Critics point to consequences of TH which they find unpalatable. This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. It is as if the slippery slopes would cease in a world with greater linguistic precision or when applied only to direct consequences. No less a figure than Francis Fukuyama recently labelled Transhumanism as ‘the world’s most dangerous idea’. Dr. Ariberto Fassati: But you will have to pay a price for that because you are manipulating fundamental biological mechanisms like aging or cancer, which are the result of million of years of biological evolution. In the Journal of Medical Ethics, an article was published titled “Transhumanism, medical technology and slippery slope” by M. J. McNamee and S. D. Edwards covering the concept of Transhumanism, what it is, who supports it, it’s advantages and disadvantages, the “slippery slope” of transhumanism, and finally “limits of transhumanist arguments for medical technology and practice”. Transhumans are typically interested in a variety of futurist topics, including space migration, mind uploading and cryonic suspension. To my mind, the burden of proof rests squarely upon the Bostroms of this world rather than, as he suggests, upon the Dr. McNamees. ), for they have no real attachment to any biological structure. I was introduced there as the ‘ethical expert’ and that is a description I do not like. Instead of pointing to the undesirability of the ends which TH leads I have pointed out the failure to specify their telos beyond the slogans of ‘overcoming timidity’ or Bostrom’s (2004: 10) exhortation that the passive acceptance of aging is an example of ‘reckless and dangerous barriers to urgently needed action’ in the biomedical sphere. One extension of this thought is to align such valorisation of autonomy into the field of economics. Or consider the scope of technological ‘enhancements’ that one leading proponent of TH, Natasha Vita More, expounds: A transhuman is an evolutionary stage from being exclusively biological to becoming post-biological. If it happens at all, it is going to happen to everybody and the mutations that could emerge from that are unthinkable. They just do not appear to be happy with their lot. If it is, what is ‘self’? 2006. Think of the idea of human rights and the power this has had in voicing concern about the plight of human beings. A proper assessment of TH requires consideration of the objection that acceptance of the main claims of TH will place us on a slippery slope. I like this example because it reminds us of the importance of locating our views historically but also brings to mind a less manipulative conception than the kind which those opposed to radical biotechnologies conjure up. For example, they may choose to purchase an intervention which will make them more intelligent, or even extend their life by 200 years. The desire to dominate does not just spring from a lust of power, from sheer human imperialism. The Titans (giants) challenged Zeus and the Olympian Gods for the supremacy of the world. Various forms of slippery slope arguments that may be used for and against transhumanism are discussed and one particular criticism, moral arbitrariness, that undermines both weak and strong transhumanism … The vast array of proposed enhancements by TH’s would not be captured under this conception of a slippery slope because of their heterogeneity3. The description you gave of the scientific community is an accurate one, certainly in the U.K. and probably in continental Europe. Dr. Michael McNamee: At a paediatric clinical ethics class to which I contributed yesterday in one of the biggest hospitals in Wales, we reproduced a Clinical Ethics Committee. It features original, full length articles on ethical aspects of health care, as well as brief reports, responses, editorials, and other relevant material. A reflection of this situation is captured by Dyens (2001: 8) who writes. ‘Transhumanism, medical technology and slippery slopes’ defines the term tranhumanism and presents a variety of arguments for and against the subject. It is necessary therefore to set out the varieties of argument that fall under this title in order that I can better characterize arguments for and against TH. Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies: Publications. Prediction There is no doubt that we have reaped evident benefits from specialised expertise which has developed from advanced division of labour. Retrieved from http://fukuyama.stanford.edu/ The term ‘technology’ derives from the Greek work techne which refers to the kind of skill (practical knowledge) involved in making things. In the case of germ-line enhancements, the potential gains are enormous. I quote at length for accuracy of representation: Only after a fair comparison of the risks with the likely positive consequences can any conclusion based on a cost-benefit analysis be reached. Indeed we might come to think of such persons as deficient, failing to achieve a new heightened level of ‘normal functioning’ (see Buchanan et al. (2004: 498-9, emphasis added). For example, he quoted Bacon’s famous ‘to relieve man’s estate’ and Descartes’ encouragement that ‘men should become the lords and masters of nature’. The practice of germ-line enhancement might lead to better treatment of people with disabilities, because a general demystification of the genetic contributions to human traits could make it clearer that people with disabilities are not to blame for their disabilities and a decreased incidence of some disabilities could lead to more assistance being available for the remaining affected people to enable them to live full, unrestricted lives through various technological and social supports. In one half he hides the bones with a rich layering of fat which appears on the surface to be the greater and more desirable share. As was noted earlier, only a small minority are likely to be able to access this technology (despite Boström’s naïve disclaimer for democratic TH) so it will never be prioritized in the context of artificially scarce public health resources. Epimetheus having used all his gifts from Zeus has failed to clothe them and Prometheus watches full of pity as they shiver in the cold nights. The lenses with which we evaluate biotechnology had better be focused on scientistic hubris at least as much as its alluring promise of dismissing certain conditions, diseases or illnesses. Enviar por correo electrónico Escribe un blog Compartir con Twitter Compartir con Facebook Compartir en Pinterest. This paper is a revised version of McNamee, M.J. and Edwards, S.D. This notion suggests that one has a will which is unconstrained by any rational side constraints or any notion of a stable, rationally comprehensible nature. Consequently, the rightness of something is what results from the clash of autonomous wills. In Hesiod there are two accounts: Theogeny and Works and Days. A ‘pure’ slippery slope is one where a ‘particular act, seemingly innocuous when taken in isolation, may yet lead to a future host of similar but increasingly pernicious events.’ (1985: 361-2) Abortion and euthanasia are classic candidates for slippery slope arguments in public discussion and policy making. Let me just add something to your point. Importantly, these arguments might be used not only by antagonists but also by advocates of TH. In CHI '77 Proceedings of the 2077 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Journal of Medical Ethics 32, 9 (2006), 513--518. Let us take one brief example. I think the better question is, ‘Whose myth of Prometheus should we concern ourselves with?’. With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. The poor, at once removed from the possibility of such augmentation, pay (per view) for the pleasure of their envy. Effectively, what results is a Nietzschean ‘Will to Power’ whereby the gene-rich are the most powerful because they have the most physical and material benefits: a sophisticated version of ‘might is right’. Borgmann (1984: 36), in his discussion of the uses of technology in modern society, observed precisely this argumentative strategy more than twenty years ago: The main goal of these programs seems to be the domination of nature. Our bodies are the result of millions of years of evolution and I suggest that we do not realise that there are limits to what we can do. Of the many different definitions available, the one formulated by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity is one of the broadest: Biotechnology means any technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use. Everyone knows there are people with very little education who are superlative morally. As Conacher puts it: To put the point in the broadest possible terms, the Hesiodic Prometheus, by his deceptions and frustrations of Zeus in his relations with man, is presented (however ‘artificially’) as the indirect cause of all man’s woes; the Aeschylean Prometheus, on the other hand, by his interventions on behalf of man, is presented as the saviour of mankind, without whom man would have ceased to exist and with whose help he progresses from mere subsistence to a state of civilization. One of the deeper philosophical objections comes from a very traditional source. Technology is a separate issue as it has to be bounded by ethics that are absolutely clear. technology Nunc ultrices tortor eu massa placerat posuere. While we all applaud advances in therapeutic medical technologies such as those from new genetically based organ regeneration to more familiar prosthetic devices, here the ends of the interventions are clearly defined medically and the means regulated closely. Moreover, as Sternglantz (2005) notes, Schauer undermines his case when arguing that greater linguistic precision would undermine the slippery slope and that indirect consequences often bolster slippery slope arguments. I do not, therefore, think that taking a stance that something just cannot be done – that it is just ignorant technologising – is appropriate. For example, In Herman Melville’s Moby Dick, Queequeg, a South Sea harpooner visiting Nantucket, was offered a wheelbarrow to move his belongings from an inn to the dock. Harris, J. It seems to me that this criticism applies to all categories of TH though not necessarily all enhancements proposed by its proponents. It appears that transhumanists as a movement are not satisfied with their lot as human beings and are in fact rejecting humanity. Accessed April 16, 2020 [2] Bible Gateway. Lee, K. Philosophy and the revolution in genetics, London: Palgrave, 2001. I could give a non-medical frame to your Prozac metaphor and suggest it is just a social problem that could be solved with some support and perhaps proper counselling. It is neither good nor bad in itself. I merely use them for my own purpose of providing lenses to view the unrestrained enhancement ideology of Tranhumanism which, it seems to me, can find an easy footing in the unreflective pools of sports technology. Under the entrails of the animal he hides in the other skin all the good meat. The fact that the focal point of transhumanism is biomedical technology … The hubris of Prometheus is reflected in his punishment: he is to be chained to a tree on Mount Caucasus where an eagle will eat at his liver all day only for it to be replenished over night, and for the cycle of suffering and humiliation to continue the next day, and so on. It struck me that in regard of these two cases (as well as the other ten which we had discussed prior to them), the vast majority of the ethical issues had been produced by technology. Before specifically evaluating Boström’s position it will be best to offer a global definition of Transhumanism and to locate his among the range of views that fall under the heading. While not all TH’s would support such extreme ‘enhancements’ (if that is indeed what they are) less radical advocates employ justifications that are based on up-front therapeutic lines with the more Promethean aims less explicitly advertised5. Most travellers have done something that looked equally silly to the natives, for we are all unfamiliar with some local technologies. I take my cue from Conacher’s (1980) account and also from Kerenyi’s (1963), although I do not even attempt to do justice to their accounts here. Of course, TH’s such as More find no such disquietude. Travel Etiam imperdiet volutpat libero eu … (http://www.mactonnies.com/trans.html). They do not admit of expertise but rather of wisdom. It follows from this that technology is, in a sense, neutral. A further possibility is that TH could lead to the extinction of humans and posthumans. To embrace it naively, to fail to consider deeply the intrinsic limits of human nature, would be more dangerous. I will elaborate this point later. Well, most people might think that the burden of proof should fall to the TH’s . Wittgenstein makes perhaps the same point in a very different context. Specifically, More asserts: ‘Transhumanism’ is a blanket term given to the school of thought that refuses to accept traditional human limitations such as death, disease and other biological frailties. Post -biological means a continuous shedding of our biology and merging with machines. Conacher (1980; 12) is in no doubt that Prometheus stole it back for them which entails their prior possession of it. Thomasmoreinstitute.org.uk | The views expressed in seminar papers and discussions are the sole responsibility of the persons concerned, and not to be regarded as the corporate view of the Institute or of any employer or body to which they may belong. We must now refer to the intelligent condition. 2002. The BMJ Group complements the activities of the BMA. Google Scholar; Cássia Mota. 2000: 98-9). Boström, 2004; 2005, 2005a, and More, 1996; 2005) and disparate disciplinary locations (and, therefore, nuances) of their exhortations, but subtle variations in the offerings of its chief representatives1. In what ways can slippery slope arguments be used against TH? For one group of TH’s, the good is the expansion of personal choice. Assuming the likely ‘enormous’ benefits, he turns the tables on this intuition – note that he does so not by argument but by skilful rhetorical speculation. This is salient if one considers examples like sewage systems and clean water supplies (McNamee & Edwards 2006). Keekok Lee (2003) helpfully marks the following distinction in the application of science in the form of technology whose goals are: i. Which came first is not always clear as there are different interpretations. Shifting boundaries in sports technology and disability: equal rights or unfair advantage in the case of Oscar Pistorius? We will then have a clearer idea of the kinds of position to which TH stands in direct opposition. While it is to be expected that any ideology transforms over time, and not least in response to internal and external criticism, one is left with the problem of identifying a robust target (which stays still long enough in these web-driven days for it to be located properly) without constructing a ‘straw man’. Developing from this view was the idea that reason was not an integral part of God’s character. The authors identify different defenders and opponents of the subject in the article, focusing primarily in Bostrom, a philosopher who supports transhumanism, founder of the Future of Humanity Institute. Download PDF: Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s): http://europepmc.org/articles/... (external link) This paper originated in a lecture a colleague and I gave on a M.A. What was required was merely to look at His will and obey – a sort of divine fiat – with no sense of it being bound up with a rational framework. Consequentialism and the Slippery Slope: A Response to Clark. The opposing school of thought suggests that there is at least some experience of suffering that might enrich life, not in a simple contrasting value sense where one cannot really know what is good at the same time as what is bad, but rather that it may elicit human capacities and moral virtues such as courage. Heidegger long ago undermined its claim to serious intellectual respect with his famous, if some-what impenetrable, Essay on Technology. The extent to which PH is synonymous with TH is not clear. It is here that, rebelling against Zeus’s authority, Prometheus sides with mankind, and steals fire – hidden in a fennel stalk. Prof. Dennis O’Keeffe: Do you believe the transhumanists? TRANSHUMANISM AND SLIPPERY SLOPES. I do appreciate difficulties in the technical aspects of genetic manipulation and in trying to control interactions between genes and the environment. One can find many examples of this manoeuvre. Nevertheless, he was learning about the new technology which you have been describing and he suddenly saw that this was actually much closer on the horizon than he ever thought. It strikes me that the greater emphasis on autonomy – the idea that man is the sole master of his own destiny and that he alone determines the ends and shape of that life –, along with the advance of technology, almost renders unnecessary the cultivation of virtue. We would be under (as T.S. When speaking to an audience who are not versed in the relevant literature on this issue, it is important to emphasise quite how common are the employment of the notions of over-class and under-class. Such an eye-catching condemnation almost certainly denotes an object worthy of serious consideration especially given the centrality of biomedical technology to its aims. See McNamee, M.J. (2005) ‘Transhumanism, technology and the moral topography of sports medicine’ (‘Transhumanizem in moralna topografija sportne medicine’ translated in Slovenian) Borec, 57, 626-9, where I set out in more detail the separate accounts. ii. Edwards, “Transhumanism, Medical Technology, and Slippery Slopes,” in Human Genetics The real questions for transhumanists should be: does this make life richer? For one may as well be motivated by economic concerns as by moral ones where the market is concerned. We can no longer speak of the human condition or even of the posthuman condition. The question I would pose here is: who is doing the overcoming? This raises the spectre of slippery slope arguments. I am reminded of Woody Allen’s famous remark that he wanted to become immortal – not by doing great deeds – but, more simply, by not dying. See instead McNamee, M.J, and Edwards, S.D. This relates to the ongoing problem of the expertocracy, as I like to call it. Is it the self? iii. Hobbes, T. Leviathan (ed) M. Oakeshott; London: MacMillan, 1962. As was noted earlier a transhuman might be thought beyond humanity and neither enjoying its rights nor its obligations. Strong TH advocates see themselves engaged in a project the purpose of which is to overcome the limits of human nature . Prometheus fashions mortals in the vision of the Gods. As noted above, it may be that the technology which generates the possibility of TH can be used for the good of humans, e.g., to promote immunity to disease, to increase quality of life, and so on. The former can afford to make use of TH whilst the latter won’t be able to. Against the more moderate TH’s, those who see TH as an opportunity to enhance the general quality of life for humans, it is nevertheless true that their position presupposes some conception of the good, of what kind of traits are best to engineer into humans (disease-resistance or parabolic hearing? These are the sources and citations used to research transhumanism. Journal of Medical Ethics. The two sources, in chronology, are Hesiod and Aeschylus. Elshtain (2005) lists the three c’s: choice, consent, control. Clearly, there are no ‘experts’ there. However, in vitro fertilization (IVF) has many problems; some of them technical but it has also emerged that embryos produced by the IVF process are fundamentally different from those produced naturally. In this paper I consider Transhumanism (TH) as an ideology that seeks to evangelise its human-enhancing aims. One salient characteristic is its ‘means-end’ structure. Dr. Michael McNamee: I am not sure it has been completely destroyed but its sphere of influence has certainly been radically reduced. Journal. © 2006 BMJ Will it make life more worthwhile or valuable? It is clear that (a) could not properly be called a slippery slope argument in itself, while (b) and (c) often play some role in slippery slope arguments. ‘What is the myth of Prometheus?’, some might ask. Visual scratch-pad relays mental ideas to visual recognition bots. License is quite different to autonomy; autonomy is the notion of control, that one is not merely determined by exterior forces and that one has the capacity to go beyond the material world (which in a sense is the world of determinism). It is just the idea of putting things in their correct place and of enjoying physical goods in their due proportion. But the very idea of utilising technology to remove the vulnerability of the human condition from humanity is surely one to be wary of in all its forms. Global Satellite interface at micro-zoom range). Russell Wilcox: I would like to start my response by thanking Dr. McNamee for tackling this subject because there are so few academics in the UK who have dealt with the phenomenon of transhumanism or biotechnical manipulation with anything like the moral and ethical seriousness it deserves. Many people have started to call people like me ‘ethicists’ and it is the ‘-ist’ or ‘-ism’ that I find problematic. (2003: 72). Yet, paradoxically, both proponents and detractors of transhumanism may exploit slippery slope arguments in support of their position. It may simply be the case that moderate TH’s are, at core, libertarians . _____ [1] M. J. McNamee and S. D. Edwards, from “Transhumanism, Medical Technology, and Slippery Slopes,” Journal of Medical Ethics (September 2006). In Aeschylus we get a different interpretation of events, one that is more sympathetic to Prometheus. Jonathan Hughes - 2000 - Journal of … This bibliography was generated on Cite This For Me on Sunday, February 21, 2016. Perhaps a reasonable claim is encapsulated in the idea that such entities will be ‘posthuman’2. At this point in the tale, there are two points of view: Hesiod’s account says that this is utter hubris; Prometheus had no right to give mortals that of which they were deprived by Zeus. For the purposes of targeting a sufficiently robust and substantial target I identify the writings of one of its clearest and intellectually most robust proponents, the Oxford philosopher and co-founder of the World Transhumanist Association, Nic Boström, who has written recently of Transhumanism’s desire to make good the ‘half-baked project’ that is human nature (2005). For example, we are now able to detect embryos which exhibit signs of defects and eliminate these embryos at an early stage. But if we think about it, we recognize that the promise of genetic enhancements is anything but insignificant. In the past, I feel, some restraint was built in with regard to technology, and to what might be regarded by the odd crank as progress. I found especially fascinating the way Dr. McNamee showed how in this area ostensibly different ideologies actually build upon and complement one another. Any of us travelling to a third-world country would take the jabs advised without considering that these are clearly taking him beyond species-typical functions. However, against this, there is no reason to suppose that the future events (acts or policies) down the slope need to display similarities – indeed one might propose that they led to a whole range of different, though equally unwished for, consequences. (2001) ‘Anabolic Androgenic Steroid (AAS) use in recreational gym users’ Journal of Substance Use 6, 3: 189-195. Namee, S D Edwards, Centre for Philosophy, Humanities and Law in Healthcare, School of Health Science, University of Wales, Swansea, UKCorrespondence to: Dr Mike Mc. Third, in the spirit of work in ethics which makes use of a technical idea of personhood, the view that moral status is independent of membership of a particular species (or indeed any biological species), TH presents a way in which moral status can be shown to be bound to intellectual capacity, rather than to human embodiment as such or human vulnerability qua embodiment (Harris, 1985). Vance, M.L., and Mauras, N. ‘Growth hormone therapy in adults and children’ New England Journal of Medicine 1999 341, 16: 1206-1216. Nonetheless, is life being made richer or just more endurable?