Type， Paradigm and Ethical Dispute of Human Enhancement

doi:10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2018.01.001

Abstract

Abstract: Emerging human enhancement technologies are increasingly penetrating into the mankind's inner body， constantly building and reinventing human beings. Proponents argue that human enhancement technologies make human beings super-humans while opponents hold that man will eventually become Frankenstein. Human enhancement can be divided into four types: physiological enhancement， cognitive enhancement， moral enhancement and compound enhancement. Human enhancement technologies constantly challenge such traditional concepts as body/mind， natural/artificial and living/non-living， accompanied by ethical disputes including treatment and enhancement， human nature and dignity， moral freedom and social risk. There are different explanation paradigms for these disputes-the biomedical paradigm is focused on the definitions of treatment and enhancement， the transhumanism paradigm gives priority to how to understand the mankind while the social paradigm pays more attention to moral freedom and social risk.

Key words: cognitive enhancement, moral enhancement, biomedical paradigm, transhumanism paradigm

CLC Number:

N031

ZHANG Can. Type， Paradigm and Ethical Dispute of Human Enhancement[J]. Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science), 2018, 20(1): 1-6.

References

[1]Bostrom N. A History of Transhumanist Thought［J］. Journal of Evolution and Technology， 2005，14(1):1-25.
[2]吴勤. 颠覆未来作战的前沿技术系列之人体增强［J］. 军事文摘， 2016(1):41-45.
[3]Bostrom N，Sandberg A. Cognitive Enhancement: Methods， Ethics， Regulatory Ehallenges［J］. Science and Engineering Ethics， 2009，15(3):311-341.
[4]Fukuyama F. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution［M］. New York: Farrar， Straus and Giroux， 2003.
[5]冯烨. 认知增强及其伦理社会问题探析［J］. 自然辩证法研究， 2013，29(3):63-68.
[6]Lin P，Allhoff F. Untangling the Debate: The Ethics of Human Enhancement［J］. NanoEthics， 2008，2(3):251-264.
[7]Douglas T. Moral Enhancement［J］. Journal of Applied Philosophy， 2008，25(3):228-245.
[8]Danaher J. Why Internal Moral Enhancement Might Be Politically Better than External Moral Enhancement［J］. Neuroethics， 2016(7):1-16.
[9]Cabrera L Y. Rethinking Human Enhancement: Social Enhancement and Emergent Technologies［M］. New York: Palgrave Macmillan， 2015.
[10]Allhoff F，Lin P，Steinberg J. Ethics of Human Enhancement: An Executive Summary［J］. Science and Engineering Ethics， 2011，17(2):201-212.
[11]Hassoun N. Nanotechnology，Enhancement， and Human Nature［J］. NanoEthics， 2008，2(3):289-304.
[12]Daniels N. Normal Functioning and the Treatment-enhancement Distinction［J］. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics， 2000，9(3):309-322.
[13]Sharon T. Human Nature in an Age of Biotechnology: The Case for Mediated Posthumanism［M］. Dordrecht: Springer， 2013.
[14]阿诺德·盖伦. 技术时代的人类心灵［M］. 何兆武，何冰，译. 上海:上海世纪出版集团， 2008.
[15]贝尔纳·斯蒂格勒. 技术与时间: 爱比米修斯的过失［M］. 裴程，译. 南京:译林出版社， 2000.
[16]Bostrom N. In Defense of Posthuman Dignity［J］. Bioethics， 2005，19(3):202-214.
[17]张学义. 实验哲学: 一场新的哲学变革［J］. 哲学动态， 2011(11):74-79.
[18]毛新志. 神经伦理学初探［J］. 武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版)， 2011，24(6):839-844.
[19]刘毅，朱志方. 自由意志与道德判断的实验研究［J］. 学术研究， 2012(3):30-34.
[20]岳瑨. 允许的限度: 后人类生命伦理规制的起点——以NBIC会聚技术对医疗技术范式突破为例［J］. 学习与探索， 2016(10):34-40.
[21]Naam R. More than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement［M］. New York: Broadway Books， 2005.
[22]Gordijn B. Converging NBIC Technologies for Improving Human Performance: A Critical Assessment of the Novelty and the Prospects of the Project［J］. The Journal of Law， Medicine & Ethics， 2006，34(4):726-732.
[23]Iovino S，Oppermann S. Material Ecocriticism: Materiality， Agency， and Models of Narrativity［J］. European Journal of Literature， Culture and Environment， 2012，3(1):75-91.