and if it's treated right,

it can benefit everyone,

it could be abused in many ways if it is not properly done

but most things turn sour.

I don't think average people are willing to take that chance.

i think it will be abused, which is why we're better off without it

It would be nice to have a better phone though.

it probably will come into fruition, i'd say

and i think it's unfortunate

Human nature itself leans negative.

We'd most likely use advances in trans-humanism for evil needs.

phone-chips will be manufactured into our bodies, so outside agencies, like governments, can keep track of us at all times

yea evil needs for sure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPARaLA3M8Y

technology is great and all, but shouldn't be worshipped to the point where we want to merge our identity and consciousness with it

I think this guy gives a good POV on transhumanism, seeing as how he is one himself.

if biomedical technology is an aspect of transhumanism, then i'm not against all aspects of transhumanism

As in he follows the philosophy of Transhumanism?

More or less.

Also that description
"Will Artificial Wombs end gender warfare" makes me a bit sceptical

Transhumanism is solely a positive.

Emphasis on trans.

*Trans* transhumanism.

All in all, this was a quite good question

definitely I think goes under-discussed.

I don't entirely understand the cons of transhumanism

The only potential downside I could see revolves around elitism in the distribution of technologies, increasing economic inequalities

i think 'expanding our mental limitations' with technology could entail forfeiting certain personal freedoms

Well wouldn't becoming trans be null if we can solidify what gender our children will become?

Maybe.

Unless that becomes a option in it of itself.

Because if the idea that "someone born a man internally wants to be a woman" is real, then won't parents just reinforce the aspects that make someone a man or woman?

from my perspective making minds and consciousness subject to computer-analysis and modification, which is a potential road that i've heard some transhumanists be open towards, could bring on a whole range of issues, including thought-policing by governments and corporations, government rewiring of individual desires and values, loss of personal autonomy

True that is a very real possibility.
It would be *Brave New World* turned to 11

Brave New World is a great example. Not all dystopias look ugly, and utopias come at a price

I actually have it on PDF if you want. I'll put it in Archive

@Deleted User

oh nice, thanks

The problem with humanity lies in our souls, not our abilities. Not sure what goals of transhumanism exactly we are debating as there are huge amounts of goals, but as a movement it basically represents a diametrical opposition to the thrust of Christianity: it is unapologetically pro human in every facet. It is often atheistic and represents a pointed fear of death. To the extent that it wishes to enhance human achievement, the same critiques can be said, but here at least it’s a double edged sword in the same way that all technology advances human power: some will use it for good and some for bad

But I think you can split transhumanism into at least two separate goals: extend the capabilities of humans, and enhance human longevity. Any general categories missing?

Not that i know of. Unless you consider fully becoming a machine to be a seperate category