Abstract
This paper concentrates on the current recovery of the debate on human nature. Two
causes for this revival are identified: i) the contemporary general trend toward a naturalization
of the philosophy, and ii) the uncertainty aroused by the new possibilities of (bio)technological
intervention on humans. The main thesis here is that a meaningful assessment of the new
(bio)technologies, as applied to human beings, requires the support of a concept of human
nature no radically naturalized. Both, the denial of human nature, as its radical naturalization,
make the human being available for any (bio)technological intervention. Both ideas will deprive
us even of the criteria for evaluating interventions.
The defence of this thesis is conducted by the following steps: firstly, we study the
current lines of thought that deny the existence of human nature, as well as the proponents of a
radical naturalization of it. The next step deals with techniques to improve human life. I will see
the more traditional techniques for cultivation and therapy, as well as the newest technologies,
even futuristic ones, for the alleged improvement of human beings, known as Human
Enhancement Technologies (HET). The last section proposes to assess separately the
technologies as such, on the one hand, and the philosophies that call for a trans/post-humanist
application of them, on the other one. The technologies should be evaluated case by case. But
human nature is required in each case as a criterion. The philosophies aimed at overcoming
human nature will result, therefore, an obstacle for a proper assessment of any
(bio)technological intervention on human beings. The search for a suitable concept of human
nature, given our technological capabilities, should start, I suggest, by the Kantian and
Aristotelian tradition.
References
Agamben, G. (2003). Homo sacer: El poder soberano y la nuda vida. Pre-Textos.
Aristóteles. (1994). Política. Gredos.
Aristóteles. (1995). Ética Nicomáquea. Gredos.
Bertolaso, M. (2010). “Super-naturali” come vampiri: L’enhancement in medicina. En C. Cullen (Ed.), La medicina dei nuovi vampiri. Academia Universa Press.
Carpintero, F. (2008). La ley natural. Encuentro.
Dublin, M. (1992). Futurehype: The tyranny of prophecy. Penguin Books.
Foucault, M. (2007). El nacimiento de la biopolítica. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Fukuyama, F. (2002). El fin del hombre: Consecuencias de la revolución biotecnológica. Ediciones B.
Habermas, J. (2002). El futuro de la naturaleza humana: ¿Hacia una eugenesia liberal? Paidós.
Hume, D. (1988). Tratado de la naturaleza humana. Tecnos.
Jonas, H. (1995). El principio de responsabilidad: Ensayo de una ética para la civilización tecnológica. Herder.
Jonas, H. (1997). Técnica, medicina y ética: Sobre la práctica del principio de responsabilidad. Paidós.
Kant, I. (1978). Crítica de la razón pura. Alfaguara.
Kant, I. (2000). Crítica de la razón práctica. Alianza.
MacIntyre, A. (2001). Animales racionales y dependientes. Paidós.
More, M. (2010). Transhumanist FAQ. http://extropy.org/faq.htm
Mosterín, J. (2006). La naturaleza humana. Espasa.
Moya, A. (2010). La domesticación de la naturaleza: De la artificialización a la intervención. Éndoxa, 24, 291–310.
Negro, D. (2009). El mito del hombre nuevo. Encuentro.
Nietzsche, F. (1990). Sobre verdad y mentira en sentido extramoral. Tecnos.
Nietzsche, F. (2004). Así habló Zaratustra. Alianza.
Nuño, L., y Etxeberría, A. (2010). ¿Fue Darwin el Newton de la brizna de hierba? La herencia de Kant en la teoría darwinista de la evolución. Éndoxa, 24, 185–216.
Postigo, E. (2009). Transumanesimo e postumano: Principi teorici e implicazioni bioetiche. Medicina e Morale, 2009(2), 267–282.
Sádaba, J. (2009). Cyborg: Sueños y pesadillas de las tecnologías. Península.
Savater, F. (2004). Política para Amador. Ariel.
Savulescu, J., y Bostrom, N. (Eds.). (2009). Human enhancement. OUP.
Sloterdijk, P. (2001). Extrañamiento del mundo. Pre-Textos.
Sloterdijk, P. (2003). Normas para el parque humano. Siruela.
Smith, C. U. M. (1987). “Clever beasts who invented knowing”: Nietzsche’s evolutionary biology of knowledge. Biology and Philosophy, 2, 65–91.
Ursúa, N. (2010). ¿Tendrá la “convergencia de tecnologías” (CT) y la “mejora técnica del ser humano” un impacto similar al darwinismo? Implicaciones y consideraciones filosóficas. Éndoxa, 24, 311–329.
World Transhumanist Association. (2010). The transhumanist declaration. http://humanityplus.org/learn/philosophy/transhumanist-declaration
World Transhumanist Association. (2010a). The transhumanist FAQ. http://humanityplus.org/learn/philosophy/faq
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.