Francis Fukuyama’s Our Posthuman Future fears that biotechnology will make monsters of us. Steven Rose weighs the evidence. The power to genetically enhance future generations could be a boon for humanity – or it could lead to an era of violent rebellion against the. Is a baby whose personality has been chosen from a gene supermarket still a human? If we choose what we create what happens to morality? Is this the end of .
|Published (Last):||9 March 2011|
|PDF File Size:||2.60 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.65 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Our Posthuman Future by Francis Fukuyama (II) | Books | The Guardian
Books of the Week. Fukuyama refers to the irreducible totality of these qualities as “Factor X”, “the complex whole” as opposed to “the sum of simple parts”, which forms the foundation of human dignity.
In Our Posthuman Future posthiman, one of our greatest social philosophers begins to describe the potential effects of genetic exploration on the foundation of liberal democracy: But if we do, we should do it with eyes open. Fukuyama sketches a brief history of man’s changing understanding of human nature: Both writers suggest that nature itself, and in particular human nature, has a special role in defining for us what is right and wrong, just and unjust, important and unimportant.
OUR POSTHUMAN FUTURE: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution
Author outlines several issues that need to be address to establish an effective international regulation of biotechnology: Instead we are treated to an unflinchingly conservative position that the only way to combat negative outcomes is to pass the burden of biotech research regulation to political bodies which will be successful in hedging these outcomes to the degree that they are successful in orchestrating global consensus to outlaw biotech research.
They want to maximise the freedom of parents to choose the kind of children they have, the freedom of scientists to pursue research, and the freedom of entrepreneurs to make use of technology to create wealth. The genius of Our Posthuman Future is that it brings home just how important [these issues] will be in our immediate future for ordinary people. But the situation is paradoxical, as US conservative religious views on, for instance, stem-cell research clash with an otherwise deregulatory agenda.
Modern thinking is misguided about “human nature”, the only remedy being a return to pre-Kantian thinking about essences etc. Learn more about Amazon Giveaway.
Our Posthuman Future – Wikipedia
Fukuyama accepts their claims to universalism in order to build his case that the naturalistic fallacy is itself fallacious. The possibility that biotechnology will permit the emergence of new genetic classes has been frequently noted and condemned by those who have speculated about the future.
Indeed, there is no such thing as the human race any longer, since they have been bred by the Controllers into separate castes of Alphas, Betas, Epsilons, and Gammas who are as distant from each other as humans are from animals.
Does that mean, with the limited intelligence of a less developed brain – but with a brain nonetheless and all basic body parts and feelings that “Modern Man” exhibits – that the caveman would be right? Francis Fukuyama teaches at the Paul H. But it is not infinitely malleable, and the elements that remain constant – particularly our species-typical gamut of emotional responses – constitute a safe harbour that allows us to connect, potentially, with all other human beings.
Buy the selected items together This item: Fukuyama The End of History and the Last Man ; Trust is no stranger to controversial theses, and here he advances two: Rarely has someone entering the policy arena so eloquently and precisely laid out the case for political control of emerging technology.
We do not have to regard ourselves as slaves to inevitable technological progress when that progress does not serve human ends. Critics point out that human fukuyamaa can be expressed only within the diverse and historically contingent societies that humans create, and therefore cannot be understood a priori.
Don’t mess with human nature…
Which, in its own way, is rather ironic. This means that social elites may not just pass on social advantages but embed them genetically as well. Alexa Actionable Analytics for the Web. The much more common dystopic writing of the past 50 years has largely been posited on disruptive scientific and technological fantasies.
Whether certain forms of radical environmentalism will translate into hostility to human biotechnology remains to be seen. For a political economist to derive a conclusion abstracted from either practical politics or economy almost makes one wish for the return of the bioethicists.
Instead of Big Brother watching everyone, people postyuman use the PC and Internet to watch Big Brother, as governments everywhere were driven to publish more information on their own activities.
But the opposite possibility also seems to be entirely plausible – that there will be an impetus toward a much more genetically egalitarian society. For any person growing up as I did in the middle decades of the twentieth century, the future and its terrifying possibilities were defined by two books, George Orwell”s first published in and Aldous Huxley”s Brave New World published in While Fukuyama correctly illustrates the “easy fixes” that our society has latched onto Prozac, Ritilin: These assumptions together constitute what has been called the naturalistic fallacy.
It is impossible to know which of these two scenarios – one of growing genetic inequality, the other of growing equality – will come to pass. He begins by summarising what he sees as the current state of play in the science and technology of genetic and brain sciences, in terms of their capacity to extend healthy human life, to understand the roots of human behaviour intelligence, aggression, sexual orientationand to control and change that behaviour with drugs Prozac, Ritalin and so on.