Dialogue 52 (2):377-394 (2013)

Abstract
The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the difficulties involved in interdisciplinary work on the question of the risks associated with the ethical and social acceptability of human enhancement through the development of nanotechnologies. These difficulties emerge in the context of the debate between transhumanism, whose principal defenders have backgrounds in the natural sciences, and humanism, whose principal defenders have backgrounds in the social sciences and the humanities. The aim of the paper is to demonstrate that essentially transhumanists and humanists differ on these questions: the identification of risks and impacts; the assessment that serves as the foundation for the acceptability or unacceptability of these risks and impacts; and faith in the capacity of science to overcome the identified risks to human beings. This paper’s presentation of the divergences that exist in the debate between transhumanism and humanism constitutes a necessary first step towards intervening in that debate in an interdisciplinary manner. L’objectif de cet article est de montrer les difficultés du travail interdisciplinaire sur la question du risque dans l’acceptabilité éthique et sociale de l’amélioration humaine par le développement des nanotechnologies. Ces difficultés émergent du contexte du débat entre le transhumanisme, dont les principaux protagonistes proviennent des sciences de la nature, et l’humanisme, dont les principaux défenseurs proviennent du milieu des sciences humaines et sociales. Notre objectif est de montrer que les positions des transhumanistes et des humanistes diffèrent essentiellement sur plusieurs aspects de la question : l’identification des risques et des impacts, l’évaluation qui fonde l’acceptabilité ou non des risques et des impacts, et la foi en la capacité de la science de surmonter les risques identifiés pour l’être humain. Rendre ces divergences explicites constitue un premier pas nécessaire en vue de pouvoir y intervenir de façon interdisciplinaire.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0012217313000607
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,259
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Oneself as Another.Paul Ricoeur & Kathleen Blamey - 1992 - Religious Studies 30 (3):368-371.
A History of Transhumanist Thought.Nick Bostrom - 2005 - Journal of Evolution and Technology 14 (1):1-25.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Thomistic Appraisal of Human Enhancement Technologies.Jason T. Eberl - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (4):289-310.
Transhumanism Between Human Enhancement and Technological Innovation.Ion Iuga - 2016 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 3 (1):79-88.
Vile Sovereigns in Bioethical Debate.Melinda Hall - 2013 - Disability Studies Quarterly 33 (4).
Moral Transhumanism: The Next Step.M. N. Tennison - 2012 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (4):405-416.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-12-12

Total views
35 ( #327,351 of 2,518,693 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #408,186 of 2,518,693 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes