I meant it in a hypothetical sense, so I apologize for the implication that that would really be your goal. It might be my goal if I thought transhumanism was irrational though, as I would consider irrational beliefs to be at odds with the mission of a rationalist site.
There could certainly be irrational aspects of transhumanism worthy of criticism without the entire belief-cluster being invalidated as well. My main interest is in the cryonics sub-cluster (which is complex enough in its own right) -- one could in theory be a transhumanist and opposed to cryonics, or a cryonicist opposed to most other transhumanist beliefs. (I know some anti-uploading cryonicists, for example.)
Check your assumptions; what evidence do you have that this statement describes my goal? Is that evidence sufficient?
I meant it in a hypothetical sense, so I apologize for the implication that that would really be your goal. It might be my goal if I thought transhumanism was irrational though, as I would consider irrational beliefs to be at odds with the mission of a rationalist site.
There could certainly be irrational aspects of transhumanism worthy of criticism without the entire belief-cluster being invalidated as well. My main interest is in the cryonics sub-cluster (which is complex enough in its own right) -- one could in theory be a transhumanist and opposed to cryonics, or a cryonicist opposed to most other transhumanist beliefs. (I know some anti-uploading cryonicists, for example.)