Transhumanism and the future.

I would like to address some of the issues brought up in the thoughtful letters in the November/December 2004 Humanist responding to my short critique of transhumanism.

Erdman Palmore asserts that Isaac Asimov's claim, "An individual's brain is of prime importance to humanity only until he is thirty-five," is "obviously false as proven by the age of most Nobel Prize winners." But this misses the crucial point that while many Nobel Prize winners are somewhat advanced in years, the basic idea that directed their life's work and for which they were awarded the prize was realized at a young age. A random pick of past Nobel Prize winners serves up Herbert A. Simon, 1978 Nobel Laureate in Economics. He wrote a term paper as an undergraduate, before the age of 20, which led to his receiving the prize some 42 years later at the age of 62.

Steven E Goldberg correctly, I think, points out that the most important problems we face are likely caused by the size of our population. But then he concludes that a concern over diminished problem solving in a world of fewer new brains "seems largely without merit." I suggest that, in a static population, better solutions to existing and new problems will be found with a faster cycling of new brains than with a slower cycle or with old brains. The confusion lies in the increased complexity of problems caused by an increasing population rather than in the capacity of new brains to solve those problems.

Goldberg offers an alternative: "Wouldn't it be preferable to accept a slower pace of innovation in exchange for a vastly improved quality of life for a smaller human population with longer average lifespans and better overall health?" This fails to address the basic problem: Is innovation possible without degrading the environment? Are we able to achieve our goals and maintain a sustainable existence? Our past history doesn't bode well in this respect.

If I am reading these two letters correctly, they present a similar, very important, basic question--the question that I suggested in my article: What goals should be the driving force of humanity?

This is perhaps the most important issue of our day and I would like to open a dialog with all those interested. My e-mail address is [e-mail]. Perhaps through the exchange of ideas we can make some important discoveries and contributions.

Michael L. Giancola

Pacific Palisades, California