Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):547-560 (2012)

Abstract
One argument which is frequently levelled against the enhancement of human biology is that we do not understand the evolved function of our bodies well enough to meddle in our biology without producing unintended and potentially catastrophic effects. In particular, this argument is levelled against attempts to slow or eliminate the processes of human ageing, or ‘senescence’, which cause us to grow decrepit before we die. In this article, I claim that even if this argument could usefully be applied against attempts to enhance other human traits, it cannot be valid in the case of attempts to enhance the various processes that constitute senescence. I begin by reviewing the biology of ageing to show how it consists of a number of unrelated traits. Then, following the arguments of a number of evolutionary biologists, I explain that every one of these traits is a product of evolutionary ‘neglect’ rather than ‘intent’. Finally, I consider the strongest version of the argument against enhancing senescence, which acknowledges these facts about the evolution of ageing but insists that we have nevertheless have prudential reasons to avoid enhancement wherever there is some uncertainty about the genetics or evolutionary function of a trait. I provide two reasons for rejecting this version of the argument as well, even in the case of human senescence, where such uncertainty is currently significant.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s13347-012-0066-7
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,256
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Human Enhancement.Nick Bostrom & Julian Savulescu (eds.) - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
Problems of the Self: Philosophical Papers, 1956-1972.John Perry - 1976 - Journal of Philosophy 73 (13):416-428.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Ethics of Human Life Extension: The Second Argument From Evolution.Chris Gyngell - 2015 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 40 (6):696-713.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Changing Conceptions of Species.Bradley E. Wilson - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (3):405-420.
Evolution and Psychology in Philosophical Perspective.Matteo Mameli - 2009 - In Robin Dunbar & Louise Barrett (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Oxford University Press.
The Future of Human Evolution.Russell Powell - 2012 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (1):145-175.
What’s Wrong with the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism?Geoff Childers - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):193-204.
A Plea for Human Nature.Edouard Machery - 2008 - Philosophical Psychology 21 (3):321 – 329.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-02-28

Total views
30 ( #348,863 of 2,419,703 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,420 of 2,419,703 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes