Reading Posthuman Ethics in Daniel Wilson’s Amped
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In 20th century and beyond, humans have witnessed numerous advances in technology which have opened new horizons. Science and technology redesigned human life exponentially and humans always search for a more technological world and hence more comfort and ease. As such, going past human confinement could be accessible through a few changes in human form, but these changes posture a contentious point since people grow into being more reliant on technology in order to execute their desires and needs. What will happen to humanness and humanity? What will happen to their moralities and behaviors? In this manner, technological development could have both promising and discouraging pictures within the human mind. The current study cites Daniel H. Wilson’s Amped (2013) to discuss the clash of views between Transhumanists and Bioconservatives. Transhumanists believe that human improvement advances should be made broadly accessible, where people could adopt these innovations and apply them to themselves to have a better life. In particular, bioconservatives consider human enhancement technologies as ‘dehumanizing’ for these technologies might weaken human dignity and affect something that is profoundly valuable about being human. As such, Posthuman theory is consulted in order to analyze the ethical and moral concerns of human enhancement technology in Wilson’s Amped. The findings are summed in the importance of ethics in any kind of enhancement and conclude that the trustworthy source is a priority to ensure success.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Agar, N. (2007). Where to Transhumanism? The Literature Reaches a Critical Mass. The Hastings Center Report, 37(3), 12-17.
Bostrom, N., Roache, R., Petersen, T. S., Ryberg, J., & Wolf, C. (2008). New waves in applied ethics. Basingstoke, Hampshire, [etc.: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bostrum, N. (2007). Human vs. posthuman. The Hastings Center Report, 37(5), 4.
Douglas, T. (2008), Moral Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 25: 228-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.2008.00412.x
Hook, C. C. (2004). Transhumanism and posthumanism. Encyclopedia of bioethics.
Kass, L. R. (2003). Ageless bodies, happy souls: biotechnology and the pursuit of perfection. The New Atlantis, (1), 9-28.
Koch, T. (2010). Enhancing who? Enhancing what? Ethics, bioethics, and transhumanism. Journal of medicine and Philosophy, 35(6), 685-699
Kurzweil, R. (1999). The age of spiritual machines: how we will live, work and think in the new age of intelligent machines. Orion.
Lake, C. B. (2014). Prophets of the posthuman: American fiction, biotechnology, and the ethics of personhood. University of Notre Dame Press.
Sandel, M. J. (2007). The case against perfection. Harvard university press.
Savulescu, J., & Kahane, G. (2009). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. Bioethics, 23(5), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00687.x
Waters, B. (2016). From human to posthuman: Christian theology and technology in a postmodern world. Routledge.
Wilson, D. H. (2013). Amped. Vintage.
Wilson, S., & Haslam, N. (2009). Is the future more or less human? Differing views of humanness in the posthumanism debate. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 39(2), 247-266.
Bostrom, N. (January 01, 2003). When machines outsmart humans. Futures Guildford-, 35, 7, 759-764.