Advertisement

NanoEthics

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 237–246 | Cite as

Human Enhancement and the Anthropology of the “Entire Human Being”

  • Richard Saage
Invited Contribution
  • 108 Downloads

Abstract

About one and a half decades ago, two prominent reports were published in the United States (US) which strongly influenced subsequent international discussions on the topic of human enhancement: a 2002 report on “converging technologies for improving human performance”, based on a workshop which was organised by the US National Science Foundation (NSF) and the US Department of Commerce in December 2001, and the first report of US President George W. Bush’s Council on Bioethics (PCBE), published in October 2003 with the title Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness. The 2002 report included a wide variety of contributions from academics in various fields of research, from representatives of US institutions, and from companies. Due primarily to the influence of the two NSF staff editing the report, it can be regarded as the first major instance of the influence of transhumanism, a techno-futurist ideology and movement, on the US technology and innovation discourse. The PCBE report, on the other hand, is a prime example of a conservative critique of the transhumanist notion of human enhancement. In this invited contribution, these two crucial publications are analysed mainly in order to point out the relevance of philosophical anthropology as developed since the 1920s by Helmuth Plessner and others. This remarkable school of thought is experiencing a revival in countries such as Germany and the Netherlands, and, to some extent, in the English-speaking world. In this article, it is argued that philosophical anthropology provides us with an important alternative to both anthropological essentialism and scientism, two approaches that are still highly relevant in current discourse on human enhancement.

Keywords

Philosophical anthropology Human enhancement Transhumanism Helmuth Plessner Adolf Portmann Converging technologies Essentialism Scientism 

References

  1. 1.
    Coenen C, Schuijff M, Smits M, Klaassen P, Hennen L, Rader M, Wolbring G (2009) Human enhancement study (IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005–28/SC32 & 39). European Parliament, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gehlen A (1961) Anthropologische Forschung. Zur Selbstbegegnung und Selbstentdeckung des Menschen. Rowohlt, Reinbek bei HamburgGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Plessner H (1965) Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch. Einleitung in die philosophische Anthropologie, 2nd edn. Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rothacker E (1948) Probleme der Kulturanthropologie. Bouvier, BonnGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Portmann A (1970) Entlässt die Natur den Menschen? Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Biologie und Anthropologie. Piper, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Portmann A (1964) Utopisches in der Lebensforschung. In: Portmann A (ed) Eranos-Jahrbuch 1963. Vom Sinn der Utopie. Rhein-Verlag, Zürich, pp 311–344Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (eds) (2002) Converging technologies for improving human performance. Nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science. WTC, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    PCBE (President’s Council on Bioethics) (2003) Beyond therapy. Biotechnology and the pursuit of happiness. President’s Council on Bioethics, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rehberg K-S (2008) Eine merkwürdig “alte” Antwort auf eine noch ältere Frage. In: Ganten D, Gerhardt V, Nida-Rümelin J, Heilinger J-C (eds) Was ist der Mensch? Gruyter, Berlin, pp 212–216Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (2002) Overview: converging technologies for improving human performance: nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC). In: Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (eds) (2002) Converging technologies for improving human performance. Nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science. WTC, Arlington, pp 1–30Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scheich H (2012) Das Gehirn und seine Semantik. In: Ammer C, Lindemann A (eds) Hirnforschung und Menschenbild. Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, Leipzig, pp 25–31Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pico della Mirandola G (1956) Oration on the dignity of man (3rd printing). Henry Regnery Company, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sandel MJ (2007) The case against perfection: ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Özmen E (2011) Ecce homo faber! Anthropologische Utopien und das Argument von der Natur des Menschen. In: Nida-Rümelin J, Kufeld K (eds) Die Gegenwart der Utopie. Zeitkritik und Denkwende. Herder, Freiburg, pp 101–130Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fischer J (2002) Androiden - Menschen - Primaten. Philosophische Anthropologie als Platzhalterin des Humanismus. In: Faber R, Rudolph E (eds) Humanismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp 229–240Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Saage
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany
  2. 2.Sächsische Akademie der WissenschaftenLeipzigGermany
  3. 3.BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations