| Homepage | Imprint |
|
||
 |
Transhumanism
Transhumanism (sometimes abbreviated >H or H+) is an intellectualand cultural movement, or an emergent philosophy, analyzing and supporting morphological freedomand the use of new sciencesand technologiesto overcome human limitations and improvethe human condition.
OverviewBiologistJulian Huxleycoined the term transhumanism in 1957 and defined it as "man remaining man, but transcendinghimself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature". Huxley's definition differs substantially from the one commonly in use since the 1980s. In 1966, FM-2030(formerly F.M. Esfandiary), an Iranian-Americanfuturistwho was teaching "new concepts of the Human" at New School University, began to identify as "transhuman" (a short hand for "transitory human") people who were adopting technologies, lifestyles and world views that were transitional to "posthumanity". In 1968, Abraham Maslowreferred to transhumans in Toward a Psychology of Being while, in 1972, Robert Ettingeralso referred to them in Man into Superman[1]. However, in 1990, Dr. Max Moregave transhumanism its modern definition: "Transhumanism is a class of philosophies that seek to guide us towards a posthumancondition. Transhumanism shares many elements of humanism, including a respect for reasonand science, a commitment to progress, and a valuing of human (or transhuman) existencein this life. […] Transhumanism differs from humanismin recognizing and anticipating the radical alterations in the nature and possibilities of our lives resulting from various sciences and technologies […]." [{{fullurl:Template:FULLPAGENAME}}#endnote_www.maxmore.com.795] Dr. Anders Sandbergdescribes modern transhumanism as "the philosophy that we can and should develop to higher levels, physically, mentally and socially using rational methods" while Dr. Robin Hansondescribes it as "the idea that new technologies are likely to change the world so much in the next century or two that our descendants will in many ways no longer be 'human'." The Transhumanist FAQ[2], prepared by the World Transhumanist Association, gives the following two formal definitions:
Transhumanists generally support emerging and converging technologies such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technologyand cognitive science(NBIC), and hypothetical future technologies such as simulated reality, artificial intelligence, mind uploadingand cryonics. Since some observers, such as Ray Kurzweil, believe the pace of technological evolutionis accelerating, many transhumanist thinkers speculate that the next 50 years will yield not only radical technological advances but possibly a technological singularity. Transhumanism maintains that this is desirable and that humans can and should use technology to become more than human. Enlightenment and humanistic rootsFollowing in the tradition of Enlightenment-influenced 19th century political, moral and philosophical thought, transhumanism seeks to build upon the global knowledge base for the betterment of all humankind. Derived in part from the philosophical traditions of secular humanism, transhumanism asserts that there are no 'supernatural' forces that guide humanity. While largely a grassroots and broadly based movement, transhumanism does tend toward rational arguments and empirical observations of natural phenomena; in many respects, transhumanists partake in a culture of science and reason, and are guided by humanitarianprinciples and values. Specifically, transhumanism seeks to apply reason, science and technology for the purposes of reducing poverty, disease, disability, malnutrition and oppressive governments around the globe. Many transhumanists actively assess the potential for future technologies and innovative social systems to improve quality of all life, while seeking to make the material reality of the human condition fulfill the promise of legal and political equalityby eliminating congenitalmental and physical barriers. Transhumanism argues there exists an ethical imperative for humans to strive for progressand improvement of the human condition. If humanity enters into a post-Darwinian phase of existencein which humans are in control of evolution, transhumanists argue that random mutationswill possibly be replaced with rational, moral, and ethical, but most specifically, guided change. To this end, transhumanists engage in interdisciplinaryapproaches to understanding and evaluating possibilities for overcoming biological limitations. This includes the use of futures studiesand various fields or subfields of science, philosophy, economics, history, and sociology. History of transhumanismRobert Ettinger, known widely as the "fatherof cryonics" due to his 1962 book Prospect of Immortality[3], laid one of the foundations for modern transhumanism with his 1972 book Man Into Superman. Early transhumanists met formally in the early 1980s at the University of California, Los Angeles, which became the central transhumanist hot spot. Here, FM-2030lectured on the "Upwinger" futurist ideology. John Spencer at the Space Tourism Societyorganized many transhumanist space-related events. Natasha Vita-Moreexhibited "Breaking Away" at EZTV Media[4], a venue for transhumanists and other futurists to meet. FM, John, and Natasha met and soon they began holding gatherings for transhumanists in Los Angeles, which included students from FM-2030's transhumanist courses and audiences from Natasha's transhumanist artistic productions, as well as some from the space and astrophysicscommunity. In 1982, Vita-More authored the Transhumanist Arts Statement (and, in 1997, the Extropic Art Manifesto of Transhumanist Arts), and, in 1988, produced the cable TV show "TransCentury UPdate" on transhumanity. This talk show reached over 100,000 viewers. In 1986, Dr. Eric Drexlerpublished his famed book on nanotechnologyand molecular assemblers, Engines of Creation,[{{fullurl:Template:FULLPAGENAME}}#endnote_www.foresight.org.796] and founded the Foresight Institute. The Southern Californiaoffices of the Alcor Life Extension Foundationbecame a nexus for futurist thinkers and technologists. Yet not all activists who were interested in improving the human condition were involved in "transhumanism". Most did not know of the word, although some were certainly pioneering in what is now transhumanism. Thus, generally speaking, they all shared a critical technophilia. Today, the Extropy Institute, founded by Max Morein 1988, and the World Transhumanist Association, founded by Dr. Nick Bostromand David Pearcein 1998, are among the largest transhumanist organizations. For a roster of individuals who have identified themselves or been identified by others as advocates of transhumanism, see the list of transhumanists. Currents within transhumanism(in alphabetical order)
Practical transhumanismAs proponents of personal developmentand body modification, transhumanists tend to use existing technologies and techniques that improve cognitive and physical performance, while engaging in routines and lifestyles designed to improve healthand longevity. Many transhumanists seek to become cyborg, transhumanor posthuman, which they see as the next significant evolutionary step for the human species. They believe biotechnological and nanotechnological innovations (such as nootropics, prosthetic enhancements, mind-machine interfaces, human genetic engineering, and molecular nanotechnology) will facilitate such a quantum leapby the midpoint of the 21st century. Depending on their age, some transhumanists worry that they will not live to reap the benefits of these future technologies. However with this knowledge, many have a great interest in life extensionpractices, and funding research in cryonicsin order to make the latter a viable option of last resort rather than remaining an unproven method. Regional and global transhumanist networksand communitiesexist to provide support and forums for discussion and working on collaborativeprojects. Transhumanism and spiritualityAlthough some transhumanists report a strong sense of spirituality, they are for the most part secular. In fact, many transhumanists are either agnosticsor atheists. There are, however, a number of transhumanists who follow liberal forms of Eastern philosophicaltraditions, and a minority of transhumanists who have merged their beliefs with established religions (such as Christian transhumanists). Some also look to the simulation argumentas a synthesisof deismand digitalism. Despite the prevailing secular attitude, some transhumanists pursue hopes traditionally espoused by religions, such as immortality. However, some thinkers associated with the transhumanist movement emphasize that they merely wish to support the use of technology to help achieve longer and healthier lives. Some transhumanists hope that future understanding of neurotheologywill enable humans to achieve control of altered states of consciousnessand thus "spiritual" experiences. Materialisttranshumanists do not believe in a transcendent human soul. They often believe in the compatibility of the human minds with computer hardware, with the theoretical implication that human consciousness may someday be uploadedto alternative media. Most materialist transhumanists subscribe to some version of personhood theoryor at least judge as speciesistethical theories that give overriding importance to membership in a biological species. CriticismsCriticismsof transhumanism can be divided into two main categories: those objecting to likelihood of transhumanist goals being achieved (practical criticisms); and those objecting to the moral principles of transhumanism (ethical criticisms). Practical criticismsGeneticistand science writerSteve Jonesargues that humanity does not, and never will, have the technology that proponents of transhumanism seek. He once joked that the letters of the genetic code, A, C, Gand Tshould be replaced with the letters H, Y, P and E. Jones claims that technologies like human genetic engineeringwill never be as powerful as is popularly believed. In his book Futurehype: The Tyranny of Prophecy, University of Torontosociologist Max Dublin points out many failed predictions of the past technological progress and argues that modern futurist predictions will prove similarly inaccurate. He also objects to what he sees as scientism, fanaticismand nihilismin advancing transhumanist causes, and writes that historical parallels exist to religious and Marxistideologies. Most transhumanists, however, strongly reject the charge of fanaticism and nihilism, seeing it as inconsistent with the core rationalismof the movement. They also point out that almost every technological advancement of the last century, such as cloningwhich was previously believed to be impossible, was predicted by science fictionor non-fiction futurists. Ethical criticismsCritics or opponents of transhumanist views often favour improvement of ethicalbehaviour, rather than technology, as the most effective way to improve society. Technological solutionsmay be compatible with other improvements, but some worry that strong advocacy of them might divert attention and resources from social solutions. As most transhumanists support non-technological changes to society, such as the spread of political libertyand procreative liberty, and most critics of transhumanism support technological advances in areas such as communicationsand healthcare, the difference is often a matter of emphasis. Sometimes, however, there are strong disagreements about the very principles involved, with divergent views on humanity, human nature, and the moralityof transhumanist aspirations. Existential risk argumentA notable critic of transhumanism is Bill Joy, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, who argued in his essay Why the future doesn't need us,[{{fullurl:Template:FULLPAGENAME}}#endnote_www.wired.com.798] that human beings would likely guarantee their own extinctionby developing the technologies favored by transhumanists. This alarmistconclusion was seized upon by neo-ludditeand bio-ludditemilitants, such as Kalle Lasn, to reinforce their claim that humanity has an inherent lack of competence to direct its own evolution and should therefore completely relinquish technology development. British Astronomer RoyalMartin Reesclaims in his book Our Final Hour that advanced science and technology brings as much risk of disaster as opportunity for progress. Rees does not advocate a halt to scientific progress, but tighter securityand perhaps an end to traditional scientific openness. Advocates of the primacy of the precautionary principle, such as the Green movement, also favor slow, careful progress or a halt in potentially dangerous areas. Some precautionists believe humanity's collective intelligenceshould organize first and thus be ready to overcome any dangers from artificial intelligencesthat do not share human morality, thus avoiding any risk of bodily harm. Transhumanists do not necessarily rule out specific restrictions on emerging technologiesso as to lessen the prospect of existential risk. Generally, however, they counter that the proposals of Joy, Lasn, Rees, and precautionist Greensare not realisticand sometimes are even counter-productive. The common transhumanist view is that society should take deliberate action to ensure the early, yet safe, arrival of the benefits of emerging technologies rather than contributing to technophobiaand the Frankenstein complex. One transhumanist solution proposed by Nick Bostromis differential technological development, in which we would seek to influence the sequencein which technologies developed. On this approach, we would strive to retard the development of harmful technologies and their applications, while accelerating the development of beneficial technologies, especially those that offer protection against the harmful ones. Human nature and equality argumentIn his book Our Posthuman Future, neoconservativepolitical economistFrancis Fukuyamaasserts that transhumanism may undermine the progressive ideals of liberal democracyit ostensibly favours, through a fundamental alteration of human natureand human equality. Bioconservatives, like Fukuyama, hold that any attempt to alter the naturalhuman state (such as human cloningand human genetic engineering) is inherently immoral. Libertarianscience journalistRonald Baileyhas contested these claims by arguing that political equality has never rested on the facts of human biology. In fact, liberalismis already the solution to the issue of human and posthuman rights since, in liberal societies, the law is meant to apply equally to all, no matter how rich or poor, powerful or powerless, educated or ignorant, enhanced or unenhanced. Life without meaning argumentGreenactivistBill McKibbenhas argued at length against many of the technologies that are postulated or supported by transhumanists, including germline gene therapyand radical life extension. He claims that it is wrong to tamper with fundamental aspects of ourselves (or our children), such as our vulnerability to aging and death and our genetic potentials for certain limited levels of physical and cognitive ability. Attempts to "improve" ourselves through such tampering would remove limitations that provide a necessary context for the experience of meaningful human choice. McKibben claims that human lives would no longer seem meaningfulin a world where such limitations can be overcome technologically. Furthermore, even the goal of using germline genetic modification for clearly therapeutic purposes should be relinquished, since it would inevitably tempt us to tamper with such things as cognitivecapacities (this argument relies on slippery slopereasoning). Transhumanists and other supporters of emerging technologies, such as Bailey, deny the claim that life would be experienced as meaningless in a world with such technologies. They suggest, for example, that a person with greater abilities would tackle more advanced and difficult projects and continue to find meaning in the struggle to achieve excellence. Biotech divide argumentMcKibbenalso advances one of the most widespread criticisms of (libertarian or apolitical) transhumanism: that emerging human enhancement technologieswould be disproportionately available to those of greater financial resources, thereby exacerbating gaps between wealthy and poor (see the film Gattaca for a fictional depiction of this scenario). Ironically, this is a criticism also voiced by democratic transhumanists, such as progressivebioethicistJames Hughes, who prefer to articulate public policies(such as universal health carevoucherswhich cover HET) to attenuate this problem rather than banthese potentially beneficial technologies. Brave New World argumentBiologistStuart Newmanand activistJeremy Rifkinargue, like the majority of bioconservativesand bio-luddites, that, since genetic engineering could lead to the manufacturingand enslavementof monsterssuch as human clones, designer babies, parahumansor even zombies(see Frankenstein, The Island of Dr. Moreau and Brave New World for fictional depictions of these scenarios), draconian measures should be implemented to prevent these dehumanizingprojects from ever happening, usually in the form of an international criminal banon human genetic engineering. One reply made by transhumanists and non-anthropocentricpersonhood theorists, such as Hughes, is that, if they are sentient, all these creations would still be unique persons deserving of respect, dignity, rights and citizenshipas any other person. Furthermore, they suggest that an uplifted animal, such as a gorillagenetically enhanced to gain human-level intelligence, could become be the most effective spokesperson for the animal conditionand animal rights. They conclude that the real ethical issue which must be dealt with is not the creation of "monsters" but the "human-racism" that would view and treat these creations as monsters. Some thinkers who are sympathetic to transhumanist ideas, such as Russell Blackford, have also objected to the assumption that all these possibilities can be run together, rather than being treated on their individual merits, and to the slippery-slope reasoning involved in the use of Brave New World-type arguments. If some of these innovations would, indeed, be imprudent in particular social circumstances, they could be regulated without abandoning others that might bring benefits. New eugenics argumentThe most virulent opposition to transhumanism comes from critics who allege subjectivity, perfectionismand biological determinismin the use of concepts such as "enhance" and "limitations", seeing eugenicor "master race" ideologies and programs of the past as warnings of what transhumanism might unintentionally encourage, as evidenced by a cabalof crypto-nazisunsuccessfully trying to gain entryinto the movement. Some transhumanists do advocate forms of liberal eugenics, but many others distance themselves from this term (preferring "reprogenetics") to avoid mistaken associations with the pseudoscientificand authoritarian practices of early-20th-century eugenic movements. Modern transhumanism essentially developed out of an American civil libertariancyberculture. The idea of equating that culture's position on genetic enhancementwith the eugenic policy of Nazi Germanyor the impetusfor a hypothetical future "Eugenics Wars" is seen by transhumanists as absurdand libellous. ReferencesBooks:
|test={{{Authorlink|}}}
|then={{wikilink
|1={{{Authorlink}}}
|2={{qif
|test={{{Author|}}}
|then=Raymond Kurzweil
|else={{{Last|}}}{{qif
|test={{{First|}}}
|then=, {{{First}}}
}}
}}
}}
|else={{qif
|test={{{Author|}}}
|then=Raymond Kurzweil
|else={{{Last|}}}{{qif
|test={{{First|}}}
|then=, {{{First}}}
}}
}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Coauthors|}}}
|then=, {{{Coauthors}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|}}}
|then= ({{{Date}}})
|else={{qif
|test={{{Year|}}}
|then={{qif
|test={{{Month|}}}
|then= ({{{Month}}} 1999)
|else= (1999)
}}
}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Author|{{{Last|{{{Year|}}}}}}}}}
|then=.
}}{{qif |test={{{Chapter|}}}
|then= "{{qif
|test={{{ChapterURL|}}}
|then=[{{{ChapterURL}}} {{{Chapter}}}]
|else={{{Chapter}}}
}}"}}{{qif |test={{{Editor|}}}
|then= {{{Editor}}}
}} {{qif |test={{{URL|}}}
|then=[{{{URL}}} The Age of Spiritual Machines]
|else=The Age of Spiritual Machines
}}{{qif |test={{{Others|}}}
|then=, {{{Others}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Edition|}}}
|then=, {{{Edition}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Pages|}}}
|then=, {{{Pages}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Publisher|}}}
|then=, {{qif
|test={{{Location|}}}
|then={{{Location}}}:
}}Viking Adult
}}{{qif |test={{{ID|}}}
|then=. ISBN 0-670-88217-8
}}.
|test={{{Authorlink|}}}
|then={{wikilink
|1={{{Authorlink}}}
|2={{qif
|test={{{Author|}}}
|then=Francis Fukuyama
|else={{{Last|}}}{{qif
|test={{{First|}}}
|then=, {{{First}}}
}}
}}
}}
|else={{qif
|test={{{Author|}}}
|then=Francis Fukuyama
|else={{{Last|}}}{{qif
|test={{{First|}}}
|then=, {{{First}}}
}}
}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Coauthors|}}}
|then=, {{{Coauthors}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|}}}
|then= ({{{Date}}})
|else={{qif
|test={{{Year|}}}
|then={{qif
|test={{{Month|}}}
|then= ({{{Month}}} 2002)
|else= (2002)
}}
}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Author|{{{Last|{{{Year|}}}}}}}}}
|then=.
}}{{qif |test={{{Chapter|}}}
|then= "{{qif
|test={{{ChapterURL|}}}
|then=[{{{ChapterURL}}} {{{Chapter}}}]
|else={{{Chapter}}}
}}"}}{{qif |test={{{Editor|}}}
|then= {{{Editor}}}
}} {{qif |test={{{URL|}}}
|then=[{{{URL}}} Our Posthuman Future]
|else=Our Posthuman Future
}}{{qif |test={{{Others|}}}
|then=, {{{Others}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Edition|}}}
|then=, {{{Edition}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Pages|}}}
|then=, {{{Pages}}}
}}{{qif |test={{{Publisher|}}}
|then=, {{qif
|test={{{Location|}}}
|then={{{Location}}}:
}}Farrar Straus & Giroux
}}{{qif |test={{{ID|}}}
|then=. ISBN 0-374-23643-7
}}. Web references:
|test={{boolnand
|1={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}
}}
|2={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}}}
|then=web reference: Parameter url, title and date must be specified
}}{{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}{{qif |test={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{boolor
|1={{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}
|2={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}}}
|then=.}}{{qif
|test={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}}}
|then= [{{{URL|{{{url}}}}}} {{{Title|Transhumanism: A Futurist Philosophy}}}].
}}{{qif |test={{{format|{{{Format|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{Format|{{{format}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{{Work|{{{work|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Work|{{{work}}}}}}.}}{{qif
|test={{{Publisher|{{{publisher|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Publisher|{{{publisher}}}}}}.
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}
|then= URL accessed on [[{{{Date|November 14}}}]]{{qif
|test={{{Year|{{{year|}}}}}}
|then=, [[{{{Year|2005}}}]]
}}
}}.
|test={{boolnand
|1={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}
}}
|2={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}}}
|then=web reference: Parameter url, title and date must be specified
}}{{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}{{qif |test={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{boolor
|1={{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}
|2={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}}}
|then=.}}{{qif
|test={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}}}
|then= [{{{URL|{{{url}}}}}} {{{Title|Engines of Creation}}}].
}}{{qif |test={{{format|{{{Format|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{Format|{{{format}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{{Work|{{{work|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Work|{{{work}}}}}}.}}{{qif
|test={{{Publisher|{{{publisher|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Publisher|{{{publisher}}}}}}.
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}
|then= URL accessed on [[{{{Date|November 14}}}]]{{qif
|test={{{Year|{{{year|}}}}}}
|then=, [[{{{Year|2005}}}]]
}}
}}.
|test={{boolnand
|1={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}
}}
|2={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}}}
|then=web reference: Parameter url, title and date must be specified
}}{{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}{{qif |test={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{boolor
|1={{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}
|2={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}}}
|then=.}}{{qif
|test={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}}}
|then= [{{{URL|{{{url}}}}}} {{{Title|Why the future doesn't need us}}}].
}}{{qif |test={{{format|{{{Format|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{Format|{{{format}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{{Work|{{{work|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Work|{{{work}}}}}}.}}{{qif
|test={{{Publisher|{{{publisher|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Publisher|{{{publisher}}}}}}.
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}
|then= URL accessed on [[{{{Date|November 14}}}]]{{qif
|test={{{Year|{{{year|}}}}}}
|then=, [[{{{Year|2005}}}]]
}}
}}.
|test={{boolnand
|1={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}
}}
|2={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}}}
|then=web reference: Parameter url, title and date must be specified
}}{{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}{{qif |test={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{boolor
|1={{{Author|{{{author|}}}}}}
|2={{{PublishYear|{{{publishyear|}}}}}}}}
|then=.}}{{qif
|test={{booland
|1={{{URL|{{{url|}}}}}}
|2={{{Title|{{{title|}}}}}}}}
|then= [{{{URL|{{{url}}}}}} {{{Title|Who's Afraid of the Brave New World?}}}].
}}{{qif |test={{{format|{{{Format|}}}}}}
|then= ({{{Format|{{{format}}}}}})
}}{{qif |test={{{Work|{{{work|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Work|{{{work}}}}}}.}}{{qif
|test={{{Publisher|{{{publisher|}}}}}}
|then= {{{Publisher|{{{publisher}}}}}}.
}}{{qif |test={{{Date|{{{date|}}}}}}
|then= URL accessed on [[{{{Date|February 8}}}]]{{qif
|test={{{Year|{{{year|}}}}}}
|then=, [[{{{Year|2006}}}]]
}}
}}. See also
External linksPrinciples and manifestos
Organizations
Portals and on-line articles
Blogs
de:Transhumanismus es:Transhumanismo fa:???????? fr:Transhumanisme it:Transumanesimo he:???? ??????? nl:Transhumanisme pl:Transhumanizm pt:Transumanismo ru:????????????? fi:Transhumanismi sv:Transhumanism
|
