Редактирование: Criticism of transhumanism (раздел)

== The view that transhumanism is a totalitarian ideology with insufficient respect for human dignity ==

As a variant of the previous criticism, it can be asserted that transhumanism will inevitably remove freedom of choice from individuals who would prefer to remain unenhanced. To remain unenhanced in the future will be akin to someone choosing to remain illiterate: that choice made sense when many professions had no need of literacy, but anyone in the early 21st century who opts out of learning to read and write would be at a substantial disadvantage.

Socrates is a notable example of someone who decried the need to learn to read and write. As described in [http://outofthejungle.blogspot.co.uk/2007/11/socrates-objections-to-writing.html the Out of the Jungle blog, 2007]:

<blockquote>
[Socrates] worried that reliance on writing would erode memory (it has!), but also, and maybe more importantly, that reading would mislead students to think that they had knowledge, when they only had data.
</blockquote>

If literacy (generally regarded as being a universal good) has drawbacks as regards human skillsets, similar drawbacks could apply to the enhancements favoured by transhumanists.

This criticism of transhumanism asserts that when significant new body and brain enhancements become available, everyone will be pressurised to adopt them, despite an internal preference to remain unenhanced. Therefore, without intending it, transhumanism will have the effect of a totalitarian ideology, with insufficient respect for human dignity.

Transhumanists can reply that the upsides and downsides of specific enhancements should be widely discussed in advance, to allow a broader appreciation to be reached on how to preserve human dignity at the same time as humanity is enhanced. There is nothing intrinsic to transhumanism that dictates that personal choices would be overridden.