Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People
... • El argumento más básico y general (quizá también el más ingenuo) sostiene que, las nuevas tecnologías genéticas no diferirían en lo sustancial de las que ha venido utilizando la Humanidad desde siempre (Harris, 2007), potenciando sus capacidades básicas (agricultura, transporte, viviendas, conocimiento), salvo en que serían más potentes y eficientes. Pero despachar el problema negando el problema no parece la mejor vía, atento a que las capacidades actuales parecen cualitativamente diferentes y no solo un cambio incremental en las capacidades tecnológicas. ...
... En este contexto, algunos sostienen que si se acepta el uso terapéutico no habría buenas razones para rechazar el uso para mejoramiento. Dado que el biomejoramiento se convertiría en una práctica habitual de la Humanidad a mediano plazo, se sostiene que aceptarlo y ejecutarlo es un deber moral, en la medida en que negarle esta posibilidad a los hijos los colocaría en una situación de desventaja muy grande con respecto a sus pares (Harris, 2007;Nam, 2015). El conocimiento disponible y el control sobre lo viviente, se sostiene, abre nuevas e impensadas posibilidades para la especie humana; no aprovecharlas y esperar la lotería genética sería un error. ...
... Ver, entre otros: GarcíaGonzález & Álvarez Peláez (1999, 2007;Kevles (1995);Stepan (1991); RomeoCasabona (1999);Miranda & Vallejo (2005;;Palma (2005Palma ( , 2019; Bashford & Levine (2010). 13 Uno de los errores más frecuentes es circunscribir el fenómeno de la eugenesia a la Alemania nazi. ...
La irrupción de CRISPR en el campo de la biotecnología ha potenciado la capacidad humana de la edición genética, pero al mismo tiempo ha avivado el inquietante debate sobre la posibilidad del mejoramiento humano a través de la tecnología y, en la medida en que se puede intervenir en la línea germinal, incidir en la evolución de la propia especie. En este artículo se trazará un mapa de los principales argumentos en favor y en contra de esa posibilidad de intervenir el genoma humano en la línea germinal y además se expondrán algunas ideas que suelen invadir la discusión, por ejemplo, el problema de la naturaleza humana o la supuesta semejanza con la eugenesia. Se espera poder brindar insumos para una discusión que recién empieza, pero que promete no terminar rápidamente.
... In contrast, bio-liberals are proponents of genetic enhancement and other biotechnologies, advocating for genetic enhancement through a multifaceted lens that includes technological progressivism, autonomy, individualism, or utilitarianism (Bostrom and Sandberg 2008;Dworkin 2011;Harris 2010). Baylis and Robert (2004) assert that despite opposition, the advancement of genetic enhancement technology is inevitable. ...
... Harris suggests that this evolution is likely to endow us with increased mental and physical powers, and contends that genetic enhancement is not only morally justifiable, but in some instances, it is morally imperative. Harris equates genetic enhancement to providing quality education for children, grounding this argument in utilitarian principles (see Harris 2010). While transhuman evolution and Harris's concept of directed evolution may seem similar, they are fundamentally different. ...
... Transhuman evolution represents a form of directed evolution, aiming to select traits deemed desirable by humans. However, if it is applied to humans, the benefits of selected traits are not assured, leading some to argue that transhuman evolution might be better defended from a deontological perspective, rather than a consequentialist one (Harris 2010;Bostrom 2009). Human goals vary, as not everyone behaves as a rational being who always makes optimal decisions or choices that benefit the whole society. ...
Transhumanism is a movement that advocates for the enhancement of human capabilities through the use of advanced technologies such as genetic enhancement. This article explores the definition, history, and development of transhumanism. Then, it compares the stance on genetic enhancement from the perspectives of bio-conservatism, bio-liberalism, and transhumanism. This article posits that transhuman evolution has twofold implications, allowing for the integration of transhumanist research and evolutionary biology. First, it offers a compelling scientific framework for understanding genetic enhancement, avoiding technological progressivism, and incorporating concepts of evolutionary biology. Second, it represents a new evolutionary paradigm distinct from traditional Lamarckism and Darwinism. It marks the third synthesis of evolutionary biology, offering fresh perspectives on established concepts such as artificial selection and gene-culture co-evolution. In recent decades, human enhancement has captivated not only evolutionary biologists, neurobiologists, psychologists, and philosophers, but also those in fields such as cybernetics and artificial intelligence. In addition to genetic enhancement, other human enhancement technologies, including brain-computer interfaces and brain uploading, are currently under development, which the paradigm of transhuman evolution can better integrate into its framework.
... Если технологии позволяют продлить жизнь, то, с этой точки зрения, человек имеет право воспользоваться ими по своему усмотрению. Ограничение доступа к таким технологиям может рассматриваться как нарушение права на самоопределение и выбор собственного жизненного пути [1]. ...
... • Религиозные и философские концепции смысла жизни: [1]. ...
В статье рассматриваются философско-этические проблемы, связанные с возможностью радикального продления человеческой жизни и достижения бессмертия. В статье рассматриваются философско-этические дилеммы, возникающие в связи с перспективой радикального продления жизни. Анализируются аргументы «за» (право на жизнь и самоопределение, устранение страданий, расширение возможностей) и «против» (проблема перенаселения, социальное неравенство, нарушение естественного порядка, психологические и экзистенциальные последствия, проблема сохранения идентичности). Рассматриваются вопросы справедливости и доступности технологий продления жизни, а также проблема эвтаназии в контексте потенциального бессмертия. Проводится философский анализ ценности бессмертия, поднимается вопрос о том, является ли оно благом или проклятием. Также исследуется влияние радикального продления жизни на представления о смысле жизни и смерти. Анализируются традиционные религиозные и философские концепции смысла жизни (гедонизм, стоицизм, экзистенциализм, нигилизм) и их трансформация в условиях потенциального бессмертия. Рассматриваются духовные и экзистенциальные аспекты бессмертия, включая влияние на религиозные верования, проблему сохранения личности и памяти, поиск абсолютных ценностей, а также «экзистенциальный груз» накапливающегося опыта.
... In more recent papers, Harris (2007) has modified and expanded his perspective, stating that if individuals have the opportunity to enhance or improve their health using biotechnology, they may do so even if the same technology is not universally available. In the 'Survival Lottery, ' a central computer primarily coordinates the principle of saving the lives of two or more unfortunate people at the cost of one healthy life. ...
... In this account, the utility of survival for a greater number of lives is predominant. Meanwhile, in the second account (Harris, 2007), the individual feelings of happiness and well-being take precedence over the well-being of the unfortunate majority. The common denominator in both scenarios is the use of biotechnological means, which provide survival and well-being for the chosen individuals. ...
Human Enhancement Technologies (HET) encompass bio-, nano-, cognitive, and info-communication technologies and sciences aimed at enhancing and improving human capacities and characteristics beyond the statistical norm of normal human functioning. Bioethics is defined as a bridge between natural and social sciences and the humanities. It has served as the science of global survival for a long time, spanning millennia. In contemporary bioethics, there are two mainstreams and several factions: transhumanism and bio-conservatism. This theoretical and ideological divisionism has opposing arguments due to the usage of HET. While the former supports all types of human enhancement, arguing that human survival is facilitated by the use of new biotechnologies, information technologies, and other advancements, the latter opposes such usage, even in some medical and diagnostic cases. In this paper, we will analyze the usage of various Transhumanist narratives illustrated by mythology. For this purpose, we have created two methodological triangles: the Survival Triangle and the symbolical Mythological Triangle. These triangles are constructed between the following points: Anticipation/Proteus, Autonomy/Icarus, and Survival/Odysseus. The paper indicates that survival, as the ultimate goal of humans, is justified using new biotechnologies—the transhumanist aim. However, what is the ethics of the means used in this respect, and what could be the cost of ultimate digitalization for the sake of survival?
... In recent years, the idea of using new technologies not only to prevent major diseases but also to enhance our capabilities has been central to bioethical reflection (Buchanan, 2011). Particular focus is laid on the possibility of intervening in the genetic makeup to improve not only physical but also mental traits, such as rationality (Harris, 2010;Savulescu et al., 2011). More recently, attention has also turned to moral enhancement, the possibility and morality of interventions aiming to improve individuals' ethical and moral dispositions (Harris, 2016). ...
... The debate on human enhancement is deeply polarized. On one side are those who defend the morality of the human enhancement project, some of whom argue that such interventions are even a moral obligation (Sorgner, 2022;Savulescu et al., 2011;Harris, 2010), believing that, if there are technical possibilities to improve the human condition, it is ethically right to exploit these so as to correct human nature. On the other side are those who argue that the use of biotechnologies such as genome editing may be morally acceptable for therapeutic purposes (and thus to restore or produce a natural condition) but never for enhancement ones. ...
This article explores the Catholic Church’s perspective on space exploration and
construction of human settlements beyond Earth, highlighting the significant
moral dilemmas posed by these endeavors. While the Church generally supports
space exploration, biotechnologies such as genome editing, assisted
reproduction, and artificial wombs – technologies potentially essential for
human survival and reproduction in space – clash with its moral principles.
Non-therapeutic genetic modifications, regarded by the Church as an
arbitrary redesign of human nature, are categorically prohibited. Similarly,
assisted reproduction is considered morally unacceptable due to the
destruction of embryos, the separation of the unitive and procreative aspects
of human sexuality, and it fosters the selection of embryos and eugenics
practices. Although the use of artificial wombs offers practical and safety
benefits in space, it is also incompatible with the Church’s teachings on the
dignity of human life and procreation. These conflicts underscore the Church’s
challenge in reconciling humanity’s aspirations for space exploration with its
ethical and spiritual framework. If technologies that fundamentally alter human
nature or reproduction are excluded, the prospect of human expansion into
space may remain morally unattainable.
... His archeology became a new ontology not only by way of deconstructing the notion of the human but also the notions of gender, animal, machine, and nature. 32 Ferrando argues that Foucault's approach aimed to break "dualism or antithesis, demystifying any ontological polarization through the postmodern practice of deconstruction". 33 This is why the cyborg 25 Le Breton, L'adieu au corps. ...
... Peter Lang Publisher, 219. 32 Lundblad, "Animality/ Posthumanism/ Disability: An Introduction." New Literary History, 51 (4). ...
Throughout the past century, technology integration into the human body has experienced remarkable growth, finding its expression through specific artistic movements that have acted as catalysts for acceptance and societal transformation. This article delves into the examination of three paradigm shifts that underpin this profound evolution. The first shift marks a departure from curative treatments for disabilities, shifting towards a focus on augmentative improvements. Subsequently, the second shift propelled the enhancement of healthy bodies, driven by the visionary concept of posthumanism, which envisions transcending the limits of our species through technology. Today, we find ourselves amidst the third paradigm shift, characterized by the practical cyborgization of society, made possible by the emergence of new cyborgs. By critically reflecting on the practices of these cyborgs, we gain valuable insights into the potential challenges and implications that technology may pose in the future. Crucially, this research highlights the indispensable role that art and aesthetics have played in shaping the social perception of technology integrated into the human body. Art, serving as a safer avenue for experimentation than scientific research, has become instrumental in presenting and normalizing these groundbreaking ideas within the public imagination. By exploring the intersections of art, technology, and human bodies, we can navigate the complex terrain of our ever-evolving relationship with technology and anticipate the profound implications it holds. This section will explore the 20th-century paradigm shift towards integrating technology into human beings, focusing on a forward motion that started in restoration and developed into improvement. To study the history of the restoration of human organs, we have to go back at least as far as Ancient Egypt, as can be witnessed by mummies found with wooden legs, feet, or fingers. 1 However, although prostheses can be found throughout history, they were not created as such by physicians until the 16th century. 2 People with disabilities were not considered important to their society, and their survival and well-being were left at the mercy of religious institutions. 3 Gradually, the development of medical science, on the one hand, and the growing sensitivity to the individual, on the other, were preparing the shift towards the turn that 1 Jacqueline, "The art of medicine. The ancient origins of prosthetic medicine". The Lancet, 377, nº 9765 (2011): 548-549.
... Research Question 1: Ethical considerations surrounding genetic engineering and human cloning In Singapore, genetic engineering and human cloning raise ethical concerns regarding the prevention of inherited conditions . The use of genetic engineering to prevent inherited diseases has been debated, with some arguing it is a moral obligation to prevent suffering (Harris, 2007), while others raise concerns about the potential for eugenic practices (Kitcher, 1996). Singapore's emphasis on meritocracy and academic achievement may exacerbate these concerns, as genetic engineering could be seen as a means to enhance cognitive abilities (Tan, 2012). ...
... As we venture deeper into the uncharted territories of genetic engineering, we find ourselves at the crossroads of innovation and ethics, where the possibilities of this technology are vast, with potential applications in medicine, agriculture and beyond (Harris, 2007). However, with great power comes great responsibility and it is our duty to ensure that these advancements align with our values and principles, prioritising ethical considerations alongside scientific progress (Kitcher, 1996). ...
" This conference paper delves into the ethical, social and philosophical implications of human enhancement technologies, specifically cloning and eugenics, within Singapore's thriving STEM landscape. Drawing from personal experience with orthognathic cosmetic surgery and inspired by Hypatia's intellectual legacy, this research explores the potential of these technologies to redefine human identity, capabilities and societal structures. The need for breakthroughs in Human Nuclear Genome Editing (HNGE) and alternative approaches is underscored by congenital diseases. To ensure responsible innovation, this paper proposes integrating algorithmic frameworks that prioritise informed decision-making, risk management and individual autonomy, aligning with Hypatia's principles of critical thinking, inclusivity and empathy. As a researcher and aspiring policymaker, this work aims to develop forward-thinking policies that harmonise STEM innovation with human well-being, dignity and self-determination, promoting inclusivity and equitable access. This research envisions a future where genetic advancements serve diverse humanity, advancing social justice and progress in anthropology and beyond.
... His weaker point, however, is regarding the view that an impairment is necessarily a harm. To Harris, that very point is actually the strength of his position as he believes that defining disability as a "harmed condition" relative to alternative possibilities is better than defining it in relation to what is typical or normal for such beings (Harris, 2001(Harris, , 2007. He holds this view because he thinks that one can be harmed by a trait even if that trait is species-typical: "The deaf are unable to hear whatever their social environment and are therefore disabled relative to those who can hear (whether or not hearing is species typical) and not relative to their environment." ...
... 12 As mentioned above, these reproductive preferences are acceptable as long as they are not based on demeaning beliefs about others and do not lead to real-life harms such as a reduced lifespan or pain. This time, the main concern is that of "harm" since deafness is generally viewed as a harmed condition (Harris, 2007) or an atypical functioning, implying there is a problem with the biology of the individual (Buchanan et al., 2000). The concept of "unjustified harm" often includes societal conditions that could adversely impact a child's life. ...
In this paper, I question the argument from human dignity found in the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (UDHGHR) and in the recent views of the International Bioethics Committee (IBC). I focus on what this argument says about the permissibility of two broad categories of reprogenetic choices that may be available to prospective parents in the genomic era. The argument from human dignity holds that non-medical genetic selection and somatic enhancements ought to be prohibited because they violate the principle of human dignity. I argue that human dignity need not be violated by the enterprise of human genetic selection/somatic enhancement if reasonable social safeguards are established. In particular, I argue that respecting the reprogenetic choices of the decision-maker is paramount within the boundaries of (i) prohibiting the infliction of a shortened lifespan or pain upon the child; (ii) prohibiting the actualization of demeaning beliefs or intentions such as viewing certain groups as inferior; (iii) prohibiting the choice resulting from an expression of unwillingness to love and care for the child; and, with respect to somatic gene enhancements in particular, (iv) the potentially unjustified effects of the enhancement on others, if any, are reasonably addressable (and addressed) via social modifications so as to ensure the enhancement no longer risks adversely affecting them. With these limits, reprogenetic autonomy cannot be said to undermine the dignity of humans by creating unjustified harms or expressing demeaning ideas.
... In this sense, it is interesting to allude to the concept of directed evolution (DE) that appears in the work of Harris (2007). DE argues that changes in the world require direct changes in Humanity, advocating for taking control of evolution until we become a completely new and improved species, a stance that is controversial in this debate. ...
Philosophical concern for the human future is more important today than ever because of the ethical, social, and technological challenges we face-Human Enhancement (HE) and Transhumanism (H+) are some of the theories that are involved with the future of our species. These two positions tend to be confused, but we contend that a distinction can and should be made between the two approaches. To perform this explanation, we propose two axes of differentiation: the concept of enhancement itself and the valuation of the biological body. In this context, H+ begins with a disregard for the body and seeks to transcend the human condition with exponential enhancements, while HE advocates a gradual enhancement within our current limits. Clarifying this contrast between H+ and HE is vital for the responsible adoption of future technologies, enabling informed decisions about which scientific promises are viable and worthy of support, and which should be reconsidered.
... I take this to be a questionable promise that would have best been left out. Indeed, several books have already taken on a similar task in previous years: I have in mind, in particular, John Harris's Enhancing Evolution (Harris, 2007) and Allen Buchanan's Beyond Humanity (Buchanan, 2011). Both works offer a detailed and rather pointed critique of some of the main bioconservative objections, several of which are also tackled by Gordon. ...
This commentary on Emma Gordon’s book Human Enhancement and Well-Being explains why, despite my basic agreement with her overall position on the strength of bioconservative objections to enhancement, my thinking differs from hers regarding some aspects of her analysis. I focus in particular on her critique of the hyperagency argument, the authenticity argument, and the inequality argument against enhancement. I then proceed to discuss, in turn, her remarks on enhancement counsellors and on the enhancement of loving relationships, highlighting some issues which I think are worthy of further clarification and exploration. These include the degree to which enhancement counsellors should act as “gatekeepers” when it comes to accessing enhancements, how their role would relate to that of medical professionals, and how exactly some of Gordon’s desiderata should be applied to the enhancement of loving relationships.
... Asimismo, trae a consideración el uso de anteojos como una forma de enhancement. Por otro lado, expone en su obra que los nuevos avances en biotecnología nos permitirían evolucionar, algo que nuestra especie y otras en el planeta ya ha hecho a lo largo de los siglos sin mayor cuestionamiento (Harris, 2010). ...
En la actualidad, los seres humanos nos encontramos en un punto crucial donde la ciencia y la tecnología nos brindan la oportunidad de ampliar nuestras capacidades biológicas, dando origen a una nueva generación de individuos con mejoras significativas. Esta perspectiva plantea un intrigante cuestionamiento: ¿Constituye esta transformación un verdadero proceso evolutivo, o, en un escenario más sombrío, marca el comienzo de la desaparición de la especie humana tal y como la conocemos? Este artículo se propone abordar alguos dilemas éticos surgidos en torno a la aplicación de la neurotecnología para trascender los límites naturales de nuestras capacidades físicas, emocionales y cognitivas. Además, busca arrojar luz sobre los posibles riesgos inherentes al empleo de la tecnología para alterar nuestra propia naturaleza y, de manera más profunda, analizar las auténticas amenazas que podrían surgir si no se toma acción para prevenir que la próxima brecha social se forje entre aquellos humanos que han sido mejorados y aquellos que no.
... There is a lot of controversy around the term 'human nature' (Roughley 2023). According to some authors it is an essential part of humans to constantly seek to improve and develop themselves, now also by biotechnological means (Bostrom 2003;Harris 2007). ...
There are an increasing number of ways to enhance human abilities, characteristics, and performance. In recent years, the ethical debate on enhancement has focused mainly on the ethical evaluation of new enhancement technologies. Yet, the search for an adequate and shared understanding of enhancement has always remained an important part of the debate. It was initially undertaken with the intention of defining the ethical boundaries of enhancement, often by attempting to distinguish enhancements from medical treatments. One of the more recent approaches comes from Julian Savulescu, Anders Sandberg, and Guy Kahane. With their welfarist account, they define enhancement in terms of its contribution to individual well-being: as any state of a person that increases the chances of living a good life in the given set of circumstances. The account aims to contribute both to a shared and clear understanding of enhancement and to answering the question of whether we should enhance in certain ways or not. I will argue that it cannot live up to either claim, in particular because of its inherent normativity and its failure to adequately define well-being. Nevertheless, it can make a valuable contribution to an ethics of enhancement. As I will show, the welfarist account refocuses the debate on a central value in health care: well-being, which can be a relevant aspect in assessing the permissibility of biomedical interventions – especially against the background of new bioethical challenges. To fulfil this function, however, a more differentiated understanding of well-being is needed.
... Yet political scientists have rarely broached the subject. 1 Philosophers and political theorists have drawn attention to some of its normative implications: Francis Fukuyama (2002Fukuyama ( , 2004 declared transhumanism "the world's most dangerous idea" and a fundamental threat to liberal democracy; Jürgen Habermas (2003) argued that cloning and genetic engineering would jeopardize equality and autonomy; and Michael Sandel (2004) contended that they would undermine the moral virtues of disinterestedness and temperance (see also Levin 2021). Defenders of "human engineering," often drawing on utilitarian reasoning, insist that it is essential for increasing future human welfare (Harris 2010;Buchanan 2011;Agar 2014). Sociologists and anthropologists have investigated how transhumanism is embedded in popular sociotechnical imaginaries and national techno-futurist cultures (Hurlbut and Tirosh-Samuelson 2016;Bernstein 2019), as well as exploring its theological dimensions (Geraci 2010;Tirosh-Samuelson 2012). ...
Inspired by developments in artificial intelligence, space engineering, and genetics, discussion of post-human visions of the future is now widespread, especially in the tech world. This reflective essay analyses various ideological configurations of “transhumanism,” a body of thought centred on the pursuit of radical human improvement through technoscientific intervention. It focuses on the political values and world-making projects transhumanists have advocated since the early twentieth century. We argue that transhumanism constitutes a significant strand of international political thought: transhumanists have articulated extraordinarily ambitious visions of global order. Through analysing the work of key transhumanists from the interwar era to the present, we show that assorted socialist and liberal iterations have aimed to overcome the irrationality of a state-centric international order, with projects ranging from Marxist accounts of a world state to anarcho-capitalist visions of market order through to dreams of space colonization. Analysing transhumanist world-making visions helps to clarify the political ideas underlying current techno-utopian projects and debates about existential risks to humanity.
... Harris further argues that access to new reproductive technologies should not only be viewed as an instance of reproductive freedom but also, as a moral right. 2 More generally, according to Harris, enhancing human abilities through biotechnological interventions reflects our moral responsibility to improve the quality of life and alleviate suffering. 3 Until such time when artificial wombs are perfected, the female uterus remains necessary for fetal development, and today it is possible to transplant this organ. There have been successful clinical trials for instance in Spain, Germany, Sweden, and China, and it is estimated that more than 40 children have been born with the help of UTx. 4 Reproductive medicine specialists and transplant surgeons around the world are collaborating to make this procedure a reality for women with AUFI everywhere. ...
Uterus transplants (UTx) provide women without a uterus the possibility of experiencing gestational motherhood. This paper delineates the complex bioethical landscape surrounding UTx, focusing on the critical aspects of informed consent, risk–benefit analysis, justice considerations, and the distinct challenges encountered by both donors and recipients. While not discussing UTx directly, John Harris’ seminal work, The Value of Life: An Introduction to Medical Ethics (1985) in its advocacy for reproductive freedom and informed consent provides an informative starting point for the discussion.
As an example, UTx is analyzed within the socio-political context of Mexico. The impact of the Mexican healthcare and legal systems on UTx procedures is discussed and the regulatory measures necessary to ensure that UTx is conducted ethically and equitably are outlined.
... In our view, the problem arises both when we consider genome editing interventions on the embryo (germline) as interventions affecting the person, and when we consider them as interventions changing a person's identity. In the former case, it may seem more than legitimate to ask parents to correct or edit the genome of the unborn child since genetically enhanced children, who will later be born, will enjoy a better life (Battisti 2021;Harris 2007;Sparrow 2007Sparrow , 2011Sparrow , 2022. If we assume that germline genome editing interventions are person-affecting, it is reasonable to conclude that parents must resort to them (de Araujo 2017; Gyngell, Bowman-Smart and Savulescu 2019). ...
This text explores the intricate relationship between personal autonomy and public health objectives, particularly accentuated during the recent pandemic. Emphasising the challenge of balancing individual autonomy with broader public health imperatives, the discussion delves into state interventions that may restrict individual freedom and the potential moral justifications behind such actions. Public health interventions, encompassing various policies from data collection to preventive legislation, are examined in light of their impact on individual freedom. Drawing on Holland's analysis, the text illustrates how these policies may limit individual autonomy while serving the interests and welfare of society. It argues that, in a liberal society, restrictions on citizen choices are justified not only for individual health but also to safeguard collective interests. The recent COVID-19 response, including measures like lockdowns and vaccine passports, exemplifies this evolving balance. The text contends that, as the state places more emphasis on public health over personal autonomy, interventions like genome editing might cease to be considered mere options, potentially leading to mandatory genetic modifications for those desiring children. This shift raises ethical questions about protecting individual autonomy in a diverse society. The text highlights the absence of compelling justifications against restricting individuals from making autonomous decisions about their children's genetic makeup or imposing legal obligations for genome editing.
... Can a non-biological entity possess the right to life, freedom of speech, or the right to participate in democratic processes? These questions are not only relevant in the context of hypothetical future technologies but also reflect current debates on the ethical treatment of AI and the rights of increasingly autonomous systems (Harris 2011;Nussbaum 2011). Moreover, the potential to create societies of "superior virtual humans" raises further ethical considerations. ...
The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into various aspects of human life and the hypothetical ability to transfer human consciousness into machines prompts a profound reevaluation of human value and the foundations of our rights. This paper explores the philosophical implications of such technologies, questioning the criteria by which we ascribe value and rights to beings, whether embodied in flesh or silicon. It delves into the potential of merging human consciousness with advanced AI systems to create entities with both human and artificial capabilities, introducing a new category of being that challenges our traditional concepts of personhood, value, and rights. This inquiry is accentuated by the rapid pace of AI development and its increasingly sophisticated applications, leading to a discussion on the source of human value, the practical implications for the future of human rights, and the ethical considerations of creating societies of "superior virtual humans." The paper argues for a broad and inclusive understanding of personhood and rights that could extend to virtual humans, challenging traditional notions and inviting a future where rights are grounded in the qualities that constitute moral personhood beyond mere biological existence. It navigates through utilitarian, deontological, and virtue ethics perspectives, debates on mind-body dualism, and the scenario of virtual humans to illuminate the complexities of defining personhood and rights in a world where the boundaries between human and machine, mind and body, are increasingly blurred. The exploration is critical for ensuring that advancements in technology are matched by our ethical and philosophical understanding, emphasizing the importance of inclusivity and the spectrum of the human condition in reimagining personhood, value, and rights in the age of AI.
... For a discussion on the interplay between humanist and transhumanist ideals, see Duarte Arias(2023)and Muñoz González (2020a, 2020b). 2 For a defense of the ethical thesis of transhumanism, seeBostrom (2006),Harris (2010), andSavulescu (2009). ...
This paper explores the connection between the extended mind thesis and transhumanism, with a particular focus on how technology may influence, alter, or enhance human cognitive capabilities and skills. The extended mind thesis posits that external elements can become an integral part of cognitive processes. Drawing on this notion, the paper contends that transhumanism adopts such perspective in defending the possibility of cognitive enhancement. In this sense, it assesses whether technology can truly enhance cognitive function or induce a specific type of ignorance, instead, by diminishing cognitive phenomenology—the lived, experiential dimension of mental processes or the phenomenal aspect of cognitive consciousness. The assumption that cognitive technologies inherently enhance independent mental performance is challenged with the argument that overreliance on technology may reduce the ability to execute cognitive tasks autonomously. The analysis concludes that coupling to technological artifacts can indeed lead to a specific type of ignorance by compromising cognitive phenomenology. It also suggests that such ignorance is a symptom of technology overuse, which can undermine the ability to perform cognitive tasks independently. These two conclusions invite reconsideration of the transhumanist claim that technology can enhance human cognition.
... 56 The concentration on issues involving death subsided quickly in the works of John Harris, who first became a critic of health-economic quality-of-life calculations, 57 then turned his attention to extending lifespans and having the best possible offspring we can have. 58,59,60 Embryos still lost their lives in reproductive selection, 61 but the stress was on the wellbeing of all living people regardless of their age or medical condition. ...
Bioethics as a philosophical discipline deals with matters of life and death. How it deals with them, however, depends on the kind of life particular bioethicists focus on and the kind of value they assign to it. Natural-law ethicists and conservative Kantians emphasize biological human life regardless of its developmental stage. Integrative bioethicists also embrace nonhuman life if it can be protected without harming humans. Liberal and utilitarian moralists concentrate on life that is sentient and aware of itself, to the exclusion of biological existence devoid of these. Extinctionist and antinatalist philosophers believe that life’s value is negative and that its misery should be alleviated and terminated by not bringing new individuals into existence. As the last-mentioned approach reverses the idea of life’s positive value, it could be called oibethics.
... This paper's interpretation of the Extended Health Hypothesis resonates with broader discussions in bioethics and enhancement technologies. For instance, John Harris advocates for the ethical use of technology to enhance human abilities and views it as a moral obligation [24]. While this paper aligns with Harris on the potential of technology to improve life, it advances the argument by integrating technology directly into the very definition of health, thus broadening the concept. ...
Technology is increasingly shaping human life, particularly in healthcare, where recent advancements have revolutionized patient care. Despite these advances, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition of health remains rooted in traditional notions, raising questions about its adequacy in light of technological progress. This paper explores the conceptual and practical limitations of the current definition and argues for its revision to encompass the role of technology in health. This paper examines the evolving landscape of healthcare technology and its philosophical implications, drawing on theories such as the Extended Health Hypothesis and the Extended Mind Hypothesis. It claims that health extends beyond traditional biological boundaries and includes the influence of technology on well-being. This paper advocates for a re-examination of the WHO definition of health to reflect the integral role of technology in modern healthcare. Recognizing technology as part of health necessitates a broader conceptual framework that acknowledges the interconnectedness of biology, technology, and human well-being. Given technology’s transformative role in healthcare, this paper argues for a revaluation of the WHO’s definition of health to encapsulate the evolving relationship between technology and human well-being. At the end, we propose a new definition recognizing that health is a dynamic state of physical, mental, social, and technological well-being, wherein individuals can achieve optimal quality of life through the harmonious integration of biological, psychological, and technological factors. This state encompasses not only the absence of disease but also the effective utilization of advanced technologies.
... Alguns defensors de l'eugenèsia liberal creuen que les accions eugenèsiques haurien de ser permeses (Agar, 2004;Green, 2007) i fins i tot n'hi ha que defensen una obligació moral de fer servir sempre les tècniques disponibles (Harris, 2007;Savulescu i Kahane, 2009 i la Procreative Beneficence). Aquesta és una postura conseqüencialista que des del seu punt de vista no s'allunya de l'obligació de tractar les malalties greus dels nens però que genera molta controvèrsia (de Melo-Martin i Goering, 2022). ...
Els objectius i els mètodes de l’eugenèsia humana són compartits amb la millora genètica animal. En animals domèstics es fan servir de manera habitual gairebé tots els mètodes disponibles per fer selecció, i aquesta connexió permet analitzar l’eugenèsia liberal posant el focus en l’aplicabilitat que puguin tenir les seves propostes. Les pràctiques eugèniques haurien de funcionar no només en teoria, sinó també tenint en compte les condicions reals en què s’han de desenvolupar: com s’hereten els caràcters fenotípics que es volen seleccionar, com és el material genètic i què implica garantir els postulats liberals. La gran majoria de caràcters d’interès són caràcters quantitatius, i la capacitat de seleccionar-los es veu restringida pel lligament, les correlacions genètiques i el context genòmic entre d’altres. Per superar les limitacions d’aquestes tres característiques cal seleccionar poblacions senceres, i això és incompatible amb l’elecció individual que s’hauria de produir en l’eugenèsia liberal. Tenint en compte tots aquest factors, només es pot arribar a la conclusió que l’eugenèsia liberal és impossible, o bé perquè no funciona (i per tant no és eugenèsia) o bé perquè no és liberal.
... A debate on this (futuristic) topic is beyond the scope of the present paper; however, it is worth noting that several ethicists view at least some forms of genetic enhancement as being of potential value to humanity and thus justifiable on ethical grounds. For example, it would arguably be a good thing if all people (or as many people as possible) were modified to have excellent eyesight or better memory capacities [22]. ...
This paper critiques the restrictive criteria for germline genome editing recently proposed by Chin, Nguma, and Ahmad in this journal. While praising the authors for resisting fervent calls for an outright ban on clinical applications of the technology, this paper argues that their approach is nevertheless unduly restrictive, and may thus hinder technological progress. This response advocates for weighing potential benefits against risks without succumbing to excessive caution, proposing that ethical oversight combined with genetic scrutiny at the embryo stage post-editing can enable responsible use of the technology, ultimately reducing the burden of genetic diseases and enhancing human health, akin to how IVF transformed reproductive medicine despite strong initial opposition.
... Así, para John Harris (2007), el mejoramiento no es sólo una posibilidad, sino un deber moral. La historia de la humanidad es la del continuo proceso de mejora de nuestro entorno, desde la piedra tallada hasta la internet. ...
En este artículo se argumenta que es posible una versión ‘humana’ del transhumanismo, que la eliminación de limitaciones físicas o fisiológicas no atenta contra la posibilidad de la educación, y que la verdadera educación no queda disminuida con el transhumanismo. En la primera parte se muestran las principales corrientes del transhumanismo, y los argumentos a favor y en contra de este. En la segunda parte, desde una postura logocéntrica, se trata de mostrar que el transhumanismo no es incompatible con la educación y que no tiene por qué haber una transgresión de códigos morales en el mismo. Al final se proponen algunos criterios para juzgar cuándo las intervenciones biotecnológicas en los seres humanos son aceptables y cuándo no.
... Por ello, es fundamental entender los cambios esperados en la medicina y la salud en su relación con las tecnologías emergentes para analizar los aspectos éticos relacionados con su distribución y uso. Todo lo que la tecnología puede lograr está inseparablemente conectado con el bien común, hasta el punto de que "hacer el bien" debe formar parte de cualquier respuesta adecuada a esa cuestión (Harris, 2010). ...
A medida que la humanidad avanza, el pensamiento humano evoluciona y se enfrenta a nuevos dilemas. De estas reflexiones surgen movimientos y posturas filosóficas como el transhumanismo; una corriente de pensamiento que busca superar las limitaciones humanas a través de la tecnología. A lo largo de este libro se explorarán las ramificaciones filosóficas, éticas y bioéticas de este fascinante movimiento, el cual cada vez se vuelve más influyente. En este contexto nace este libro, fruto del trabajo colectivo de un grupo de investigadores latinoamericanos dedicados a examinar las implicaciones y consecuencias del transhumanismo. Este esfuerzo conjunto es especialmente significativo, dado que la gran mayoría de las discusiones sobre este asunto, han tenido lugar principalmente en el ambiente anglosajón. Por lo tanto, este libro representa un hito al aportar la perspectiva y las reflexiones de América Latina, una región rica en diversidad cultural, social y filosófica. La primera parte de esta publicación se dedica a una serie de reflexiones filosóficas sobre el transhumanismo. Para esto se explorará el concepto de “Techné” como herramienta de mejora humana, centrándose en cómo la tecnología puede ampliar nuestras capacidades. Este enfoque nos lleva a la discusión sobre “La muerte de la Muerte: vida exponencial y transhumanismo”. En esta sección, consideraremos la posibilidad de la superlongevidad y la cuestión de si realmente queremos, o debemos, aspirar a vivir más de 120 años.
Genome editing, prominently led by the revolutionary CRISPR-Cas9 technology, is a powerful tool with significant applications in diverse fields, particularly in medicine and agriculture. It empowers scientists with the ability to effect precise genetic modifications, thereby potentially paving the way for advanced treatments for genetic disorders such as Huntington’s disease, hemophilia, and cystic fibrosis. Yet, the significant capabilities of this technology also brings to the fore a myriad of intricate bioethical, legal, and regulatory dilemmas. In light of these complexities, this article endeavors to conduct a comprehensive scoping review of the existing literature on the most significant ethical implications emanating from genome editing. In conducting this review, we utilized the power of software tools like EndNote and Rayyan to aid in the systematic and thorough review of the literature. EndNote, a reference management software, was instrumental in organizing and managing the references and bibliographies, while Rayyan, a web application designed for managing and screening records for systematic and scoping reviews, proved crucial in the import and management of text records for the review.The review identified as main aspects of ethical, bioethical and medico-legal interest the exacerbation of social inequalities, safety concerns such as off-target mutations and immunological risks, ecological and evolutionary implications, and challenges to human dignity. It highlights the necessity for equitable access, rigorous regulation, and public engagement to address these issues responsibly.The ultimate objective of this article is to underscore the importance of an informed and inclusive dialogue regarding genome editing. Such dialogue is pivotal for fostering responsible innovation in this rapidly advancing field, ensuring that scientific progress aligns with ethical considerations. By presenting a comprehensive examination of the ethical implications of genome editing, we aim to contribute to this ongoing dialogue and promote a balanced and nuanced understanding of this impactful technology.
The further away we move from the clinical and theoretical core of medical thinking, the closer we get to the confines of medicine. Yet, medicine like any professional discipline, needs confines, which must rely on cases in which an individual becomes a casualty of some condition of his own body or mind. These confines may be epistemic, ethical, or ontological, and going further beyond these limits belong either to medicalization or to medical enhancement.
When medicine reaches its limits, its objectives dissolve by the incursion of legal, political, existential, anthropological or new ethical concerns that interpose into the central core of medical thinking. Clinical knowledge is knowledge by participation so that clinical apprehension is likely to be governed by the doctor’s interest, experience, knowledge and emotions.
According to available data, the use of medical—especially psychopharmacological—means for enhancing healthy individuals’ mood or cognitive function seems popular among certain groups—and might well further increase in the future. This article sheds some light on ethical controversies regarding such a potential ‘neuro-enhancement’ practice. After a brief look at the debate's history and at some of its conceptual difficulties, potential neuro-enhancement means are introduced to prepare the ground for debating ethical questions. Here, focus topics relating to self-chosen enhancements are risk-taking, autonomy or authenticity of the individual, a potential erosion of human nature or human virtue, issues of social fairness and latent social pressures. Focus topics relating to third-person-induced neuro-enhancement, in particular ‘improving’ children are concerns about a child’s best interests, its right to an open future and the proper limits of parental influence. Other ethical issues addressed in the paper are the role of doctors in neuro-enhancement, and matters of research policy in this field.
Amid the complexities of the contemporary Digital Age, characterized by high levels of technological development and associated with intricate ethical implications in terms of human interaction, the integration of different bioethical, algorithmic, and neuroethical perspectives represents critical interventions. This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the conceptual underpinnings, challenges, and practical 2 considerations surrounding ethical integration within these unique perspectives, aiming for a unified ethical code to guide conduct across the realms of science and technology and social governance. The conceptual foundations, constraints, and implementation aspects of ethical integration from the vantage of these special scopes, proposes an integrated ethical coding system across the field and domains of science and technology, and social harmony. We are beginning to understand that the universe could very well be a "virtual reality" and a parallel multiverse could be a fact and not only a mere fanta-scientific hypothesis. This new realm is afoot, as Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain make history as the guiding and organizing principles of the biggest and the most profound revolution of the human species. By boiling established principles down to a functional, universal informatic DNA or "universal software", this paper highlights the possibilities of transformative ethics based on integrated paradigms, which lies in accountability, sustainability, and human welfare in the face of rapid transition.
This paper examines the implications of brain–machine interfaces (BMIs) from a libertarian perspective, arguing that their widespread use necessitates careful scrutiny due to potential risks to individual autonomy, freedom, privacy, and dignity. BMIs, while offering significant technological advancements, pose severe threats by potentially undermining fundamental libertarian values. The paper discusses how BMIs could enable invasive surveillance, thought manipulation, and emotional control, drawing parallels to Robert Nozick’s Experience Machine thought experiment. Unlike the hypothetical machine, which offers simulated experiences, BMIs could facilitate real-time control over individuals’ thoughts and emotions, leading to unprecedented forms of government overreach and coercion. The paper concludes that although libertarians advocate for minimal state intervention, the profound impact of BMIs on personal freedom and autonomy warrants a cautious approach, including potential restrictions on their use to safeguard against their misuse and to preserve individual self-ownership and dignity.
This Element explores the rationality and morality of the kind of human reproductive cloning that does not involve genetic enhancements or other biological alterations in the individuals produced. The analysis is needed because, sooner or later, the technique will be safe enough to be tested; yet its pros and cons have not been sufficiently investigated. The literature abounds with defenses and criticisms of cloning but these do not distinguish between impure and pure forms, the one allowing the combination of reproduction and amendments, the other not. Therefore, cloning is condemned or condoned on grounds that have more to do with enhancements than the reproductive act. This Element shows how the conceptual landscape changes when the distinction is made visible and the arguments targeted at the production of a new life without the support or burden of the enhancement factor. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
The article interprets Margaret Atwood’s MaddAddam trilogy as an important, critical voice in the debate over desirability of liberal eugenics – genetic programming of children that is regulated only by the market forces of supply and demand. Arguing that the trilogy indicates potential effects of liberal eugenics on both the functioning of society and an individual’s sense of self, the article refers to a number of theoretical texts coming from the fields of bioethics, social psychology and anthropology, but its primary source of argumentation lies in the philosophy of Jürgen Habermas.
El deseo de mejoramiento humano ha interesado a la sociedad a lo largo de la historia. Los mitos contienen gran parte de esos anhelos, al renovarse con el tiempo y adquirir nuevos matices. En este trabajo mostramos cómo los elementos ligados a los deseos de inmortalidad del viejo mito sumerio de la Epopeya de Gilgamesh renacen en los nuevos deseos construidos en torno a crispr/Cas9. Esta es una herramienta exitosa de la biología molecular, visible en las reflexiones del transhumanismo, relacionadas con el deseo de la amortalidad, de la eterna juventud y de erradicar las enfermedades del ser humano.
Approximately 1 billion disabled individuals live worldwide, and a large portion of this population faces challenges in labor force participation, employment, and work life. Since the meaning of work extends beyond earning income, eliminating these obstacles is crucial for social inclusion. The research analyzed Human Enhancement Technologies (HET) applications in the literature and aimed to reveal their potential effects on helping disabled individuals overcome the difficulties they face in their working lives. The restorative effects of HET in eliminating disability present HET as an alternative for addressing the challenges faced by disabled individuals.
Celem artykułu jest analiza poglądów Sandela na temat wyzwań bioetycznych, jakie mogą pojawić się w związku rewolucją biotechnologiczną i postępami inżynierii genetycznej w kontekście tzw. etyki udoskonalania, a także próba odpowiedzi na pytanie, w jaki sposób należy formułować wątpliwości bioetyczne wobec nieograniczonych manipulacji genetycznych, które są możliwe wskutek rewolucji biotechnologicznej. Autorzy charakteryzują Sandelowską wizję etyki udoskonalania, przedstawiają wynikające z niej wyzwania dla wolności, godności i człowieczeństwa, jak również wskazują, w jaki sposób Sandel opisuje argumenty we współczesnej debacie bioetycznej, podkreślając ich niewystarczający charakter. Do głównych wyzwań, jakie mogą pojawić się w związku z niewłaściwym wykorzystaniem odkryć biotechnologii, zaliczają: projektowanie genetyczne dzieci, udoskonalanie sportowców czy zwiększanie nierówności społecznych wynikających ze statusu genetycznego jednostki. W konkluzjach wskazują na argument „etyki wdzięczności za życie jako dar”, który według Sandela w lepszy sposób wyraża wątpliwości bioetyczne i chroni takie wartości, jak wolność, autonomia i godność człowieka.
Background:
Nonhuman animals are regularly enhanced genomically with CRISPR and other gene editing tools as scientists aim at better models for biomedical research, more tractable agricultural animals, or animals that are otherwise well suited to a defined purpose. This study investigated how genome editors and policymakers perceived ethical or policy benefits and drawbacks for animal enhancement and how perceived benefits and drawbacks are alike, or differ from, those for human genome editing.
Methods:
We identified scientists through relevant literature searches as well as conference presentations. Policymakers were identified through rosters of genome editing oversight groups (e.g., International Commission on the Clinical Use of Human Germline Genome Editing, World Health Organization) or efforts aimed at influencing policy (e.g., deliberative democracy groups). Interviews covered participants' views on ethical differences between interventions affecting somatic or germline cells and distinctions between using gene editing for disease treatment, prevention, and enhancement purposes.
Results:
Of the 92 participants interviewed, 81 were genome editing scientists, and 33 were policymakers, with 22 interviewees being both scientists and policymakers. Multiple areas were identified in which the ethical implications of genomic enhancements for nonhuman animals differ from those for human animals including with respect to experiential welfare; germline edits; environmental sustainability; and justice.
Conclusions:
Overall, respondents viewed that animal enhancement is unburdened by the ethical complexities of human enhancement. These views may be related to participant perceptions of animals' lesser moral status and because germline editing in animals is common practice.
Etyka transhumanizmu jest etyką utylitarystyczną. Celem transhumanistycznego projektu ulepszania człowieka jest zwiększenie jego dobrostanu fizycznego, psychicznego i społecznego, czyli zwiększenie sumy szczęścia jednostki i społeczności, której jest ona częścią. Treścią niniejszych rozważań jest wskazanie i opisanie tego, co stanowi ostateczną podstawę etyki transhumanistycznej i wyznacza zarazem granicę, poza którą nie mogą wykroczyć transhumanistyczne projekty ulepszającego modyfikowania człowieka. Twierdzimy, że tą podstawą i zarazem wyznacznikiem granicy moralnej akceptacji działań jest zachowanie tożsamości osobowej podmiotu. Tożsamość tę rozumiemy w sensie kartezjańskim, czyli jako relację, w jakiej samoświadomość podmiotu pozostaje do jego cielesności. Transhumanistyczne ulepszanie człowieka staje się zatem niemoralne, jeśli może prowadzić do utraty pamięci jednostki o przeszłych relacjach między jej samoświadomością a cielesnością.
Etyka transhumanizmu, czyli etyka ulepszania człowieka, jest etyką deontologiczną z nakazem czynienia dobra jako podstawową normą moralną. Jednak konkretne praktyczne działania, poprzez które ma być realizowane dane dobro, są oceniane z uwagi na przewidywane konsekwencje. Etyka transhumanistyczna jest więc w istocie etyką konsekwencjalistyczną, a skoro postawa transhumanistyczna wyraża się w dążeniu do ulepszania człowieka, zatem każde zrealizowane „udoskonalenie” jest uznane za zwiększenie sumy dobra i w rezultacie zwiększenie dobrostanu człowieka. Tym samym etyka ulepszania człowieka jest etyką utylitarystyczną. Etyka medyczna ma charakter deontologiczny, ale w perspektywie transhumanistycznej staje się etyką utylitarystyczną – działanie „udoskonalające” oceniane jest jako moralne, jeżeli zwiększa sumę dobra. Musi to w istotny sposób zmieniać rozumienie podstawowych zasad etyki medycznej. Zmiana ta będzie fragmentem zmiany szerszej i bardziej podstawowej, polegającej na zatarciu granicy między działaniami terapeutycznymi a działaniami
The article introduces the concept and value of cyborgs against the backdrop of the technological revolution and offers a humanistic reflection on them, ingesting ethical issues regarding social justice and privacy discussions, as well as philosophical reflections on cyborgs in the context of technologized environments, with profound theoretical and practical implications.
The field of transhumanism and green banking is a relatively new and important field of research that deals with the combination of cutting edge technical and human advancements with sustainable financial practices. The objective of this research study is to investigate this multidisciplinary subject through an extensive examination of the literature. The main goal is to comprehend how transhumanist technologies might assist green banking, which prioritizes ecologically friendly financial practices. The process entails a methodical examination of extant academic papers, industry reports and case studies. The selection of sources was focused and impact in the domains of transhumanism and sustainable finance. The overview identifies important ideas, practices and technical developments while highlighting the historical development of transhumanism and green finance. Results show that integrating transhumanism with green banking has a number of advantages, including improved operational effectiveness, novel financial services and favorable effects on society and the environment.
This paper sets forth some philosophical foundations of the transhumanist project, drawing on its roots in philosophical positivism and its confidence in the liberating power of technology. Such confidence is interpreted within the sphere of hope, departing from transhumanism's negative presumptions regarding the human condition, and embracing its aspirations for a humanity without limits. However, it is the claim of this paper that such hope is deceptive. Since transhumanism is incapable of grasping the depths of the human person, limited by its own philosophical categories, it both underestimates the human capacity for interior transformation and misunderstands the real nature of hope. Thus, transhumanism is marked by a deeply rooted despair that wears the mask of an insufficient hope.
Moral bioenhancement presents the possibility of enhancing morally desirable emotions and dispositions. While some scholars have proposed that moral bioenhancement can produce virtue, we argue that within a virtue ethics framework moral bioenhancement cannot reliably produce virtue. Moreover, on a virtue ethics framework, the pursuit of moral bioenhancement carries moral risks. To make this argument, we consider three aspects of virtue—its motivational, rational, and behavioral components. In order to be virtuous, we argue, a person must (i) take pleasure in doing the right thing and have the correct motivational attitudes; (ii) reason correctly about what is called for in a particular ethical dilemma; and (iii) intentionally and continuously practice and cultivate virtues. These dimensions of morality—in short: precisely those emphasized in a virtue ethics framework—cannot be consistently or reliably met using existing moral bioenhancement technology.
Participants in the long-running bioethical debate over human germline genetic modification (HGGM) tend to imagine future people abstractly and on the basis of conventionalized characteristics familiar from science fiction, such as intelligence, disease resistance and height. In order to distinguish these from scientifically meaningful terms like “phenotype” and “trait,” this article proposes the term “persemes” to describe the units of difference for hypothetical people. In the HGGM debate, persemes are frequently conceptualized as similar, modular entities, like building blocks to be assembled into genetically modified people. They are discussed as though they each would be chosen individually without affecting other persemes and as though they existed as components within future people rather than being imposed through social context. This modular conceptual framework appears to influence bioethical approaches to HGGM by reinforcing the idea of human capacities as natural primary goods subject to distributive justice and supporting the use of objective list theories of well-being. As a result, assumptions of modularity may limit the ability of stakeholders with other perspectives to present them in the HGGM debate. This article examines the historical trends behind the modular framework for genetically modified people, its likely psychological basis, and its philosophical ramifications.
Ethical responses to transhumanism, even from secular points of departure, often use religious language in debating the merits of discussion, and phrases such as ‘playing God’ or ‘hubris’ are not rare. Having Christian ethics and theology as one of the respondents to the ethical and moral issues that are raised by biotechnological developments such as transhumanism, is therefore perhaps easier than in other ethical concerns. In this contribution, the discourse on transhumanism will be approached by defining it in economic terms as a positional good. The focus will further be on the notion of economic inequality, and why it should matter in an ethical discussion on transhumanism, particularly from the perspective of Christian ethics. In making this case, the notion of solidarity will especially be drawn on as articulated in liberation theology as a theological resource. Social community is part and parcel of the Christian moral imperative and, as such, within the context of the discussion on economic inequality and transhumanism, the theological theme of solidarity forms an integral part of responding. Contribution: This article aims to contribute to the Christian ethical discussion on transhumanism by including an economic definition of transhumanism and situating the discussion within the field of liberation theology. The contribution also lies in centring the ethical issues around the theological theme of human solidarity and social community as a Christian moral imperative.
Η ψηφιακή τεχνολογία άλλαξε τη σύγχρονη αθλητική κουλτούρα και οδήγησε σε νέες μορφές σπορ, όπως είναι τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ. Τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ αποτελούν μία οργανωμένη ανταγωνιστική ανθρώπινη δραστηριότητα με βιντεοπαιχνίδια, μέσω διαδικτύου ή τοπικού δικτύου (LAN). Διαθέτουν τη δική τους ιστορική διαδρομή που αναδεικνύει και εξηγεί τα σημερινά τους χαρακτηριστικά: κοινωνική αλληλεπίδραση, ανταγωνισμός, οικονομικο-πολιτισμικά στοιχεία, ψυχαγωγία, δημοφιλία, και επαγγελματισμός. Πολλοί υποστηρίζουν ότι τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ, συγκροτώντας ένα παρόμοιο οικοσύστημα με αυτό των συμβατικών σπορ, και διαθέτοντας όλα εκείνα τα εξωγενή και εγγενή χαρακτηριστικά, αλλά και λειτουργίες των συμβατικών σπορ, μπορούν να θεωρηθούν, και αυτά, έστω και υπό περιορισμούς, σπορ. Η θέση που υποστηρίζεται στην παρούσα μελέτη είναι ότι τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ δεν μπορούν να ταυτιστούν με τα συμβατικά σπορ επειδή η ανθρωπινότητα, ως θεμελιώδες στοιχείο των σπορ, βιώνεται σε αυτά, από τους παίκτες τους, με διαφορετικό τρόπο και επειδή εμπεριέχουν ένα εγγενές πρόταγμα υπερανθρωπισμού. Πρόκειται για μία φιλοσοφική μελέτη που ισορροπεί μεταξύ οντολογίας και ηθικής, αξιοποιώντας στοιχεία της αναλυτικής μεθόδου, καθώς και της ερμηνευτικής μεθόδου της φιλοσοφίας. Η σημασία της μελέτης έγκειται στην ανάπτυξη μιας διαφορετικής φιλοσοφικής προσέγγισης για τις νέες τεχνολογίες και τον αθλητισμό, καλύπτοντας ένα ερευνητικό κενό στο πεδίο της Φιλοσοφίας του Αθλητισμού. Επιπλέον, συμβάλλει στην πλουραλιστική πληροφόρηση για τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ, αλλά και στην ανάδειξη της ανθρωπιστικής αξίας του αθλητισμού και της ανάγκης διατήρησης της ανθρωπινότητας στη σύγχρονη ψηφιακή κοινωνία και στον αθλητισμό, εν μέσω της τεχνολογικής καταιγίδας της εποχής. Τα ηλεκτρονικά σπορ διαφοροποιούνται από τα συμβατικά σπορ, στο ότι λαμβάνουν χώρα σε έναν υβριδικό κόσμο. Οι παίκτες τους ενεργώντας, ταυτόχρονα, στον πραγματικό κόσμο και στον εικονικό κόσμο των βιντεοπαιχνιδιών, αποκτούν υβριδική υπόσταση και υβριδικές ικανότητες, υιοθετώντας χαρακτηριστικά ριζοσπαστικού κυβερνο-οργανισμού. Αυτά τα χαρακτηριστικά επηρεάζουν τον τρόπο με τον οποίο βιώνεται η ανθρωπινότητα των παικτών των ηλεκτρονικών σπορ. Αγωνίζονται στους εικονικούς κόσμους με έναν άλλον εαυτό μιας ασώματης τεχνικής ετερότητας, τροποποιείται η ηθική τους αυτοκατανόηση, περιορίζεται η ελευθερία του πράττειν, σε σχέση με αυτήν των συμβατικών σπορ, και υποβαθμίζονται τα φυσικά τους χαρίσματα. Προκειμένου να διαφυλαχθεί ο ανθρωπιστικός χαρακτήρας του αθλητισμού, η οποιαδήποτε πολιτική ανάπτυξης και διάδοσης των ηλεκτρονικών σπορ θα πρέπει να βασιστεί στην αρχή της πρόληψης των όποιων κινδύνων, και προς την κατεύθυνση της προφύλαξης του στοιχείου της ανθρωπινότητας. Ο σύγχρονος αθλητισμός, αλλά και η σύγχρονη κοινωνία, που βιώνουν την επέλαση μιας πληθώρας εφαρμογών τεχνητής νοημοσύνης, έχουν την ανάγκη ενός ψηφιακού ανθρωπισμού, έτσι ώστε να επιβιώσουν στο μέλλον με τον ανθρωπιστικό τους χαρακτήρα.
En la primera parte de este artículo se presenta el planteamiento moderno del transhumanismo y su respectivo análisis bioético, pretendiendo realizar dicho análisis bajo un esquema de razonabilidad más que de una búsqueda de exactitud luego de haber expresado de manera resumida pero concisa, las premisas del intrigante movimiento eugenésico y las posiciones de varios autores al respecto, ampliando así la descripción actual del estado tecnocientífico de las ideas transhumanistas y su desesperado énfasis en la mejora de las biotecnologías disruptivas y emergentes. En una segunda parte del texto abordaremos el concepto de Eugenesia y su desarrollo a partir de lo que hoy por hoy conocemos como evolución dirigida (ED), analizando axiológicamente la necesidad, las consecuencias y los conflictos de este concepto en virtud de su comprensión en cuanto al ser humano, proponiendo una visión que trascienda la concepción de un organismo únicamente biológico, haciendo crítica sobre aspectos mecanicistas, utilitaristas y reduccionistas que el transhumanismo confiere a su comprensión del “ser humano”. Finalmente, en una tercera y última parte, analizaremos los problemas bioéticos de la idea eugenésica con la ayuda del ensayo “la emboscadura” de Ernest Jünger para así buscar un análisis objetivo, axiológico y metafísico, para definir el proceder tecnocientífico frente al ser humano como un fin y no como un medio.
Transhumanism presents a view of human progress by transcending the human, regarding finitude and suffering to be fundamental problems that must be overcome by radical bioenhancement technologies. Recent theologians have compared Christianity and transhumanism as competing deifications via grace and technology, respectively. Ron Cole-Turner is a cautious yet optimistic interpreter of the relationship between Christian deification and transhumanism, regarding them, on the one hand, to be incompatible based on self-centeredness vs. kenosis, while on the other hand, they can be compatible through a robust theology of creation and transfiguration such that creative human efforts via technology will be an active agent in transforming the world in glory. In this way, Christian transhumanism offers a vision of human progress in deification that transfigures creation through technology. In this paper, I challenge this proposal. I wish to show how transhumanism in any stripe, whether secular, Christian, or other, is fundamentally incompatible with Christian deification for two reasons: (1) incompatible views of progress and (2) incompatible views of human agency in deification. I will address each in turn. I then propose that human progress is infinite growth in the love of Christ. Finally, I suggest how a view of human agency affects how we think about suffering as a means to human progress.
El mundo digital pone en cuestión los conceptos y las categorías fundamentales de la antropología filosófica. Los aspectos definitorios y exclusivos de los seres humanos pierden su vigencia con la aparición de entidades sintéticas que comparten dichas características. En este artículo nos hemos propuesto realizar un análisis filosófico de la antropología digital. Primero, hemos examinado las cuatro estrategias seguidas hasta el momento para dar cuenta de las continuidades ontológicas entre seres humanos y tecnologías. Defendemos que ninguna de ellas resulta convincente por dos razones: las tres primeras reducen la antropología a ontología y la última descarta completamente la dimensión ontológica. Por ello, nos hemos ocupado, en segundo lugar, de desarrollar un nuevo enfoque antropológico que dé cuenta de forma más exitosa del mundo digital, a saber, una concepción estructurista que entienda al ser humano como un ser biopsicosocial abierto a entablar relaciones con otras entidades. Esto nos ha llevado, en tercer lugar, a desarrollar los aspectos relacionales del mundo digital a través del concepto de mediación tecnológica. La noción de información que introducen las nuevas tecnologías media de un modo cualitativamente novedoso nuestra acción y percepción: produce entornos digitales cerrados, inclina a la igualdad informacional e induce dinámicas de
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.