Transhumanism and Posthumanism: Lifting Man Up or Pulling Him Down?

Transhumanism and Posthumanism: Lifting Man Up or Pulling Him Down? | Amanda C. R. Clark | Ignatius Insight | March 12, 2010

We have all heard it said at one time or other that we live in a "post-Christian age," but recently we have been hearing that we live in (or are rapidly approaching) a "post-human age." But what is "posthumanism"? The topic is little known or understood, and is frequently relegated to the realm of science fiction. With the distribution of Pope Benedict's 2009 encyclical Caritas in Veritate and his earlier writing, Faith and the Future (Ignatius Press, 2009; originally published 1970), it seems timely to examine the nature of "transhumanism" and "posthumanism" and to consider some of the moral implications of these ideas.

Posthumanism as an idea has been a popular since the 1950s, and, yes, especially among the science-fiction-minded. For example, when the film Run Lola Run was released in 1998, New York Times film critic Janet Maslin praised it as "hot, fast and post-human"—a comment that drew its own acclaim and notoriety. The term quickly entered the American lexicon, cropping up in the unlikeliest of places; it was, for example, a fashionable topic among graduate students in my library science program. These future librarians were dead serious about the promotion and hoped-for realization of "post-humanity."

"Post" indicates that something has ended—but what on earth does post-human possibly mean? Part of the answer is found in the in-between stage, known as "transhuman." The transhumanist movement took flight in the 1980s after a thirty-year gestation, when American futurists like Alvin Toffler and Stephen Hawking popularized early definitions of a hoped-for post-human or transhuman society. Nick Bostrom, professor of philosophy at Oxford University, (personal webpage, http://www.nickbostrom.com/), writes authoritatively and abundantly on the topic. Bostrom's 2005 publication, "A History of Transhumanist Thought," first published in Journal of Evolution and Technology (April, 2005), offers a concise history of transhumanism, describing the transhumanist's goal of "broadening human potential by overcoming aging, cognitive shortcomings, [and] involuntary suffering." By overcoming these "limitations" humans will then have an explosion of "choices." These choices, the appendix states, include "life extension therapies; reproductive choice technologies; cryonics procedures; and many other possible human modification and enhancement technologies." It is an ideology based upon a fundamental dissatisfaction with "mere" humanity.

Read the entire article...

Comments

[Michael]

Transhumans, Posthumans, and even mere humans, may find a significant decrease in some "cognitive shortcomings" by reading this excellent article.

[Howard]

I initially misread this as "trashhumanism". Or was that a Freudian slip of the eye?

[Geoffrey]

This articles begs a lot of questions. If I wasn't so bogged down by homework, I'd respond to it more at length.

[Jon Fermin]

I read this article and it reminds me of a film I saw years ago called Gattaca. Though the film was not very popular upon release it has become a popular film among the bioethics crowd. In Gattaca, genetics has become advanced to the point that children can be genetically chosen and modified through the use of IVF and cloning. a young couple conceive and give birth to a son, Vincent. Vincent is conceived and born without modification and is declared an In-Valid, a genetic inferiority and a second class citizen. His parents are heartbroken when they were told at birth the child would only live to be 30. Devastated, they decide to have their second child conceived through what this brave new world has decided is "The natural way". It is also hinted at briefly that this is a Catholic family who has made this decision under the pressures of society. The mother is seen within the first 10 minutes of the film holding a rosary during the birth of Vincent. This is one of the few indications we are given of religion in the film, but the rest of the film resonates with the need to value the dignity of the human person. Without spoiling too much of the plot the film is part neo-noir murder mystery and part sci-fi thriller that provokes a lot of discussion that will inspire those with faith and those without to consider the repercussions of science without morals.
Another film I have seen contrasted to Gattaca is the Ridley Scott classic, Blade Runner. In Blade runner, the inverse is shown. Androids have managed to vault across the uncanny valley and except for the voight kampf test are virtually indistinguishable from humans. Because of their nature the replicants are feared and hunted. Those who are often on the posthumanist/transhumanis side tend to side more with the replicants than the humans. This disparity arises from a philosophical debate on the nature of humanity and the existence of a human soul.
If the transhumanists are to be believed correctly, many of them deny or minimize the existence of a soul. If any soul exists it exists in a kind of dualist Cartesian sense. The Gattaca argument would assert that the human body and soul are inseparable from each other and that preference to one at the detriment of the other can produce terrible effects in society. I would recommend viewing both films in addition to the material listed above for a greater understanding of the subject.

[T. Shaw]

How about us neanderthals?

[Jon Fermin]

I was reading some of Mr. Bostrum's articles on the link provided and I could not help but notice how often he was making a straw-man out of moral objection, even in his more scholarly efforts I found it disturbing to view him making human dignity a variable quality.