The Philosophy of Transhumanism as a Revenge of the Ego-cogito

M. Philatova
{"title":"The Philosophy of Transhumanism as a Revenge of the Ego-cogito","authors":"M. Philatova","doi":"10.21146/2414-3715-2022-8-2-132-150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author of the article contrasts the objection to transhumanism, which proceeds from the fact of success technoscience, with the objection, that takes the very fact of technoscience as a problem. Transhumanism itself gives rise to the problematization of science. It is the top of its development, and at the same time it fits into a single line of continuity of the forms of transformation of human nature known in history, as another, new link of it, following Christianity in this serie. The identification of this kind of \"religious\" roots of transhumanism brings back the relevance of the problem of the connection between science and Christianity and provides additional resources for reviewing this problem today. The author of the article shows the connection between the problem of the mathematization (transformation) of nature, known even to the Eleatics, the new possibilities opened for it by Christianity, and the new European tradition of the I-cogito. The Cogito presented itself as a human nature transformed through union with God, as the very unit that Zeno had once sought, but never found. But while posing as something new to western european philosophy and thus defining its development, the cogito was not what it claimed to be. The transition from Descartes' pseudo-discoveries to Zeno's conclusions was inevitable. It has declared itself as a transition from classical epistemology to non-classical epistemology. In view of the fact that non-classics do not just indicate the failure of the classics, but call into question the very possibility of science, two paths open up: the way back or the way forward. The way back brings us back to the problem of the genesis of science, to a radical revision of its possibility. The way forward is the path of transhumanism as a rehabilitation of the pseudo-unity of the I-cogito in the new, extremely favorable conditions, when postmodernism has already abolished the polarization of the top and the bottom, the upper and the lower, that set the problem of unity.","PeriodicalId":319029,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical anthropology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/2414-3715-2022-8-2-132-150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author of the article contrasts the objection to transhumanism, which proceeds from the fact of success technoscience, with the objection, that takes the very fact of technoscience as a problem. Transhumanism itself gives rise to the problematization of science. It is the top of its development, and at the same time it fits into a single line of continuity of the forms of transformation of human nature known in history, as another, new link of it, following Christianity in this serie. The identification of this kind of "religious" roots of transhumanism brings back the relevance of the problem of the connection between science and Christianity and provides additional resources for reviewing this problem today. The author of the article shows the connection between the problem of the mathematization (transformation) of nature, known even to the Eleatics, the new possibilities opened for it by Christianity, and the new European tradition of the I-cogito. The Cogito presented itself as a human nature transformed through union with God, as the very unit that Zeno had once sought, but never found. But while posing as something new to western european philosophy and thus defining its development, the cogito was not what it claimed to be. The transition from Descartes' pseudo-discoveries to Zeno's conclusions was inevitable. It has declared itself as a transition from classical epistemology to non-classical epistemology. In view of the fact that non-classics do not just indicate the failure of the classics, but call into question the very possibility of science, two paths open up: the way back or the way forward. The way back brings us back to the problem of the genesis of science, to a radical revision of its possibility. The way forward is the path of transhumanism as a rehabilitation of the pseudo-unity of the I-cogito in the new, extremely favorable conditions, when postmodernism has already abolished the polarization of the top and the bottom, the upper and the lower, that set the problem of unity.
超人类主义哲学:自我我思的报复
本文作者将从技术科学的成功事实出发的对超人类主义的反对与将技术科学本身作为问题的反对进行了对比。超人类主义本身导致了科学的问题化。它是人类本性发展的顶点,同时它又符合历史上已知的人类本性转化形式的一条连续性路线,作为人类本性的另一个新的环节,继基督教之后。对超人类主义的这种“宗教”根源的识别带回了科学与基督教之间联系问题的相关性,并为今天审查这个问题提供了额外的资源。这篇文章的作者展示了自然的数学化(转化)问题之间的联系,这个问题甚至为埃利亚派所知,基督教为它开辟了新的可能性,以及新的欧洲我我传统。我思将自己呈现为通过与上帝结合而改变的人性,作为芝诺曾经寻求但从未找到的单位。然而,尽管自我标榜为西欧哲学的新事物,并因此定义了西欧哲学的发展,“我思”并不是它所宣称的那样。从笛卡尔的伪发现到芝诺的结论的过渡是不可避免的。它宣称自己是从经典认识论到非经典认识论的过渡。鉴于非经典不仅表明经典的失败,而且对科学的可能性提出了质疑,有两条路可供选择:后退的路或前进的路。这条路把我们带回到科学起源的问题,带回到对其可能性的彻底修正。前进的道路是超人类主义的道路,作为在新的、极其有利的条件下对我我思维的伪统一的恢复,当后现代主义已经废除了造成统一问题的上层和底层、上层和下层的两极分化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信