In many popular science fiction novels, people can read about a future full of fantastic gadgets, advanced artificial intelligences, and superhuman cyborgs. Although some of these things may seem far-fetched, with recent scientific advancements, it may soon be possible for people to enjoy some the amazing technologies that they read about, such as life-extension therapies or cybernetic implants. A new philosophy known as Transhumanism has emerged in response to these innovations and has embraced this vision of a death-free future populated by enhanced posthumans. However, although many of these technologies have an enormous potential to improve the human condition, it is essential that we as a species practice discretion and moderation as these techniques and devices are implemented if we hope to avoid many of the terrifying consequences of misuse.
To understand many of the dangers and shortcomings of these technological ambitions, it is essential to first understand the philosophy which has become so synonymous with these efforts. Transhumanism can best be described as a philosophy which advocates the use of technology in order to improve not only the quality of life of human beings, but also their lifespan, mental capacity, and physical ability. In essence, transhumanism is a radical extension of humanism. Similar to humanists, transhumanists value “rational thinking, freedom, tolerance, democracy, and concern for our fellow human beings.” The major difference in the case of transhumanism, however, is the additional belief in improving not only the “human condition and the external world,” but the human species as a whole. When arguing for biological enhancements, transhumanists typically refer to a belief in the autonomy th...
... middle of paper ...
...ijntje Smits. “A
European Approach to Human Enhancement.” Paper presented at the European Union Science and Technology Options Assessment workshop, Brussels, Belgium, February 24, 2009. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/events/workshop/20090224/background_en.pdf (accessed March 24, 2010).
Aubrey de Grey, “The War on Aging.” In The Scientific Conquest of Death, edited by Bruce J.
Klein, 29-45. Buenos Aires: LibrosEnRed, 2004. http://www.imminst.org/SCOD.pdf (accessed March 24, 2010).
Andy Miah. “Be Very Afraid: Cyborg Athletes, Transhuman Ideals & Posthumanity.” Jounral of
Evolution & Technology 13, no. 1. (October 2003), http://jetpress.org/volume13/miah.html (accessed March 24, 2010).
Andy Miah. “Posthumanism: A Critical History.” In Medical Enhancement and Posthumanity,
edited by Ruth Chadwick and Bert Gordjin, 71-94. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2009.
Posthuman by Nicholas Gane is a comparison of thoughts from selected scholars on the subject of the increasingly complex relationship between mankind and technology and how these technologies are breaking down the barriers that make us human. He starts by introducing us to the history of the concept of the Posthuman, which started with the cybernetic movement of the 1940’s and most influentially the writings of Norbert Wiener. The real popularity of the subject has its roots with Donna Haraways concept of the cyborg. Her concept is a postive rendition of the idea of posthumanism, which focuses on cybernetic technology and genetic modification and how these technologies could radically change humanity. Gane then defines Posthuman as when the
Smith, Wesley J. "The Trouble with Transhumanism." The Center for Bioethics and Culture RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2014.
When talking about the future of technology, one can only imagine what it will be down the road. The future of technology evokes many questions about the preservation of human existence, human advancement and intelligence. Some writers even discuss their positions on the future of technology and human kind. Writers such as James J. Bell, who explains the theory of the ‘Singularity’. In summary, he states that the rate of technological advancement, compared to human intelligence, will one day reach the ‘singularity’ were it will surpass the human mind (pg. 52). We may never know if technology will ever have the power to surpass the human intellect or what the consequences will be if it does attain these capabilities. Will humans still maintain control over them, or will they control us? Theses eight articles illustrate the implicit and explicit control that technology holds over humans in the future.
Mankind must fight the urge to be blinded by technology’s benefits and to consider what must be lost to gain these conveniences.
Today there are strong debates and questions about the extraordinary breakthroughs in science such as cloning, in communications through the Internet with its never ending pool of knowledge, and the increasing level of immersion in entertainment. People facing the 21st century are trying to determine whether these new realities of life will enhance it and bring life as they know it to a great unprecedented level, or if these new products will contribute and perhaps even cause the destruction of society and life. To many cloning, censoring, and total immersion entertainment are new, but to those who have read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, the topics are reminiscent of the horror that is found in Huxley's fictional utopian world where the dehumanizing of man is achieved in the interests of "Community, Identity, Stability," the world state's motto.
The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically to the use of genetic intervention prior to birth. Julian Savulescu, in his, “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings,” argues that it is not only permissible to intervene genetically, but is a morally obligatory. In this paper, I will argue that it is not morally obligatory to intervene genetically even if such intervention may be permissible under certain criteria. I will show, in contrast to Savulescu’s view, that the moral obligation to intervene is not the same as the moral obligation to prevent and treat disease. In short, I will show that the ability of humans to intervene genetically is not sufficient to establish a moral obligation.
Imagine that you are able to teleport to the not too distant future. In this world you discover that disease and poverty are no longer causes for human suffering, world hunger has become eliminated from society, and space travel is as easy as snapping your fingers. Cryonics, nanotechnology, cloning, genetic enhancement, artificial intelligence, and brain chips are all common technologies at a doctor’s office. You gasp as a friendly sounding electronic voice cries out, “Welcome to the future Natural!” You are unsure of whether being called a Natural is an insult or not, so you feign a half-hearted hello at the posthuman in front of you. Getting over the initial shock you ask the posthuman, “Who are you?” The posthuman gives an electronic sounding chuckle and shakes his head. He replies, “I am a Posthuman, and you Natural, are in Utopia. Welcome.”
Transhumanist claim the individual can plan their own life. Transhumanist value autonomy: “Transhumanist place a high value on autonomy, the ability and right of individual to plan and choose their lives”(World Transhumanist Association). The right for an individual to “plan” their own life through genetic engineering is terrifying. Ethical people should not have the power to genetically enhance or themselves or others. Genetic enthusiasts may not use genetic engineering right. People genetically enhance themselves without any cause. Planning every single commodity in any person's life creates too much power. Great power corrupts the individual. Genetic engineering yields power that any person should not
Human genetic engineering has the power to take the human race ahead in the 21st century. With it, we will be able to enhance every aspect of our physical and mental existence. It is crucial that we make the right decisions now, with the needs and wants of future generations in consideration. Genetic enhancement is our next step to a better living experience for everyone, regardless of status. Creating a world where everyone is genetically enhanced and can function at a higher level will transform the future of the human race. After examining the true facts and reasons behind genetic enhancement, it is clear that the human race will benefit greatly. As such, it is important that normal civilians do not disregard these practices as foreign and taboo, but rather encourage scientists in their quest for the ultimate panacea.
The two controversial topics discussed below share a single goal: to enhance the quality of life of a human individual. The first topic, transhumanism, is a largely theoretical movement that involves the advancement of the human body through scientific augmentations of existing human systems. This includes a wide variety of applications, such as neuropharmacology to enhance the function of the human brain, biomechanical interfaces to allow the human muscles to vastly out-perform their unmodified colleagues, and numerous attempts to greatly extend, perhaps indefinitely, the human lifespan. While transhumanist discussion is predominantly a thinking exercise, it brings up many important ethical dilemmas that may face human society much sooner than the advancements transhumanism desires to bring into reality. The second topic, elective removal of healthy limbs at the request of the patient, carries much more immediate gravity. Sufferers of a mental condition known as Body Integrity Identity Disorder seek to put to rest the disturbing disconnect between their internal body image and their external body composition. This issue is often clouded by sensationalism and controversy in the media, and is therefore rarely discussed in a productive manner (Bridy). This lack of discussion halts progress and potentially limits citizens' rights, as legislation is enacted without sufficient research. The primary arguments against each topic are surprisingly similar; an expansion on both transhumanism and elective amputation follows, along with a discussion of the merit of those arguments. The reader will see how limits placed on both transhumanism and elective amputation cause more harm to whole of human society than good.
Throughout history, human beings have struggled to achieve control over nature. Now, in the twentieth century, with all of the scientific advances in computers and medicine, humans have come closer than ever to reaching this ultimate goal. However, along with the benefits of these new and rapidly increasing scientific advancements come moral, ethical and social issues that need to be given consideration. The Computer Revolution has not only vastly improved communication and produced amazing amounts of information, but has raised questions of human rights, privacy and social implications. While medical research has achieved medical benefits not even conceivable in the past, it has also raised major ethical and moral issues. Humans must consider all of these things when making decisions or judgments about human control over nature.
Shaw, A. B. “In Defence of Ageism.” Journal of medical ethics 20.3 (1994): 188–194. Print.
At first glance, transhumanism is an impressive and fascinating idea, for it intends to enhance the human in order to guarantee them a better life, thus making endless improvements and upgrades the goal. (Mossman, 141) There are different types of transhumanism ranging from technologies that are already accessible such as different medical and pharmaceutical technologies that enable better physical and cognitive abilities, to scenarios that are far in the future if not completely science-fictional such as “discarding the human body entirely and uploading the human consciousness unto artificially intelligent “immortal” machi...
Progression is a natural occurrence in human life as well as society. Natural curiosity, coupled with a desire for self improvement, has propelled mankind into the age of science and technology. As society progresses, so, too, does human life continue to advance and improve. Medical advances have allowed humans to overcome disease and illness, and ultimately prolog human life. For example, the success of stem cell research has granted doctors the resources to replace damaged cells and begin to repair severe injuries. The amount of scientific progress making its way into society is astounding. However, eventually the question emerges, how far should these advancements be allowed to continue? And at what point do humans bypass medical need to such advances and begin to strip themselves of their humanity? The question of how far humans should allow science to penetrate the natural makeup of humans is delicate, and not one that will result in an unanimous opinion. Yet, before humans can address this subject, they must question whether or not they have the right to alter nature to any extent.
Albert Einstein once said, “It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” Technology is a controversial topic, some say we are depending in excess from gadgets and devices. However, if it wasn’t for technology we wouldn’t be able to experience many benefits.