Virtue theory is “an approach to Ethics that emphasizes an individual’s character as the key element of ethical thinking, rather than rules about the acts themselves (Deontology) or their consequences (Consequentialism).” Whereas consequentialism says that the ends justify the means, and deontology says that the means justify the ends, virtue theory says that moral character justifies both. It originated with the major Greek philosophers (Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle) and “reached its apotheosis in Aristotle’s ‘Nicomachean Ethics’ in the 4th Century B.C.” It was popular in Medieval Christian thought, but its popularity has waned in modern times as deontology and consequentialism have become more popular.

On the other end of the historical timeline, transhumanism is “the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology.” The idea can be traced back to the scientific techno-utopian thinking of Francis Bacon, who listed goals that are common to modern transhumanists at the end of his 1623 novel New Atlantis such as “prolongation of life,” “restitution of youth to some degree,” “retardation of age,” “mitigation of pain,” “increasing of strength and activity,” “increasing and exalting of the intellectual parts,” and “making of new species.” The modern transhumanist movement grew out of an early twentieth-century movement called Russian cosmism but only really started to gain attention in the past twenty years, as I described last year in my Odyssey article about transhumanism.

These ideas may seem like polar opposites, since one is based on a classical tradition and the other is a futuristic vision straight out of modern science fiction. However, virtue theory necessarily implies transhumanism, as proven here — and I try not to use the term “proven” lightly:



According to virtue theory, increasing certain qualities of people is inherently good. Human nature limits how much those qualities of people can be increased. According to virtue theory, it is good to exceed human nature. (from 1 and 2) Transhumanism is the belief that it is good to exceed human nature. Virtue theory necessarily implies transhumanism. (from 3 and 4)

The only quality which human nature does not limit is human nature itself, but as Aristotle recognized, human nature is not inherently good: “it is clear that none of the moral virtues formed is engendered in us by nature, for no natural property can be altered by habit. […] The virtues therefore are engendered in us neither by nature nor yet in violation of nature; nature gives us the capacity to receive them, and this capacity is brought to maturity by habit.” For any given virtue theory to escape its connection to transhumanism, then, it can only tell people to be exactly what they are by nature — which is not a particularly useful ethical theory, especially since “natural” does not mean “good.”

Aristotle’s virtues as described in Nichomachean Ethics are courage, temperance, liberality and magnificence (i.e. generosity), magnanimity (i.e. healthy pride), ambition, patience, truthfulness, wittiness, friendliness, modesty, and righteous indignation. All of them are psychological qualities which can, in principle, be traced to the functioning of different parts of the brain. People who do not exhibit some virtue will show different functioning in some part(s) of the brain than people who do exhibit that virtue. Aristotle said that one should try to increase their virtues through habit, but one could also try to increase their virtues through directly altering the brain.

Consider friendliness as an example. Aristotle defines it as treating others well such that they would call you a good friend, even though they technically may not be your friends. As I described last year, you can only care about roughly 150 people, at least enough to maintain a stable relationship with them. Your brain basically labels everyone else as objects. The number is not 150 for everyone, though — the bigger your prefrontal cortex (PFC) is, the more people you can care about, which explains why psychopaths have less gray matter in their PFCs.

As another example, consider the virtue of temperance. Aristotle describes it as control of the appetites for bodily pleasures like food, drink, and sex. Temperance is a balance between pursuing these appetites too much and too little, but he points out that most people who struggle with temperance pursue these appetites too much. Again, this virtue can be traced to the PFC. People who pursue bodily pleasures too much by abusing alcohol, cocaine, opiates, and heroin all have less gray matter in their PFCs. Using magnetic stimulation to enhance the PFC can reduce cravings for nicotine and cocaine.

Any person’s ability to attain Aristotle’s virtues of friendliness and temperance depends on the size and activity of their PFC, so it is good to increase PFC volume and activity using technology. The same can probably be said for all of his other virtues, given that they are linked to the PFC or some other part(s) of the brain.

Futuristic technologies like the genetic modification of humans could increase these virtues, and most (if not all) others, beyond their natural limits.