The End of Man?
What does it mean to be human? In Catholic thought, it’s clear: we are body-soul composites, made in the image and likeness of God. We aren’t just physical bodies, nor are we just spirits that happen to inhabit a body. Both our bodies and our souls are integral to what it means to be human (which is why, at the end of time, all men and women will be reunited with their bodies).
Yet, as we’ve seen, many AI proponents believe that a human being is composed only of a physical body; there is no such thing as a spirit. The body is simply a complicated organic machine, and it can be augmented limitlessly—or even replaced with a better, stronger, longer-lasting robotic body. Why not simply merge man with machine? That’s the ultimate goal of the transhumanist movement.
We’ve long used technology to improve our bodies (I could not make it through a single day without my glasses), but AI enhancement promises a far more intimate bonding between human bodies and technologies. One popular idea involves embedding some type of computer chip in the brain to augment its abilities. Currently, this notion is mostly promoted as a way to help those with various forms of brain damage, allowing them to live more normal lives. But no one believes it will end there.
Perhaps, as in the movie The Matrix, people will eventually just download information into their brains to become immediate experts on any subject. Or human bodies will be enhanced to become far stronger than currently possible. What about a human brain residing in a robot body that can’t be hurt or killed?
Yet direct human-computer connections are always a double-edged sword. If a person can voluntarily download the ability to speak French, for example, what’s to stop an AI company—perhaps under the influence of government leaders—from sending data to the brain that makes the person more compliant or submissive? Or from configuring soldiers to be more aggressive?
Transhumanism might seem irrelevant if you have no plans to get a brain chip or upload your thoughts to a computer. But what happens if transhumanist enhancements become commonplace? Let’s say you’re applying for a job, and you’re competing against “enhanced” humans who are now smarter and harder-working than you. Perhaps your whole profession is full of “enhanced” humans, making you unable to find significant work in your field. Do you compromise your anti-enhancement views in order to feed your family? According to many of the leading transhumanist experts, this is not science fiction; some are predicting that human brains will be uploaded to a robot or a computer as early as the 2040s. If these “advances” happen, how far do you go? These will be real issues in the future as transhumanist enhancements become more and more mainstream.
Who’s in Control?
Imagine a situation in which a human brain resides in and controls a robot body. The body would probably need regular fixes and improvements (what are called firmware updates), just like most modern devices. Currently, most devices automatically connect to an outside server, download the update, and install it. What if that firmware update had a bug—or malicious code allowing remote access to the robot body? Theoretically, someone’s brain could be trapped in a body he does not control.
From there it would be a small step to a totalitarian government leveraging technological implants to control its citizenry. Human freedom—our ability to choose our own destiny, which is fundamental to the Catholic idea of the human person—could easily be overwhelmed and removed in a transhumanist future.
To be sure, transhumanism also holds out the promise of overcoming common human ailments. I think most people would love a world without back pain or arthritis. But, believe it or not, the ultimate goal of the transhumanist movement is not just a less painful, healthier life but human immortality. This leads us to the strong religious aspect of the transhumanist movement.
The Religion of Transhumanism
Transhumanist proponents are often religious in their fervor for the movement, and that’s no accident. It is, in many ways, a fundamentally religious movement, or, more accurately, a movement to replace the world’s religions.
In 1990, Max More, a leading transhumanist, published an influential manifesto titled “Transhumanism: Towards a Futurist Philosophy,” in which he details his desire to see the world’s religions supplanted by transhumanism:
Humanity is in the early stages of a period of explosive expansion in knowledge, freedom, intelligence, lifespan, and wisdom. Yet our species persists in old conceptual structures and processes which act as a drag on progress. One of the worst is religious thinking. In this essay I will show how religion acts as an entropic force, standing against our advancement into transhumanity and our future as posthumans. At the same time I will acknowledge the necessary and positive role that religions have played in giving meaning and structure to our lives.
The alternative to religion is not a despairing nihilism, nor a sterile scientism, but transhumanism. Humanism, while a major step in the right direction, contains too many outdated values and ideas. Extropianism, the principal form of transhumanism, moves beyond humanism, focusing on our evolutionary future.
Understand what More—one of the most influential transhumanists—is saying: religion has kept humanity captive throughout history, and we need to jettison these religious beliefs and practices if we’re to move forward as a species and achieve our full potential. He classifies religion as “entropic,” i.e., a force that causes decline and decay. Transhumanism, on the other hand, is “extropic,” a term coined by More to represent the opposite of an entropic force—one that fosters growth and vitality for humanity.
Terrifying stuff, to be sure.
Transhumanism, then, is a new religion, and it must answer two fundamental questions that face all religions: Why is there suffering? What happens to us after we die?
Catholicism rightly posits that suffering is a result of sin, and that God Himself entered into our suffering. We unite our sufferings to His Son’s Passion so that we will be united to Him forever in Heaven, where suffering is no more.
The transhumanist movement, on the other hand, sees suffering as part of materialistic evolution and as something that can eventually be defeated through technology. Transhumanism promises an earthly world without suffering.
While there’s nothing wrong with working to alleviate suffering (the modern hospital system originated with medieval Catholics), we need to recognize that it’s impossible to remove all suffering from this fallen world. Even if we were to eliminate most forms of physical suffering, we would still face psychological and spiritual suffering. In fact, I can think of no greater suffering than living in this world forever without any reference to God, which is essentially what the transhumanists are working toward.
Death is a fundamental reality in our fallen world and a consequence of sin—so what does it mean if we can extend life almost indefinitely? A society that fights death is one that doesn’t realize there is already Someone who defeated death. It’s a society that exalts the physical life while eschewing the spiritual life.
One commonality among well-formed, happy elderly folks is that they aren’t afraid of death and even welcome its approach. Not in a suicidal way, but simply in recognition that there is something better waiting for them on the other side of the veil. While it’s natural to fear death, the person who constantly fights against physical death knows, at least subconsciously, that perhaps the next life won’t be so promising for one who has rejected God in this life.
The transhumanist project is a dangerous inversion of the Catholic doctrine of theosis, the teaching that man’s ultimate purpose is to live forever in union with God, even becoming “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4) with Him. We will spend all of eternity without suffering, in complete bliss. Transhumanists, like all men, have this desire deep within them, but because they (usually) reject the existence of God, they are working to create their own technological theosis here on earth.
The Dark Side of the Quest for Perfection
The transhumanist movement is not just some computer nerds’ harmless fantasy. It is poised to affect society in insidious ways by creating a eugenics mindset. Pope Leo XIV alerts us to this danger in Magnifica Humanitas:
From the perspective of the Church’s Social Doctrine, the key issue is not the use of technology as such, but the vision that underlies it. If the human being is treated as something to be perfected or surpassed, it becomes easier to accept that some lives are less useful, less desirable or less worthy. In the name of progress, “necessary sacrifices” may begin to be justified, placing the burden on the most vulnerable in pursuit of a supposed optimization of the species.
As we strive for physical (not spiritual) “perfection,” we risk becoming increasingly less tolerant of imperfection, until we want to eliminate not just the flaws but the people who have them.
The question we must ask is this: What is the line between man and machine? If inserting a pacemaker or grafting on an artificial leg doesn’t change what it means to be human, would a completely robotic body be any different, philosophically and morally speaking? These issues must be grappled with as technology advances toward merging man and machine.
