Pros And Cons Of Transhumanism

The Controversy of Transhumanism
Transhumanism, the idea portraying we as humans can use science and technology in order to create a better, stronger, longer living human, has become a trending debate in today’s science. Biotechnological ideas consist of cryogenic freezing, biogenetics, and biomedicine. Fukuyama argues contrastingly to transhumanism because humans do not require exactness and because transhumanism will affect isonomy. On the flipside, Ronald Bailey argues that Transhumanism is “normal” because we, as humans, have been trying to liberate ourselves farther from biological constraints since the era of Cavemen. Though Fukuyama makes a great point, that the gap of inequality might worsen from the effects of biotechnology, I believe Ronald Bailey’s view of transhumanism is more rational than Francis Fukuyama’s because technological advancements benefit mankind and genetic engineering can help rid mankind of disease.

If we were still cavemen with a lack of a language, would our world be able to function? We as humans made baby steps starting with how to build a fire approximately 1 million years ago, to curing diseases and creating computers that fit in the palm of your hand here in 2017. Many technological advancements have been made over the years and transhumanism could easily be the next step. Bailey uses examples such as, “Our ancestors had no wings; now we fly. Our ancient forebears could not hear one another over 1,000 miles; now we phone” (Bailey 1).

Fukuyama shows through his excerpt that transhumanism can have many negative effects like worsened inequality but Baileys essay shows what good Transhumanism can do for our world. Transhumanism is a large debate because of the views Bailey and Fukuyama portray. The idea of “perfect” sounds tempting to any individual with an insecurity or two, but transhumanism is still up for a very large