On the alteration of man...

In a world that is becoming more and more artificial, where do we draw the line? Nowadays, even the idea of artificial manipulation of human genes is not unheard of. It is not too crazy of a vision that one day, humans can be perfect or near perfect. It is nevertheless a chilling, sci-fi sounding thought: that perhaps in the future, our parents can determine what we grow up to look like, everyone could be created to look beautiful, we would not have to worry about diseases or terminal illnesses, we could use our brain to its fullest capacity, we could be created with specific abilities (whether it be athletic, musical, etc.). It is only a matter of time before we can no longer suppress our urge to be better, to surpass natural design, to become a better race. Why is this a bad idea? Why would we not want to improve the human species? Why would we not want to become stronger, smarter, healthier?

            Transhumanism is a movement supporting the possibility of fundamentally altering humans through technologies in order to eliminate aging, enhance intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. The idea is to overcome fundamental human limitations and basically create a superior species with expanded abilities. This idea has been growing in popularity and gaining more attention within the past few years once people realized this was actually a feasible idea. The appeal of it stems from our desire to constantly become better. Why should we settle for what we are when we can be something better? This idea of creating a better human becomes more and more tempting to us. We as a race are gifted with our talent to alter and manipulate what is around us in order to survive or live better/easier. Why should we draw the line when it comes to altering us as humans?

            “In a sense, the goal toward which humanity has been striving for millennia has been to liberate ourselves from more and more of our ancestors’ biological constraints” (Bailey 1). Through transhumanism, we can rid ourselves of harmful diseases and illnesses that have no known cure at the moment. We can make people less vulnerable, maybe even give back natural movement to people who have lost limbs. However, critics are wary of even this idea as some debate whether or not this is moral. Should we be allowed to design genes we are not born with in order to allow us to function in ways that we could never have functioned naturally?

            Through this idea of transhumanism, the issue of individuality, personality, and what makes us, us arises. Would altering our brains to make better use of it change who we are as a person? Could we eventually come to a point in which it is not unheard of to have memory chips implanted in our brains? In my opinion, I think a person develops who they are as an individual through experiences. Perfecting the mechanical and functioning aspect of the brain should have no effect on what we have experienced, our memories, our perception of the world. Therefore, the part of our brain that controls our feelings and personality would remain unscathed. In addition, the human brain is a complex and often inexplicable organ. Although fundamentally made up of cells and electrical firings, the way it is all fit together dictates how each particular brain will function. The human brain is one of the greatest achievements of nature/evolution, impossible to replicate.

            Although there are legitimate reasons to fear this form of advancement such as possible enslavement of “inferior humans” and inequality, ultimately, I feel if this type of advancement were to occur, it will be inevitable. Fukuyama also brings up a good point that if we start transforming ourselves into something superior, these enhanced creatures may feel entitled to more rights compared to those who haven’t been modified. This poses an issue of equality on an even larger scale because there are entire nations that cannot afford the technology to make these modifications. Bioethicists such as George Annas, Lori Andrews, and Rosario Isasi hold more extreme beliefs of what may happen when we create a new species; the “posthumans” will likely view the normal humans as inferior, even savages, and fit for slavery or slaugher while the normal humans may see the “posthumans” as a threat and attempt to kill them before they themselves are killed or enslaved. In my opinion however, because of society, humans should be used to political and moral principles that apply and we should not worry that posthumans will upset this balance.

            Although the idea of transhumanism is radical and perhaps even scary at this time, I believe that it can ultimately benefit humanity and society. If we have the ability to make ourselves better and more suited for this changing world, why not do it? “The human race is a pretty sorry mess with stubborn diseases, physical limitations, and short lives. Throw in humanity’s jealousies, violence, and constant anxieties, the transhumanist project begins to look down right reasonable” (Fukuyama). We as humans constantly strive to become better and continue to research developments that can benefit the society as a whole. We have been manipulating our surroundings and liberating ourselves from our biological constraints since the beginning of the species. It would almost be irresponsible for us to ignore possible technological progress and rule this idea out based on fear alone. We are destined to continue moving forward as a species and this change seems almost inevitable at the moment. The only question is when it will happen.