In Defense Of Human Morality, And Francis Fukuyama's Our Posthuman Humanity

1144 Words 5 Pages
It is important that as we start to deal with emerging issues relating to biobiotechnology, we have some sort of basis to judge each issue on. Many philosophers have presented arguments on what is important to preserve in humans. In their minds, it is important that any biobiotechnologies that we allow to be used in society must preserve these characteristics in the human race. In this paper, I will be presenting the viewpoints of Fukuyama, Bostrom, and Janicaud, and explaining which philosopher has the best argument as to what is worth preserving in humans in today’s world. In Francis Fukuyama’s book, Our Posthuman Future, he presents the idea that all humans have human dignity. This human dignity is an emergent property from human nature, …show more content…
Bostrom views what makes us human as more than simply DNA. He believes that it is important to incorporate the many dynamic things about humans into what makes us unique. For instance, our social abilities and our use of biotechnology. Because of this, it is not a physical thing that Bostrom thinks is necessary to preserve, but rather a concept. Our capacity for making our own choices and rational decisions for ourselves is the most important thing to preserve. This does not limit many technological changes we can make to ourselves, but it does limit the changes we can make to our offspring, as well as the development and use of new weapons. Doing harm to others or killing them would effectively diminish a person’s ability to choose for themselves, so it makes sense that weapons would be prohibited. This is a very clear-cut example. However, in terms of modification to children, it can be tricky. A genetic change to a child which would make them better at one skill, but worse at another, can be seen as limiting their ability to choose to do the second skill. As a result, this would be restricted in Bostrom’s views (Bostrom,

Related Documents