Philosopher Fiona Wollard recently advocated interpreting the achievements of women while giving birth. People readily recognize men-related achievements, like running a marathon, but not achievements related to giving birth. We expand on Woollard's notion of reproductive achievements, comparing them with ideas of human enhancement, which aims at humans becoming "stronger and faster". Criticisms to evolutionary psychology challenge its defense of a notion of a fixed human nature, and its disregard for the experience of birth. Some female scholars link human evolution (...) to the presence of premature infants requiring attention from mothers and alloparents. They explain why this gave an advantage to the human species, enhancing cooperation and other desirable traits. Other scholars develop philosophies of birth, mostly based on Arendt's conception of natality, questioning a human nature not sensitive to gender, excluding birth and childhood. Then we move to transhumanism, proponent of human enhancement. Transhumanism questions our biological inheritance for being flawed and outdated, including giving birth, restricting this to a source of great suffering. This assessment of the given does not consider its ambiguous, dialectical character. Because of that, tinkering with nature both accomplishes and frustrates the goals of human enhancement. (shrink)

Post-human technologies, such as human enhancements and artificial intelligence, blur or displace the boundaries of our common humanity. While these technologies enhance many valuable human powers, there is limited philosophical discussion as to whether and how they can also be dehumanizing? To answer this question, I start from a philosophical discussion of the concept of ‘dehumanization' and argue that it conflates three social mechanisms through which (i) human flourishing is impeded; (ii) subalterns are degraded; and (iii) automated processes replace typically (...) human activities. Furthermore, I argue in realist fashion that we should consider both the natural powers harnessed by post-human technologies and the social contexts through which the latter are designed, produced, marketed and consumed. I then illustrate my thinking with three recent inquiries that I conducted on post-human technologies’ dehumanizing potential. All three inquiries happen in the contemporary neo-liberal context, but each one foregrounds a distinct mechanism of dehumanization. (shrink)

En este artículo analizaré algunos puntos de convergencia entre la filosofía transhumanista y la crítica filosófica contemporánea al antropocentrismo. Para ello distinguiré entre un tipo de programa normativo fuerte y uno débil en el transhumanismo. El argumento central reside en que la normatividad fuerte en el discurso transhumanista, al suponer que es posible seleccionar exclusivamente las características “propiamente humanas” para ser conservadas en el estadio post-humano, se basa en una concepción pre-darwiniana de la especie humana, lo cual posee implicancias tanto (...) epistemológicas como éticas. (shrink)

This piece brings into critical conversation Christian resurrection hope, virtual versions of transhumanism, and intellectual disability and demonstrates that Christian resurrection provides a more cogent hope for people with severe intellectual disabilities than transhumanism. I argue that transhumanist virtual futures are theologically problematic, as bodily resurrection is neither required nor desirable. It is particularly problematic for people with severe intellectual disabilities given the way they would be excluded from these futures. Disability theology also raises issues with the traditional notions of (...) “healing” in the resurrection and the implications for the value and identity of persons with intellectual disabilities. Starting with these problems, I explore the nature of Christian hope, noting the inadequacies of a virtual transhumanist future with respect to both resurrection faith and intellectual disability, and address how resurrection hope can account for issues raised in disability theology, and so properly include people with intellectual disabilities. (shrink)