward without stumbling into self-destruction, it must ensure that it keeps itself in

check. More importantly, humanity must realise its own flaws and fallibilities before they

become issues that cannot be effectively controlled. We must acknowledge that as of now

we are imperfect creatures that are full of inadequacies. In a sense, one can say that we

are too violent, too selfish and all too human.

9
 ‘Through his rapidly increasing ability to control greater amounts of motion of matter,

man is becoming increasingly able to mix up the universe, or order it according to his

plan. With this increasing ability he has not yet developed his capacity for love and

brotherhood, and his moral sensitivity to a degree that would insure his continuous

development and survival’ (Clynes, M, Cyborg: Evolution of the Superman 1965)

Dr. Manfred Clynes argues that humanity has yet to reach a point in which it would use

technology in a morally responsible and safe manner. He fears that man’s achievements

in the fields of science and technology would supersede his own capabilities to protect

himself from, of all things, himself.

Therein lays the dilemma. Is it not because we are what we are, that is, essentially human,

that the quandary of war, conflict and strife remains the status quo in so many regions of

the world? We are primitive, we are savage, and we are all too fragile to care little for

anyone or anything but ourselves. Combined with sufficient motivation for terrible evil

and the means to do so, we can and will inflict the worst possible injuries upon ourselves.

Yet what else can humanity do but forge ahead, looking for better ways to live and

survive, in the hopes of a better future for all?

Clynes makes the poignant remark with regards to a possible solution: ‘One may

assuredly say that all true progress is progress in the ability to love.’ 3Truly, if humanity

can overcome its own failings, if we can see above our own selfishness, greed and

arrogance as a species, would that not solve the majority of the problems we face in the

world? An unrealistic dream perhaps, too optimistic and impossible when viewed with a

cynical eye. How would such a thing be done, when in reality we remain all too human?
3
Cyborg: Evolution of the Superman 1965, p7

10
2.3 Destiny

‘Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman –a rope above the

abyss…What is great about man is that he is a bridge and not a goal.’ (Nietzsche, F,

Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 1885)

Nietzsche offers the analogy of humanity being a rope stretched out across an abyss. In

doing so, he makes the argument that our current state as humans is anything but final,

and that we remain on a journey to becoming something else. While a seemingly

ridiculous and unthought-of of notion to many of us, technology as always, has changed

the rules of the game. Advances in the fields of neuroscience, robotics and biology today

allows for the melding of man and machine. The tool has always remained separate from

the body, and the implication that it can now be integrated onto and into man himself is

cause for great excitement and grave concern. ‘The very thought of altering our own

nature is alarming to us because we fear the havoc we should raise if we presumed to

change the nature of life.’ (Clynes, M, Cyborg: Evolution of the Superman, 1965, p6)

The premise of changing ourselves physically is in itself one of the great debates of this

time. We are naturally adverse to the unknown and unnatural; people have already taken

stances and varied arguments on plastic surgery for example, some stating that such an

action is an abomination in the eyes of their God, while others arguing that the freedom to

do what one does to their own body is not to be infringed upon. Imagine the uproar if

people started amputating their own limbs and mechanically enhancing their bodies for

11
the sake of progress! The social and political uncertainty of such a premise if it happened

now would be at the very least destabilising for our current social and moral fabric.

On the other hand, we have proponents of Transhumanism like Arthur. C. Clarke, who

said in an interview, ‘It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God - but to

create him.’ While bordering on the controversial and downright blasphemous to many

religions in the world, his point is nonetheless thought provoking. Some look to religion

for the answer, hoping that spiritual salvation would save us. Some believe we should

stay the course. Others argue for a more ambitious approach, in which we transcend our

current ways of thinking, our outdated systems of thought, and even our primitive

emotions. In short, the transcendence of the human condition and its limits: physical,

mental and psychological, through the integration of technology into the human body,

thereby changing human nature as well. Humanity then becomes a mere stepping stone to

something greater. Whatever the case, all we know is that our destinies lie ahead in the

murky uncertainty of human progress. And in that future, what would society and

civilisation be like? Perhaps repeating the same questions put forth in this essay’s

overview would be relevant.4 How would people in the future live and die? Would they

be biologically immortal? What kind of culture would they have, and what kind of art

would they create? How would they go about designing their cities, their society and their

way of living? Would they have solved the problems that currently plague us, our savage

propensity to behave like animals, violent and greedy? Without these flaws, what would

they be?

Would they even be human anymore?

4
p2

12
‘What is man? What will man become? That man should perennially ask these questions

and provide ever new answers is an indication of his being.’ (Clynes, M, Cyborg:

Evolution of the Superman, 1965, p1) What will we become indeed? In asking such

questions, one must also ponder the purpose of our being. 5What are we? What is our

destiny as a species? We are all alone on our little planet, full of hope, fear and wonder.

Like mere children we seem, in the grand scale of all things, playing with and seeking

forces we know little off, except that they exist along with us in this cold dark universe.

Amidst all our doubt however, one solid and most obvious truth rings true. We will never

answer our questions if we choose to destroy each other. Therefore one can argue that the

most important of the duties and responsibilities humanity should place upon itself is the

protection of the billions of lives that live under its banner. No overarching principle, no

philosophy of life, no sacred truth will ever come into existence if we give in to our

primal instincts and choose to self-annihilate.

‘We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we

grapple with problems. There are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our

responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions, and pass

them on.’ (Feynman, R, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out: The Best Short Works of

Richard P. Feynman )

5
p1

13
 Chapter 3

The Most Dangerous Idea in the World

3.1 Supermen

‘The human species can, if it wishes, transcend itself — not just sporadically, an

individual here in one way, an individual there in another way, but in its entirety, as

humanity. We need a name for this new belief. Perhaps transhumanism will serve: man

remaining man, but transcending himself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his

human nature.’ (Huxley, J, Transhumanism, 1957)

In knowing we are flawed as a species, would it not make sense therefore, to pursue

improvement and perfection at every turn? In answering such a question, many

philosophers and scientists today will mention transhumanism; but what is it exactly? The

term has been copiously used in the earlier chapters of this essay, along with hints as to

what it means, but perhaps a more robust explanation of the word would be wise at this

point of writing. Transhumanism is an intellectual and philosophical movement that

pursues the notion of humanity transcending its physical and mental limits through the

use of science of technology, while still maintaining a moral compass we find acceptable

today6. In simpler terms, it means the creation of a society of supermen that is

exponentially more powerful than the average human, and one that espouses the humanist

values we hold dear, not much unlike the Superman from D.C. comics. Superman isn’t

human; he’s kryptonian. And with that revelation comes all his superhuman abilities we

know of. His super strength, ice-breath, laser eyebeams are what most of us can probably

6
Bostrom, N. 2005. A History of Transhumanist Thought. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14

14
remember with no problem; but one can assume that it is his ability for love, forgiveness

and self-sacrifice that is most endearing. Certainly Superman is looked up to more for his

ideals above all else, as a shining bastion for all that is good in this world. Yet Superman

shares many of the flaws that plague all of us. He is vulnerable to hubris for example, and

his sense of justice often clouds his judgement. He is so like us and yet, he isn’t. His

penchant for compassion, even for his enemies always pulls through, which cannot be

said for the majority of us. One can therefore view kryptonians as a fictional example of

transhumans; still flawed, but better, improved, and less likely to fail as a species. It is

irony thus, that Krypton was destroyed along with the rest of Superman’s people. A

testament and warning perhaps, that transhumanism doesn’t mean perfection, but rather,

it is a product of a journey, not unlike Nietzsche’s analogy of us being a rope above an

abyss. One wrong step and we tumble into oblivion.

15
3.2 Nietzschean Dilemma: The Moral and Ethical Void

On the topic of Nietzsche; many authors and proponents of transhumanism have claimed

the philosopher’s work as a banner of inspiration for transhumanism. Seeing as how his

views often put humanity as a precursor to something better, this is not so surprising.

There is argument however that the works of Friedrich Nietzsche point not towards

transhumanism in a sense, but rather towards self-actualisation7. Considering the famous

quote by Nietzsche in Thus Spoke Zarathustra,

‘I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done

to overcome him? All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do

you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than

overcome man?’

Nick Bostrom argues that what Nietzsche had in mind ‘was not technological

transformation but a kind of soaring personal growth and cultural refinement in

exceptional individuals… Despite some surface-level similarities with the Nietzschean

vision, transhumanism – with its Enlightenment roots, its emphasis on individual

liberties, and its humanistic concern for the welfare of all humans(and other sentient

beings)- probably has as much or more in common with Nietzsche’s contemporary then

English liberal thinker and utilitarian John Stuart Mill.’

This view is further enforced in a journal by Michael Hauskeller, in which he states that,

‘Posthumans will allegedly lead happier, more fulfilling lives than we do now. This

7
Bostrom, N. 2005. A History of Transhumanist Thought. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14

16
assumption is the main reason why transhumanists demand that we pave the way for

posthumanity. In other words, there is a moral imperative at the heart of the

transhumanist agenda…Nietzsche, on the other hand, had nothing but contempt for those

who sought to improve the human condition, such as John Stuart Mill whom he

denounced as a “blockhead” because Mill still believed in good and evil (both natural

and moral) and felt that one should make it one’s duty to bring about the victory of the

former and the destruction of the latter. According to Nietzsche, the philosopher needs to

position himself “beyond good and evil,” because there are no moral facts and nothing

that is truly better or worse than anything else. Happiness for instance is not to be

considered better than suffering. To believe otherwise indicates a grave error of

judgement.’8

Perhaps now it is easier to see the reason for the distance in which some transhumanists

seek to put between themselves and Nietzschean philosophy. It is because

transhumanism, it would seem, seeks to work within a moral framework that can be seen

as one inspired by the age of enlightenment and that of humanism, while Nietzsche works

within a circle of complete moral vacuum devoid of all the human values we deem ‘good’

today. ‘Transhumanists may want to revaluate certain aspects of our existence, but they

certainly do not, as Nietzsche did, advocate the revaluation of all present values. On the

contrary, they emphasise the continuity between (past and present) humanist, (present)

transhumanist, and (future) posthuman values and see themselves as defenders of the

Enlightenment’s legacy against its modern (bioconservative) enemies.’ 9 As Michael, puts

8
Hauskeller, M. 2010. Nietzsche, the overhuman, and the posthuman: A reply to Stefan Sorgner. Journal of
Evolution and Technology, 21
9
Hauskeller, M

17
it, there is a difference between what Transhumanists sseek to do, that is improve the

human condition within ethical and moral limits, whilst Nietzsche on the other hand ,

‘wanted to turn our whole system of values upside down, or rather rip it apart. He prided

himself to be the “first immoralist” and hence “destroyer par excellence”10. The rope

above the abyss11 according to Nietzsche, would seem to lead us to a future with a

completely different set of moral values that many of us would find abhorrent today. Such

is the work of being a philosopher, that one must put oneself ‘beyond good and evil’.

While perhaps ‘safe’ when on paper, the ramifications of Nietzsche’s ‘moral vacuum’ to

‘overcome man’ can be argued as terrible when viewed from our current moral

perspective, i.e. killing is bad, love our fellow man etc. His work has been used as

inspiration and justification, some argue, for the implementation of Eugenics, the

Holocaust, Fascism and even anarchy. One can certainly see the appeal of Nietzschean

philosophy to power hungry, blood thirsty tyrants who wish to remake the world in their

own image despite the colossal suffering and self-inflicted damage it would cause

mankind12. But as the man said ‘Happiness for instance is not to be considered better

than suffering. To believe otherwise indicates a grave error of judgement.’ With such

reasoning taken out of context, with the ‘go ahead’ to do whatever it takes to change what

it means to be human, one can see with clarity, the immensity of the harm it would cost

us all if we allow such circumstances to occur.

It would therefore be prudent, to question any and all movements, be they cultural,

political, intellectual, that seek to change us. Even transhumanism, with its promise of

10
Hauskeller, M
11
p11
12
Kalish, M. 2004. Nietzsche's Influence on Hitler's Mein Kampf, by M. Kalish.

18
improving the human condition for all mankind, should be subject to intense scrutiny and

criticism, if only because it is advocated by well-meaning humans, but humans ambitious

nonetheless. Transhumanism could certainly herald the beginning of a great age in human

history, but its propensity to abuse is concerning, considering how similar it is to

Nietzschean philosophy. With the advent of sufficiently advanced technology, it is now

creeping up on us in ways we do not yet fully understand. As such, the need for

continuous exposure and encouragement of discussion on the concept of transhumanism

in its early stages cannot be stressed enough. Like the futurist movement in Italy in the

early 20th century, art and media today can pave the way for greater understanding and

inspiration for the future, whilst also generating much needed debate on the issues that

affect and will affect us all.

19
3.3 Predicting Uncertainty

While one can argue the moral implications of changing human nature ad infinitum, there

are some who wonder if we are indeed changing or if we would even change at all. After

all, we still remain very much human both physically and psychologically, and the

implication that we will become ‘cyborgs’ or ‘augmented’ in some form or the other

would seem more science fiction than fact. Now the case can be argued that a person in

the 1950s for example, would find the idea of a smartphone absolutely crazy. Fast

forward a mere sixty years into the future to our present time however, and that same

person would have seen the computer shrunk from the size of a room to the size of a

desktop or smaller; he/she would have observed the rise of the internet as a global

communicative device; he/she would most probably be using said internet on an IPhone

that has more computing power than the Apollo 11(1969) spacecraft that put man on the

moon. This was all accomplished in less than a century; a single human generation. On

top of that, some technologists argue that the pace of technological advancement will

only increase with time. Moore’s law13 for example, which is the observation and

prediction that computing power doubles every two to three years, has been subsequently

used in predicting what some computer scientists call the technological singularity14; or

more humorously put, the ‘nerd rapture’, in which artificially created intelligence

significantly outstrips its own masters, thereby becoming more ‘desirable’ compared to

human intelligence, and thus potentially changing human nature and civilisation as we

know it and fulfilling said transhuman future. Ray Kurzweil mentions in his book ‘The

13
Moore, G. 1998. [online] Available at:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fussell/courses/cs352h/papers/moore.pdf
14
Jornod, R. 2013. The Technological Singularity: Heading for Transhumanism.

20
Singularity is Near’ (2005), that this event would take place as early as in the year 2045,

placing it more or less in conjunction with that of Moore’s law. Much like that of the

smartphone analogy given earlier, we see a great leap in technological advancement in

which the given future is one of such change that our present selves would find

completely incomprehensible. There is naturally argument however, and staunch criticism

with regards to such an incredible vision. Paul Davies mentions in the article, ‘When

Computers Take Over’15 that, ‘This absurdity is an illustration of what one might call the

exponential-growth fallacy… Kurzweil invokes ‘Moore’s law’ as if it were a law of

nature…’ Davies goes on to give a variety of examples of ‘exponential-growth fallacy’ in

action, stating, ‘The Moon landing in 1969 was widely touted as the first small step on an

escalator to the stars, with Arthur C. Clarke predicting huge lunar bases and a Jupiter

expedition by 2001. The rapid uptake of robotics in the manufacturing industry after the

Second World War led to the predictions of cyborg servants and android armies within a

few decades. In the event, these technologies became stuck or even slid backward. The

key point about exponential growth is that it never lasts.’ Of course, a grain of salt as

well as a huge dose of healthy scepticism is always needed with regards to such

predictions, their nature being a merely speculative one. However, while Clarke’s vision

of lunar bases and the Jupiter expeditions were not ultimately fulfilled, one can perhaps

begin to see his predictions come to life, albeit at a much later time then he foresaw and

in a different way and destination. There is currently talk about sending a manned

mission to Mars, with volunteers being called upon to undertake a one way trip to

15
Davies, P. 2006. When computers take over. Nature, 440 (7083), pp. 421--422.

21
colonise the planet. With regards to his example of incredulous ‘cyborg servants’ and

‘android armies’, one need only look at the amount of resources and money currently

being spent on creating unmanned drones, strike craft and fighting vehicles by militaries

worldwide. These new weapons of war, these new ‘robotic warriors’ are certainly on the

right track of fulfilling the prediction shot down by Davies, albeit again, at a much later

date. One can thus argue that working within a more realistic time frame, and more

importantly with the right kind of motivation and with enough resources, humanity is

capable of the incredible. On a side note however, it is disconcerting that the latter vision,

that is that of ‘android armies’, seems to more of a reality than the former at this point of

time. Perhaps a continuous testament to human nature, that war seems to be the grand

motivator of major technological progress. E.g. Computer Science to break German

military codes; the jet engine race between German and British engineers; the Manhattan

Project and its child, the atomic bomb. While the notion of major conflict is of course

highly undesirable to a large portion of the world’s population, perhaps it is the urgency

of requiring ‘something’ to end said major conflict that is the best catalyst for progress,

and the ultimate fulfilment of the hypothetical prediction of the ‘technological

singularity’ and the transandence of man.

22
 Chapter 4

The Future: Today

4.1 The Seeds of Change: Prosthetics

While the idea of cyborg man seems to remain in the philosophical depths of human

uncertainty, we can perhaps observe small changes in the human condition, tiny

technological pinpricks that might eventually lead to an era of radical change; the old

adage being that Rome was not built in a day, more so relevant when taking into

consideration the vast diversity of human perspective and opinion on the matter of

transhumanism. In looking for examples for the start of the process, an observer would

most probably turn their eyes to that of the biomedical and neuroscience industry, these

places being the forefront of current breakthroughs in artificial prosthetics and human

augmentation. Prosthesis are essentially, man-made devices used to assist those of less

fortunate circumstances, i.e. loss of certain body parts, to better adapt and integrate into

society. While one can argue these artificial replacements are entirely benign in their

function, their purpose purely that of the assistance of the weak and disadvantaged, others

might make the situation out to be different.

Case studies: Oscar Pistorius, Hugh Herr and Aimee Mullins are some of the people who

currently use prosthesis in a way that can viewed as ‘enhancing’, or even ‘augmented’.

Oscar for example, a double amputee South African Paralympic and Olympic sprint

runner has won multiple medals whilst running with his prosthesis ‘blades’; so much so

23
that he has sparked intriguing controversy and debate amongst his fellow athletes, some

who claim that his running blades confer to him an unfair mechanical advantage that

normal athletes cannot hope to achieve, because the advantage is in itself ‘artificial’ and

‘unnatural’16. ‘The questions started almost as soon as Pistorius began racing, even

before he earned the moniker, "fastest man on no legs”… Pistorius donned Cheetahs for

the 2004 Athens Paralympics. He won gold in the 200 -- an event that combines single-

and double-leg amputees -- shattering the world record. According to a former U.S.

Paralympics official, single-leg amputees, feeling that they were at a disadvantage

against Pistorius, began to complain.’ Essentially, where the advantage in Oscar’s

prosthesis lies is ‘Pistorius's leg-swing times, when measured on a high-speed treadmill,

were off the human charts. At top speed, he swings his legs between strides in 0.284 of a

second, which is 20 percent faster than intact-limbed sprinters with the same top speed.

"His limbs are 20 percent lighter," Weyand says, "and he swings them 20 percent faster…

The technology is enabling him to do something that nobody else can do. That's the very

definition of an advantage.17’ Is this to be considered an unfair advantage; or the future?

While there is still debate as to the finer points of fairness and sportsmanship, one can

argue that there exists an underlining social and cultural aspect to the whole issue; where

does Oscar Pistorius belong exactly, how does he fit in? With prosthesis such as his,

where can he race without controversy and overbearing scrutiny? And where, more

importantly, does the sporting community and society in general draw the moral and

ethical line?

16
Epstein, D. 2012. Fair or foul? Experts split over whether Pistorius has advantage | David Epstein |
SI.com.
17
Epstein, D. 2012. Fair or foul

24
Hugh Herr is an engineer, biophysicist and director of the Biomechatronics Group at the

MIT Media Lab. He is also an avid rock climber and double leg amputee due to a

mountain climbing accident. He had this to say on the topic of prosthetics, ‘It's actually

unfair… As tech advancements in prosthetics come along, amputees can exploit those

improvements. They can get upgrades. A person with a natural body can't.’18 On the

topic of prosthetics augmenting and improving an amputee’s quality of life to that of one

above a normal person, he mentions, ‘When the prosthetic technology doesn't work, and

the [amputee] is limping and he can't run and he's hurting, then nobody feels threatened,

because that person is labelled as 'cute' and 'courageous’. But when the technology

works, when it can make you stronger or faster than you were, it overnight becomes sexy

and powerful and threatening. Overnight.19" In an example entirety similar to Oscar’s

dilemma regarding his running prosthesis, Hugh whose ‘prostheses that could change

length mid-ascent and find purchase on nooks too small for human feet’ was

subsequently called out by his ‘competitors who saw a potentially unfair advantage’.

“I predict that as we march into this 21st century, the changes we’ll see in prosthetic

designs [will be that] the artificial prosthetic will become more intimate with the

biological human body. There will be a mergence, if you will.” (Hugh, H, 2011) If Hugh

is correct, we now stand at the rudimentary beginnings of man-machine hybridisation,

and the eventual advent of true transhumanism.

18
Kuang, C. 2010. Bionic Legs, i-Limbs, and Other Super Human Prostheses You'll Envy
19
Kuang, C. 2010

25
‘From an identity standpoint, what does it mean to have a disability? Pamela Anderson

has more prosthetic in her body than I do. Nobody calls her disabled… There’s an

important difference and distinction between the objective medical fact of my being an

amputee and the subjective societal opinion of whether or not I’m disabled. Truthfully,

the only real and consistent disability I’ve had to confront is the world ever thinking that

I could be described by those definitions. (Aimee, M, 2009)

Aimee Mullins20, athlete, actress, fashion model and double amputee, amd first person to

ever use the ‘Cheetah’ carbon fibre sprinting prosthetics that has made Oscar Pistorius his

name. She has competed in the Paralympics and set world records in multiple competitive

sprinting events as well as the long jump, before she would eventually retire. Other than

her astounding achievements despite her disability, she has gone on to design multiple leg

prosthetics in a visually stunning, attractive and artistic fashion, and has even starred in

an art film as a ‘cheetah woman’ with animal like legs. One can go so far as to argue that

her work signifies, perhaps, the beginning of a new form of art and self-expressionism,

where instead of bodily tattoos on skin for example, one might find that the body itself

becomes an art piece, able to twist and turn in forms unimaginable due to the instalment

of mechanically augmented body parts. 21

With regards to the amazing things these extraordinary people have accomplished, one

can say that the most endearing and inspirational message that can be had from their

20
Ted.com. 2009. Aimee Mullins: My 12 pairs of legs | Video on TED.com.
21
YouTube. 2012. Can prosthetics be art.

26
accomplishments, is their inability to quit and lie down just because of their disabilities.

Instead, they have chosen to forge ahead and turn disadvantage into advantage and even

improvement. Therein lies the issue of human augmentation however. Where exactly do

we draw the line? And at what point do we deem such improvement immoral, offensive,

and unethical? We have now, the real probability of prosthesis becoming the new

paradigm of power, beauty and culture in the future. Certainly disturbing to people who

might be labelled as ‘bioconservatives’ by transhumanists, and downright immoral to

those of strong religious upbringing; the replacement of perfectly functioning human

body parts for more powerful, durable, beautiful albeit artificial versions is an issue that

will require long debate and discussion amongst the population of the world.

27
4.2 The Role of Art and Media in the Transhumanist Agenda

Art and media has played a significant role in both informing and educating the general

populace of difficult and controversial topics, the concept of transhumanism being one of

them. A good early example would be the story of Icarus, who, in his attempt to escape

from the island of Crete, flew too close to the sun with wings of feather and wax, and

subsequently fell to this death because the heat melted his artificial appendages. While

Icarus’s wings can be philosophically compared to that of human augmentation today, it

is likely that the more important message to draw from the story would be that it was

hubris and over ambition that caused Icarus’s untimely fall and death. Therefore, one can

make the argument that we as a society should always be constantly wary of our own

natures and propensity to arrogance, lest we rise and fall ignobly like Icarus did. On

another note from the same time era, the Greek and Roman Pantheon of gods can be

viewed as a sort of a transitional state between man and divinity. The gods the Greeks and

Romans worshipped were anything but perfect beings; although they held in them

unrivalled power over all mortals, they were subject to the same petty emotions and

delusions that plagued their subjects. One can view, thus, the Pantheon of gods as a

Pantheon of transhumans, more than what mere mortals are and yet still vulnerable in

terms of intellectual immaturity.

In a more modern context, the advent of the comic book superhero can also be seen as

part of the overall transhumanist concept. Certainly, the majority of superheroes are

28
transhumanistic characters in their very nature; their physical beings still humanoid in

form for the most part, but endowed with powers that are inherently inhuman. 22While

their morals are also seen to be a step above our own, they also come with their own

antitheses, namely super villains. These characters are also similar to superheroes in

terms of power, the only difference being that of their moral compass. While superheroes

stand for all that is good and tend to be selfless in their attitudes, supervillains often fight

for themselves and material gain, and are consequently seen as selfish and evil. A

message of moral dualism perhaps, not unlike the dilemma of transhumanism, can thus

be grasped from said concept of superheroes and supervillians.

Hollywood has also provided the public with a variety of films that question the existence

of man, as well as the concept of transhumanism. Perhaps one of the most famous of

examples would be Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, viewed by many now as

the director’s tour de force. The movie’s screenplay was co-written by both Stanley, and

more interestingly, one of transhumanism’s greatest proponents and thinkers, namely

Arthur C. Clarke. The movie’s elements, from its almost revolutionary way of pacing and

showing the long expanse of time without having to use outmoded and uninteresting

transitions (this can observed near then end of the film after Dave, the main character is

held in a ‘pen’ for captivity); its use of a symphonic poem based on Friedrich Nietzsche’s

Thus Spoke Zarathustra, which ‘presents the idea that mankind will one day be surpassed

by the übermensch, or the superman.’; its use of an incredibly powerful artificial

intelligence as a major non-human character(that some argue is more human than the

humans themselves), that can be seen as a nod towards the theory of technological
22
p14-15

29
singularity; and its use of major topics like human evolution, technology and the question

of extra-terrestrial life, all point towards the biggest, and most comprehensive film

relegated to the concept of transhumanism in Hollywood, and perhaps the world. It is

huge, in the sense, that it covers almost all of the known issues of human transandence

and destiny at that period of time into a beautifully crafted package of mystery, human

curiosity, fear of the unknown and boundless optimism. As such, it has served to inspire a

wide range and variety of science fiction books, scripts and movies. If a film should be

chosen to hold the banner for the transhumanist agenda, it would almost certainly be

2001: A Space Odyssey; an art piece affected by the incredible draw of an incredible

concept, and subsequently affecting its audiences in ways significant.

A new player has entered the field of media in recent years as well. The advent of video

games has opened a niche in the market of mass entertainment and interactive

storytelling, which now has access to an extremely large and prevalent consumer base

worldwide. On the topic of transhumanism; the concept is no stranger to the world of

gaming. Deus Ex and its subsequent prequel Deus Ex: Human Revolution23, are two

games of many that can be seen as excellent examples of modern media influenced by the

transhumanist agenda. For the purpose of this case study, the latter prequel shall be used;

Deus Ex: Human Revolution introduces the story of one Adam Jensen, who suffers

crippling and extreme bodily harm in the process of protecting his corporate masters. He

recovers from his injuries eventually, but his body is no longer human, having been

replaced by cybernetic limbs that are significantly more powerful than that of a normal

human being. Thus begins an epic tale of sadness, loss, betrayal and redemption, all set in
23
YouTube. 2011. Deus Ex:Human Revolution and Transhumanism.

30
a fully realised dystopian Earth in the year 2027. A person familiar with the game would

argue that what is most interesting about Deus Ex: Human Revolution is its focus on the

larger issues of social and economic change that affect the world’s citizens in a realistic

and disturbing fashion. The advent of human augmentation causes irreparable schisms

within the factions of the game, some being unable to afford such technology and are

subsequently left behind in extreme poverty, some abusing said technology for the

purpose of extortion and mercenary power grabbing, and those who stubbornly desire to

remain ‘pure’ and therefore human. What Deus Ex: Human Revolution does, is offer the

player a peek into a world that has just gotten its first taste of transhumanism, the power

in which it offers and the evils in which it stirs in the hearts of men. In doing so, the game

serves to inspire, educate and forewarn its audiences about transhumanism in an

entertaining and deeply unforgettable way.

The case studies given above are but one of many examples of how transhumanism has

affected the art and media industry. One can argue, that such work seeks to promote the

transhumanist agenda to a worldwide audience, for good or bad. It is this very moral

ambiguity, that is up for philosophical, moral and artistic debate, that this dissertation is

attempting to encourage. While technology is the basis in which civilisation progresses,

this essay proposes that it is art, media, and their respective and relevant industries that

will ultimately shape the way in which a society thinks and its culture formed. While the

responsibilities of invention and innovation lie with scientists and engineers, the burden

of exposure to new technologies and philosophies, good or bad, should be championed by

artists worldwide.

31
 Chapter 5

Conclusion

5.1 Conclusion

The idea of a higher, ultimately unattainable power, one of divine origin, is perhaps the

most prevalent concept of human civilisation. In nearly every society in recorded history,

in nearly every culture, we find the existence of a god or a pantheon of gods. Why is that?

Is it because we know we are inherently imperfect, and thus need beings of perfection as

a beacon of inspiration? Perhaps, deep down, we all aspire to be more than what we are;

perhaps, we all long to be more than human. The idea of religion and spirituality for

example, all consist of at least some form of ‘nirvana’ or heaven, in which the soul has

transcended its physical form to enter paradise, as an angel etc. The concept sounds eerily

similar to that of transhumanism, in which man transcends his current being to one of

near technological perfection, both physical and psychological. Will we then see the

melding of both spirituality and technology into a singular purpose? I view the issue with

both great excitement and trepidation, for in the quest of perfection, it would seem man

has to cast of the one thing that makes him so; his humanity. But at what cost should this

be done? I propose that one thing remains certain amidst the questions; human

civilisation will constantly forge ahead despite its own misgivings; the need for

improvement far outweighing the risks. It is in such a climate therefore, that artists and

visionaries now and in the future remain vigilant in creating relevant exposure to such

controversial ideas and events, transhumanism or no, lest it becomes too late for action.

32
 “What is a human being, then?”

“A seed.”

“A... seed?'

“An acorn that is unafraid to destroy itself in growing into a tree.”

(David. Z, The Broken God, p.236, 1992)

33
BIBLIOGRAPHY

34
Bostrom, N. 2004. Transhumanism-The World's Most Dangerous Idea? World Transhumanist Association.

http://www. transhumanism. org/index. php/WTA/more/bostrom-responds-to-fukuyama.

Bostrom, N. 2005. A History of Transhumanist Thought. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14 Availa-

ble at: http://www.jetpress.org/volume14/bostrom.pdf [Accessed: 22 Dec 2013].

Davies, P. 2006. When computers take over. Nature, 440 (7083), pp. 421--422.

Eden, A. H. 2012. Singularity hypotheses. Dordrecht: Springer.

Epstein, D. 2012. Fair or foul? Experts split over whether Pistorius has advantage | David Epstein |

SI.com. [online] Available at:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/olympics/2012/writers/david_epstein/08/03/oscar-pistorius-

london-olympics/index.html [Accessed: 11 Nov 2013].

Greenemeier, L. 2011. Robotic Exoskeletons from Cyberdyne Could Help Workers Clean Up Fukushima

Nuclear Mess | Observations, Scientific American Blog Network. [online] Available at:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/11/09/robotic-exoskeletons-from-cyberdyne-

could-help-workers-clean-up-fukushima-nuclear-mess/ [Accessed: 12 Dec 2013].

Halacy, D. S. 1965. Cyborg; evolution of the superman. New York: Harper & Row.

Hauskeller, M. 2010. Nietzsche, the overhuman, and the posthuman: A reply to Stefan Sorgner. Journal of

Evolution and Technology, 21 (1), pp. 5--8.

Hughes, J. 2004. Citizen Cyborg. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press.

Huxley, A. 1946. Brave new world. New York: Harper & Bros.

Jornod, R. 2013. The Technological Singularity: Heading for Transhumanism. [online] Available at:

http://www.mysciencework.com/news/10154/the-technological-singularity-heading-for-

transhumanism [Accessed: 11 Dec 2013].

35
Kalish, M. 2004. Nietzsche's Influence on Hitler's Mein Kampf, by M. Kalish. [online] Available at:

http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/133p/133p04papers/MKalishNietzNazi046.htm

[Accessed: 12 Dec 2013].

Kuang, C. 2010. Bionic Legs, i-Limbs, and Other Super Human Prostheses You'll Envy. [online] Available

at: http://www.fastcodesign.com/1514543/bionic-legs-i-limbs-and-other-super-human-prostheses-

youll-envy [Accessed: 1 Dec 2013].

Miranda, L. 2012. Transhumanists Vow to Destroy our Spirit and Nature. [online] Available at: http://real-

agenda.com/2012/06/27/transhumanists-vow-to-destroy-our-spirit-and-nature/ [Accessed: 13 Dec

2013].

Moon, M. n.d. Blade Runner. [online] Available at: http://www.rdasia.com/article/2730/ [Accessed: 23 Dec

2013].

Moore, G. 1998. [online] Available at: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~fussell/courses/cs352h/papers/moore.pdf

[Accessed: 25 Dec 2013].

More, M. 2010. The overhuman in the transhuman. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 21 (1), pp. 1--4.

Munkittrick, K. 2010. From Gears to Genes: A Sea Change in Transhumanism. [online] Available at:

http://www.popbioethics.com/2010/06/from-gears-to-genes-a-sea-change-in-transhumanism/ [Ac-

cessed: 22 Dec 2013].

Nietzsche, F. W. and Hollingdale, R. J. 1969. Thus spoke Zarathustra. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin

Books.

NPR.org. 2011. The Double Amputee Who Designs Better Limbs. [online] Available at:

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/10/137552538/the-double-amputee-who-designs-better-limbs [Accessed:

11 Dec 2013].

Pigliucci, M. 2010. Rationally Speaking: Why we don’t need transhumanism. [online] Available at:

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.sg/2010/10/why-we-dont-need-transhumanism.html [Accessed: 12

Dec 2013].

36
Sorgner, S. L. 2009. Nietzsche, the overhuman, and transhumanism. Journal of Evolution and Technology,

20 (1), pp. 29--42.

Strickland, J. n.d. HowStuffWorks "How Moore's Law Works". [online] Available at:

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/moores-law.htm [Accessed: 25 Dec 2013].

Ted.com. 2009. Aimee Mullins: My 12 pairs of legs | Video on TED.com. [online] Available at:

http://www.ted.com/talks/aimee_mullins_prosthetic_aesthetics.html [Accessed: 13 Dec 2013].

YouTube. 2012. Can prosthetics be art. [online] Available at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd0KmOlE7UE [Accessed: 1 Jan 2014].

YouTube. 2011. Deus Ex:Human Revolution and Transhumanism. [online] Available at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgyIUCh2GK0 [Accessed: 22 Dec 2013].

YouTube. 2013. Bionics, Transhumanism, and the end of Evolution (Full Documentary). [online] Available

at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU1-YFbAifA [Accessed: 22 Dec 2013].

YouTube. 2013. TRANSHUMAN - Do you want to live forever? (full documentary film). [online] Available

at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PAj2yorJig [Accessed: 22 Dec 2013].

37