Human enhancement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Human enhancement is a loaded and controversial term[1] referring to any attempt, whether temporary or permanent, to overcome the current limitations of the human body, whether through natural or artificial means. The term is sometimes applied to the use of technological means to select or alter human aptitudes and other phenotypical characteristics, whether or not the alteration results in characteristics that lie beyond the existing human range. Here, the test is whether the technology is used for non-therapeutic purposes. Some bioethicists restrict the term to the non-therapeutic application of specific technologies — neuro-, cyber-, gene-, and nano-technologies — to human biology.[2]
Contents |
[edit] Overview
While in some circles the expression "human enhancement" is roughly synonymous with human genetic engineering,[3][4] it is used most often to refer to the general application of the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC) to improve human performance.[5]
Since the 1990s, several academics and activists (such as some of the fellows of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies[6]) have risen to become cogent advocates of the case for human enhancement while other academics (such as the members of President Bush's Council on Bioethics[7]) and activists (such as the members of the ETC Group[8]) as its most outspoken critics.[9]
Advocacy of the case for human enhancement is increasingly becoming synonymous with “transhumanism”, which is a controversial ideology and movement which has emerged to support the recognition and protection of the right of citizens to either maintain or modify their own minds and bodies; so as to guarantee them the freedom of choice and informed consent of using human enhancement technologies on themselves and their children.[9] In a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article, political economist and philosopher Francis Fukuyama designated transhumanism as one of the world's most dangerous ideas because he believes that human enhancement may undermine the egalitarian ideals of liberal democracy, through a fundamental alteration of "human nature".[10]
Neuromarketing consultant Zack Lynch argues that neurotechnologies will have a more immediate effect on society than gene therapy and will face less resistance as a pathway of radical human enhancement. He also argues that the concept of "enablement" needs to be added to the debate over "therapy" versus "enhancement".[11]
[edit] Criticism
The most common criticism of human enhancement is that it is or will often be practiced with a reckless and selfish short-term perspective that is ignorant of the long-term consequences on individuals and the rest of society, such as the fear that it may threaten public health or "naturalize" social hierarchies.[12][13]
Accordingly, advocates of human enhancement who stress social responsibility defend and promote rigorous, independent safety testing of human enhancement technologies, as well as affordable, universal access to these technologies.[9]
For more criticisms of human enhancement, see criticisms of transhumanism.
[edit] Technologies
Human enhancement technologies (HET) are techniques that can be used not simply for treating illness and disability, but also for enhancing human capacities and characteristics.[14] In some circles, the expression "human enhancement technologies" is synonymous with emerging technologies or converging technologies.[5]
 |
Please help improve this article by expanding this section. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. Please remove this message once the section has been expanded. This article has been tagged since February 2007. |
The following are examples of technologies that are said to have been, or could be, used to enhance human capacities and characteristics:[15]
[edit] References
- ^ Carrico, Dale (2007). "Modification, Consent, and Prosthetic Self-Determination". Retrieved on 2007-04-03.
- ^ Hughes, James (2004). "Human Enhancement on the Agenda". Retrieved on 2007-02-02.
- ^ Agar, Nicholas (2004). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. ISBN 1-4051-2390-7.
- ^ Parens, Erik (2000). Enhancing Human Traits: Ethical and Social Implications. Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-780-4.
- ^ a b Roco, Mihail C. and Bainbridge, William Sims, eds. (2004). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Springer. ISBN 1402012543.
- ^ Bailey, Ronald (2006). "The Right to Human Enhancement: And also uplifting animals and the rapture of the nerds". Retrieved on 2007-03-03.
- ^ Members of the President's Council on Bioethics (2003). Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness. President's Council on Bioethics.
- ^ Mooney, Pat Roy (2002). "Beyong Cloning: Making Well People "Better"". Retrieved on 2007-02-02.
- ^ a b c Hughes, James (2004). Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-4198-1.
- ^ Fukuyama, Francis (2004). "The world's most dangerous ideas: transhumanism". Retrieved on 2006-05-01.
- ^ R. U. Sirius. "The NeuroAge: Zack Lynch In Conversation With R.U. Sirius", Life Enhancement Products, 2005. Retrieved on February 2, 2007.
- ^ Fukuyama, Francis (2002). Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. Farrar Straus & Giroux. ISBN 0-374-23643-7.
- ^ Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future. "Human "Enhancement"". Retrieved on 2007-02-02.
- ^ Enhancement Technologies Group (1998). "Writings by group participants". Retrieved on 2007-02-02.
- ^ Naam, Ramez (2004). More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement. Broadway Press. ISBN 0-7679-1843-6.
