>>3776>also medicine and drugs in general are already transhumanist, transhumanism isnt just cool robot arms and brains in jars. :^)
Medicine is, in fact, not transhumanist, because the goal of apllying medicine isn't the improvement of a human towards a goal of something more than human, transcending humanity, but only to improve the condition of a single, sick human towards the goal of a single, healthy human.
Drugs are also not really transhumanist as far as recreation goes, to trip is to be human. However, taking drugs to increase performance in general or in a certain field is transhumanist - and again shows why transhumanism is bourgeoi dreck! Cause the improvement functions only as an improvement in productivity!
It's impossible for transhumanism to imagine improving a persons artistry, because art does not follow capitalist logic. You might add 300 arms to a painter so that they might paint 100 works in the amount of time it usually takes him to create 1, or develop specific painting extremities that are able to wield a brush at a significantly more precise level - that's not gonna improve the art. What makes art good is not quantifiable, it's the artist revealing themselves in their work - and all transhumanism does is quantifying productivity.
The only class that would benefit from a transhumanist catalysation of humans abilities is the bourgeoisie - cause it would mean more workers can make more commodities in a smaller amount of time - and those "improvements" that werent related strictly to performance enhancement, would only be available to the rich anyways.
In a classless society in turn transhumanism would be utterly useless. Without the pressure of class hierarchy there is no sense in increasing ones productive capabilities, since you dont need a certain level of (economic) performance to ensure your survival. The means of survival would already be available to you. Why would anyone strive to become a machiene when they are able to freely develop themselves by unfolding whats already inside?