Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies

The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:

Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view

whats new at ieet

Autonomous cars & accidents: The human and financial standpoint

Solving Problems With Collective Intelligence – Towards an Internet of Thinkers?

Embrace: affordable, portable infant incubator

Visioneer Your Future - how do young people conceive of and understand the future?

Transhumanists Donate Incubators to Afghanistan to Combat Infant Mortality

Bitcoin is Steampunk Economics

ieet books

Surviving AI: The promise and peril of artificial intelligence
Calum Chace


g3reth on 'Mindfulness-Based Therapy – Does it Work? (Summary, Part 3)' (Oct 8, 2015)

DonaldFleck on 'Mindfulness-Based Therapy – Examining the Studies (Part 2)' (Oct 8, 2015)

michaelis on 'Consciousness is a Mathematical Pattern' (Oct 8, 2015)

spud100 on 'Digital Immortality Map: Reconstruction of the Personality Based on its Information Traces' (Oct 8, 2015)

AlonzoTG on 'Digital Immortality Map: Reconstruction of the Personality Based on its Information Traces' (Oct 7, 2015)

Valkyrie Ice on 'Technoprogressive Declaration - Transvision 2014' (Oct 7, 2015)

hilariousgoat on '#2: Why is the IQ of Ashkenazi Jews so high?' (Oct 7, 2015)

Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List


Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Seven Emerging Technologies That Will Change the World Forever
Sep 29, 2015
(120732) Hits
(4) Comments

The price of the Internet of Things will be a vague dread of a malicious world
Sep 25, 2015
(29255) Hits
(3) Comments

This Artificially Intelligent Boss Means the Workplace Will Never Be the Same
Sep 18, 2015
(16684) Hits
(1) Comments

Religion and Superintelligence
Sep 12, 2015
(8525) Hits
(0) Comments

IEET > Rights > PostGender > Life > Vision > Bioculture > Contributors > Kyle Munkittrick

Print Email permalink (1) Comments (9572) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg

No Concept of “Perfect” in Transhumanism

Kyle Munkittrick
By Kyle Munkittrick
Pop Transhumanism

Posted: Jan 19, 2010

I’d like to take a moment to correct the record on perfection.

The below image has been kicking around the net for the past week or so, with the allegation that by combining all the most beautiful women in the world, you get the most definitively beautiful woman in the world. Counter-intuitively, combining all of these images (and one could take issue with the initial roster, of course) results in a face that is both lovely and, well, boring. Take the final face and compare it with any of the real women at the top. The little nuances of difference, the minute flaws, the subtle skin shades, eye shapes, blemishes, asymmetries, and oddities of the real women make them more attractive than the “perfect” combination at the bottom.


(click image to see enlarged version)

The chart is a great demonstration of how a “norm” works. The woman at the bottom probably is what the normative ideal of a woman (in the white, Western mind) looks like. But no one looks like that. No one can. The ideal is impossible. According to the photo chart, all of the women at the top still fall short of the ideal. Yet when the ideal, the normative definition of perfection, is achieved, it looks weird and is unappealing. The ideal is, well, not ideal (take that Baudrillard). Transhumanists are acutely aware of the unreality of perfection.

Yet transhumanists and technoprogressives are often (mis)portrayed as perfectionists; as if we are disgusted by every flaw and hiccup in the human body with a fanatic desire to make everyone perfect. Though describing transhumanists as perfectionists is wrong, fearing “perfection” and those who seek it is not. “Perfect” will inevitably be someone else’s definition and people will be forced to get surgery or take drugs or who knows what to become the totalitarian definition of “perfect.” The scenario becomes even more frightening when we realize that, as with the example above, perfection is impossible.

Instead of moving towards perfection, thus operating under a teleological philosophy built on ideals, transhumanists try to move our society away from the worst problems. Debilitating genetic diseases, fragile bodily systems, aging bodies, and limited brains are all things we can improve. Our definition of improvement isn’t moving towards perfection but on the much better, more tangible and testable movement away from problems. Less pain, less disability, fewer limits, more time, and more options, these are our goals.

In many ways, transhumanists, technoprogressives, and our technophillic cohorts differ, disagree, argue, and clash over any number of problems. But the above sentence is one we all hold dear. It stems from an understanding that there are so many problems in the world that can be solved technologically regardless of your philosophical or political system. Whether you are Christian, atheist, Communist, anarchist, or whatever, a plane still gets you from New York to Beijing faster than a car and penicillin will help your bacterial infection. Because of this problem-centric mindset, transhumanists are more resilient to the desire to create systems based on ideals. By not seeking an ideal, but instead focusing on eliminating problems, the possibilities for solutions become incalculably diverse.

And because of that diversity, transhumanists are obsessed with choice and consent. All changes a person makes to him or herself, be it treatment for a disease, the use of a prosthetic, a decorative tattoo, or taking a cognitive enhancing drug should be a voluntary, educated choice.

Transhumanists and technoprogressives don’t imagine or want a perfect world, they imagine, want, and work towards a world with fewer problems and more choices.

Kyle Munkittrick, IEET Program Director: Envisioning the Future, is a recent graduate of New York University, where he received his Master's in bioethics and critical theory.
Nicole Sallak Anderson is a Computer Science graduate from Purdue University. She developed encryption and network security software, which inspired the eHuman Trilogy—both eHuman Dawn and eHuman Deception are available at Amazon, the third installment is expected in early 2016. She is a member of the advisory board for the Lifeboat Foundation and the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies.
Print Email permalink (1) Comments (9573) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg


“Resilient to the desire”?  Duh.  Vurry neophraseologically pretentious, that is. 

I think you take yourself far more seriously than is warranted.

YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Danger: Teleologist at work! Robert Wright’s “The Evolution of God”

Previous entry: Water Worlds, Naive Physics, Intelligent Life,  and Alien Minds


RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

East Coast Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
56 Daleville School Rd., Willington CT 06279 USA 
Email: director @     phone: 860-297-2376

West Coast Contact: Managing Director, Hank Pellissier
425 Moraga Avenue, Piedmont, CA 94611
Email: hank @