From Destiny to Freedom? On Human Nature and Liberal Eugenics in the Age of Genetic Manipulation

2006 ◽  
pp. 3-24
Author(s):  
Michela Betta
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Genetic Manipulation ◽  
Liberal Eugenics

Transhumanism and Its Critics

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Keith A. Bauer
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Genetic Manipulation ◽  
Enhancement Technology ◽  
Philosophical Movement

Transhumanism is a social, technological, political, and philosophical movement that advocates the transformation of human nature by means of pharmacology, genetic manipulation, cybernetic modification, nanotechnology, and a host of other technologies. The aim of this movement is to increase physical and sensory abilities, augment intelligence and memory, and extend lifespan. After providing some background on transhumanism, its philosophical heritage, and its goals, the author looks at three arguments against transhumanism, arguing that they are unpersuasive and should be rejected. This paper presents two arguments against transhumanism that have merit. The first argument is an argument from justice that addresses the distribution of benefits and burdens for funding, developing, and employing enhancement technology. The second argument examines a significant assumption held by many transhumanists, namely, that there is an essential “human nature” that can be transcended.

scholarly journals Habermas and Zhuangzi against Liberal Eugenics

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-112
Author(s):  
David CHAI
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Manipulation ◽  
Human Enhancement ◽  
English Abstract ◽  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Political Opposition ◽  
Jurgen Habermas ◽  
Liberal Eugenics ◽  
Digital Commons ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Temporal Disparity

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English; abstract also in Chinese.是否有一種道家的基因增強倫理學？考慮到時間差異，道家思想能容納這樣一種提問嗎？就生命科技的持續進展而言，我們所面臨的存在論威脅是無比真實的。圍繞著自然與人造的爭論曾經牢固地樹立在神學家與哲學家的頭腦之中；然而最近在自由優生學的喧囂中上述爭論已然消失殆盡。這一運動激起了幾位傑出人士的反對，包括哲學家尤爾根．哈貝馬斯。他們反對的立足點就是基因操控抹煞了人性本質與人造物之間的差別。道家原則上贊同這一反對，但卻是出於不同的理由。本文將表明道家可以提供一種存在－宇宙論辯護——如莊子在關於疾病與畸形的故事中所表明的——以加強哈貝馬斯從社會－政治視角出發的對自由優生學的批評。雖然沒有直接提到自由優生學本身，但與哈貝馬斯一樣，這些故事表明人類生命的開端根本說來是超出人類控制的，而改變這一根基就意味著重塑自我與自由的涵義。What would a Daoist ethics of human enhancement look like? Can Daoism even entertain such a question given the temporal disparity? In light of the ongoing advancement of biotechnology, the ontological threat awaiting us is all too real. Indeed, the debate surrounding natural versus artificial has long been entrenched in the minds of theologians and philosophers alike; in recent years, however, it has been swept up in the commotion over liberal eugenics. This movement has prompted several prominent figures, such as the philosopher Jurgen Habermas, to interject on the grounds that genetic manipulation erases the distinction between the human and the manufactured. Daoism, in principle, would agree, but for different reasons. This paper shows how Daoism can contribute to Habermas’s social-political opposition to liberal eugenics by offering an onto-cosmological line of defense, as seen in the stories on illness and malformation in the Zhuangzi. While not referring to liberal eugenics per se, these stories argue, as does Habermas, that humans have a beginning to life that is ultimately beyond their control, and to alter this origin is to recast the meaning of selfhood and freedom.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 165 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Subjektivität und Herrschaft im Kontext von Biopolitik und Gentechnik

2007 ◽  
Vol 2007 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-192
Author(s):  
Martin G. Weiß
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Political ◽  
Giorgio Agamben ◽  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Natural Origin ◽  
Liberal Eugenics ◽  
Present Essay ◽  
Political Theories ◽  
Origin Of Man

Starting with an analysis of Michel Foucault’s notion of biopower as defining feature of modernity, the present essay moves on to discuss different interpretations of “life” in the political theories of Giorgio Agamben and Hanna Arendt. The aim is to understand what transformations biopower has undergone since Foucault’s first studies. According to Jürgen Habermas biopower today has turned into liberal eugenics and bioengineering is replacing the natural origin of man causing a crisis of subjectivity, whereas from a Heideggerian point of view, the attempt to redesign human nature by means of biotechnology marks the summit of reifying subjectivism.#

Transhumanism and Its Critics

2012 ◽  
pp. 232-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith A. Bauer
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Genetic Manipulation ◽  
Enhancement Technology ◽  
Philosophical Movement

Transhumanism is a social, technological, political, and philosophical movement that advocates the transformation of human nature by means of pharmacology, genetic manipulation, cybernetic modification, nanotechnology, and a host of other technologies. The aim of this movement is to increase physical and sensory abilities, augment intelligence and memory, and extend lifespan. After providing some background on transhumanism, its philosophical heritage, and its goals, the author looks at three arguments against transhumanism, arguing that they are unpersuasive and should be rejected. This paper presents two arguments against transhumanism that have merit. The first argument is an argument from justice that addresses the distribution of benefits and burdens for funding, developing, and employing enhancement technology. The second argument examines a significant assumption held by many transhumanists, namely, that there is an essential “human nature” that can be transcended.

Liberal Eugenics & Human Nature: Against Habermas

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth. Fenton
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Liberal Eugenics

scholarly journals Liberal eugenics: moral justification of practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-112
Author(s):  
Stefan Micic
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
Moral Justification ◽  
Francis Fukuyama ◽  
Liberal Eugenics

This paper considers the question of justification of liberal eugenics as a mean to change human nature that is formed by evolution. The paper present an idea of liberal eugenics, and position of its proponent Nicholas Agar and its opponent Francis Fukuyama. The question of moral justification of liberal eugenics will be predominantly examined from the perspective of autonomy. It will be argued that the respect for human nature, formed by evolution, is secondary to the question of moral obligation to respect human dignity and as such, the practice of liberal eugenics can be morally justified.

scholarly journals The problems of human embryos genome editing from the position of Christian denominations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Gribkov ◽  
Tatiana Minchenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Genetic Manipulation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Embryos ◽  
Genetic Manipulations ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Christian Worldview ◽  
Biomedical Technologies ◽  
The One ◽  
Medical Advances

Modern biomedical technologies pose bioethical dilemmas for humanity. On the one hand, medical advances can make life much easier for people, but, on the other hand, the problem of interference in human nature actualizes the most fundamental questions regarding his ontology, the boundaries of permissible transformations, the responsibility of a scientist and a specialist who applies the latest technologies, for remote and unpredictable consequences, due to the integrity and interconnectedness of various aspects of human nature. In the scientific literature, there is a lot of information about the attitude of various denominations to genetic manipulation. This paper presents the experience of generalizing and systematizing the attitude of the main Christian confessions to the problem of editing the human embryo genome. The assessment of modern biomedical technologies from the standpoint of the Christian worldview differs, on the one hand, in the moral depth due to spiritual experience in relation to the higher divine principle, and, on the other hand, if we bear in mind the specificity of the Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant views on the problem of genetic manipulations, it is diversity interpretations in connection with historically arisen and existing to this day confessional and doctrinal differences.

scholarly journals Etica do discurso e eugenia liberal: Jürgen Habermas e o futuro da natureza humana | The ethics of discourse and liberal eugenics: Jürgen Habermas and the future of human nature

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aécio Amaral
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Information Science ◽  
Genetic Diagnosis ◽  
Discourse Ethics ◽  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Jurgen Habermas ◽  
Liberal Eugenics ◽  
The Future ◽  
Communicative Reason

Resumo Em O Futuro da Natureza Humana, Jürgen Habermas afirma que os avanços recentes no campo das biotecnologias constituem um desafio para a ética do discurso nas Ciências Sociais. Por trás de sua crítica aos defensores da eugenia liberal reside o reconhecimento de que o Diagnóstico Genético Pré-Implantação potencialmente põe em cheque o papel exercido pela razão comunicativa na constituição de uma ética individual de auto-compreensão. A ‘ética da espécie’ proposta por Habermas como contraposição a esse fenômeno se nos apresenta como moralmente reativa, na medida em que sua crítica não alcança abarcar os aspectos metafísicos que estão no núcleo do discurso da eugenia liberal. O artigo é dividido em dois momentos: perceber como a recente intervenção de Habermas ecoa o motivo da alegada colonização do mundo-da-vida pela razão tecnológica, e demonstrar como a concepção de técnica que embasa seu relato o impede de divisar a crítica dos aspectos metafísicos da cultura genética contemporânea.Palavras-chave Jürgen Habermas; cultura genética; sociedade da informação; ciência e mundo-da-vida; ética do discurso Abstract In The Future of Human Nature, Jürgen Habermas recognizes that current advances in biotechnology are challenging discourse ethics in Social Sciences. Behind his fear of the possibility of liberal eugenics, lies the recognition that pre-implanted genetic diagnosis potentially puts into question the role played by communicative reason in the constitution of the individual’s ethics of self-understanding. The ethics of species proposed by Habermas sounds morally reactive, insofar as his critique does not manage to encompass the metaphysical features which are at the core of liberal eugenics discourse. This paper is divided into two moments: the current echoing in Habermas’ work of the motif of the alleged colonization of the lifeworld by technological reason, and a demonstration of how his conception of technique which underlies such a perspective prevents him of envisaging the critique of the metaphysical aspects of contemporary genetic culture. Keywords Jürgen Habermas, genetic culture, paradigm information, science and lifeworld, discourse ethics 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document