Thoughts about our species’ future: themes from Humanity’s End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement

Journal of Evolution and Technology - Vol. 21 Issue 2 – November 2010 - pgs 23-31
http://jetpress.org/agar.htm



Abstract



This paper summarizes a couple of the main arguments from my new book, Humanity’s End. In the book I argue against radical enhancement – the adjustment of human attributes and abilities to levels that greatly exceed what is currently possible for human beings. I’m curious to see what reaction this elicits in a journal whose readership includes some of radical enhancement’s most imaginative and committed advocates.



Humanity’s End is motivated by the conviction that the debate about human enhancement must move beyond the binary “yes, I love it; no, it’s evil” dialectic that has tended to dominate philosophical discussion up till now. When we focus on the multiple means – cybernetic, genetic, nanotechnological, and so on – by which humans are likely to be enhanced, we find significant moral differences. Some human enhancements should be endorsed; many should be rejected.



An additional motivation for Humanity’s End is a sense that the technologies of human enhancement are on the verge of something really big. If Ray Kurzweil is right, then improvements of the information technologies that may be used to enhance human attributes track an exponential path (Kurzweil 2005). A feature of these ever-increasing patterns of improvement is that they deliver dramatic improvements quickly. Kurzweil’s law of accelerating returns is controversial. Perhaps new means of enhancement won’t arrive according to its schedule. But I know from my own nostalgia for rotary dial telephones and incredulity about computers that wirelessly access the Internet that human adaptation to technology lags behind the pace of technological change. We mustn’t just assume a gradualist scenario in which new human enhancements arrive in small increments with plenty of time for us to adjust between each instalment.



Rapid advances in the technologies of enhancement raise the possibility of radical enhancement which I define as the improvement of human attributes and abilities to levels that greatly exceed what is currently possible for human beings. Humanity’s End presents an argument for rejecting this degree of enhancement.



Rejecting radical enhancement does not entail rejecting all the ways in which humans might enhance themselves. I defend a moderate stance on human enhancement. Some advocates of enhancement hear calls for moderation in much the same way that frat party attendees respond to calls for moderate consumption of beer. Indeed, there are many moral debates in which moderation is hard to achieve. For example, you either think that the state should be empowered to put condemned criminals to death or you think it shouldn’t. It’s difficult to work out what might count as a moderate position on this issue (arguing for the semi-execution of the nastiest criminals?). By contrast, a proper understanding of enhancement technologies reveals plenty of ground for moderation. I argue that our shared humanity imposes moral and prudential limits on enhancement. Many of the enhancements people most want are fully compatible with their humanity. They’re valued by human beings precisely because of their promotion of enduring and significant human values. In matters of human enhancement, however, more is not always better. Proper scrutiny reveals radical enhancement to be incompatible with our humanity, and worth avoiding because of that fact. Slippery slope arguments to the effect that endorsing moderate enhancement entails endorsing radical enhancement warrant the same respect as proposals by party hosts that accepting offers of spritzers commits you to draining entire liquor cabinets.



So what would make our humanity incompatible with the machinations (literal and metaphorical) of advocates of radical enhancement? In Humanity’s End, I identify humanity with the biological species Homo sapiens. According to Ernst Mayr’s influential definition, biological species are “groups of interbreeding natural populations that are reproductively isolated from other such groups” (Mayr 1963, 30). Racism may occasionally erect barriers between Malawians, Finns, Koreans, and Samoans. But these are only ever temporary and disappear together with the bigotry that generates them. The reproductive barrier between Homo sapiens and Pan troglodytes is, in contrast, no mere cultural artefact. Humans could mate with chimpanzees only under the most thoroughly artificial circumstances


READ THE REST http://jetpress.org/v21/agar.htm

Views: 82

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

"Destroying the New World Order"

TOP CONTENT THIS WEEK

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!

mobile page

12160.info/m

12160 Administrators

 

Latest Activity

Tammy is now a member of 12160 Social Network
15 hours ago
Less Prone commented on cheeki kea's photo
Thumbnail

The Cartel

"In his 1995 book; Bloodlines of the illuminati, Frits Sringmaier listed the following 13…"
15 hours ago
tjdavis posted a photo
16 hours ago
tjdavis posted a blog post
23 hours ago
Less Prone commented on Doc Vega's blog post What Four UFO Whistle Blowers All Suffered in Common?
"This falls in the category of political assassination, a very shameful policy of eliminating people…"
yesterday
Doc Vega posted blog posts
yesterday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post The Forest Devil
"cheeki kea Thank you, just one thing. The Choctaw Indian who came to the rescue was a war veteran…"
yesterday
cheeki kea commented on Doc Vega's blog post The Forest Devil
"Well that is one fine story you've got going there Doc V. with a very interesting roll up. I…"
yesterday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post “Night of Horror” Finland WWII 1939 and a Russian Massacre
"Just another bizarre chapter in WWII that seems more suspect as paranormal."
Sunday
Doc Vega's 7 blog posts were featured
Sunday
Burbia's blog post was featured

Former President Trump?

When was this article written? It is attributed to Victor Davis Hanson. He is a Fellow at Hoover…See More
Sunday
Less Prone commented on Burbia's blog post Former President Trump?
"It must be an unintended mistake "former". But that Trump demanded to keep Khan away is a…"
Sunday
Less Prone favorited Doc Vega's blog post The Mistake We Made in America
Sunday
Less Prone favorited Doc Vega's blog post “Night of Horror” Finland WWII 1939 and a Russian Massacre
Sunday
Less Prone commented on Doc Vega's blog post “Night of Horror” Finland WWII 1939 and a Russian Massacre
"Quite an uplifting story of the winter war. Finland was overpowered by ten to one and could still…"
Sunday
Doc Vega posted a blog post

Elon Weighs in on Charlie Kirk's Assassination and How it is an Instrument of Social Control

For a very long time now there has been in place mass population behavioral control operations that…See More
Saturday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post The Forest Devil
"Less Prone Thanks Buddy I worked on it for 3 days! "
Friday
Less Prone favorited Doc Vega's blog post The Forest Devil
Friday
Less Prone commented on Doc Vega's blog post The Forest Devil
"You have spun a great story, congratulations!"
Friday
cheeki kea commented on Bob of the Family Renner's photo
Friday

© 2025   Created by truth.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

content and site copyright 12160.info 2007-2019 - all rights reserved. unless otherwise noted