A better way of being? Human rights, transhumanism and the utopian standpoint of man

IF 1 Q2 LAW
B.C. van Beers
{"title":"A better way of being? Human rights, transhumanism and the utopian standpoint of man","authors":"B.C. van Beers","doi":"10.4337/9781803921402.00021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this chapter, Van Beers builds on Helmuth Plessner's philosophical anthropology to come to a better understanding of the relation between two contemporary utopias: the humanist utopia of human rights and the transhumanist techno-utopia of human enhancement. According to transhumanist thinkers, transhumanism is the logical extension of humanism. They stress that their school of thought, like humanism, presupposes a rather utopian account of the human based on which individual choice and freedom are to be pursued and protected. For them, human enhancement is not only compatible with, but even commanded by, human rights. Based on an analysis of the utopianism involved in humanism and transhumanism, I argue that this position only holds superficially. Upon closer examination, the transhumanist's quest for techno-utopia, even if he uses human rights as a starting point, is likely to pave the way for a world that can hardly be viewed as utopian according to humanist standards. To come to that conclusion, Van Beers offers a comparison between humanism and transhumanism through the lens of Plessner's first and third fundamental law of anthropology: the law that humans are artificial by nature and the law of the utopian standpoint.","PeriodicalId":42994,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge International Law Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"246-266"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.elgaronline.com/downloadpdf/book/9781803921402/book-part-9781803921402-21.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge International Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803921402.00021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In this chapter, Van Beers builds on Helmuth Plessner's philosophical anthropology to come to a better understanding of the relation between two contemporary utopias: the humanist utopia of human rights and the transhumanist techno-utopia of human enhancement. According to transhumanist thinkers, transhumanism is the logical extension of humanism. They stress that their school of thought, like humanism, presupposes a rather utopian account of the human based on which individual choice and freedom are to be pursued and protected. For them, human enhancement is not only compatible with, but even commanded by, human rights. Based on an analysis of the utopianism involved in humanism and transhumanism, I argue that this position only holds superficially. Upon closer examination, the transhumanist's quest for techno-utopia, even if he uses human rights as a starting point, is likely to pave the way for a world that can hardly be viewed as utopian according to humanist standards. To come to that conclusion, Van Beers offers a comparison between humanism and transhumanism through the lens of Plessner's first and third fundamental law of anthropology: the law that humans are artificial by nature and the law of the utopian standpoint.
一种更好的生存方式?人权、超人类主义与人的乌托邦立场
在本章中,范比尔斯以赫尔穆斯·普莱斯纳的哲学人类学为基础,更好地理解了当代两个乌托邦之间的关系:人权的人文主义乌托邦和人类增强的超人类主义技术乌托邦。超人类主义思想家认为,超人类主义是人文主义的逻辑延伸。他们强调,他们的思想流派,像人文主义一样,以一种相当乌托邦的人类描述为前提,在这种描述的基础上,个人的选择和自由将得到追求和保护。对他们来说,人类的进步不仅与人权相容,甚至受人权支配。通过对人文主义和超人类主义所涉及的乌托邦主义的分析,我认为这种观点只是表面上的。仔细研究一下,超人类主义者对技术乌托邦的追求,即使他以人权为出发点,也很可能为一个按照人道主义标准很难被视为乌托邦的世界铺平道路。为了得出这个结论,范比尔斯通过普莱斯纳的第一和第三条人类学基本定律:人类天生是人造的定律和乌托邦立场的定律,对人文主义和超人类主义进行了比较。
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
CiteScore
0.80
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书