Christianity, Technology, and Culture in the Age of the Posthuman

IntroductionNewly emerging human enhancement technologies such as brain chip implants, CRISPR-Cas9-based gene editing, and polygenic embryo screening (PES) alongside preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-P) are highly controversial in Islam. However, the prevailing sociocultural dynamics encourage their uptake. In the current era of declining fertility rates, increased parental investment in fewer children has resulted in a flourishing tuition industry, accompanied by heightened academic pressure on students and widespread parental anxiety. These emerging technologies can be employed for cognitive enhancement, thereby providing an expedient solution for parents and students navigating a highly competitive educational environment.Materials and methodsTo inform and facilitate future policy decision-making, an online survey was conducted among 575 undergraduate Muslim students at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) to assess their perspectives and opinions regarding these newly emerging technologies.ResultsThe findings indicated a significant level of opposition among respondents to the uptake of human enhancement technologies, with 54.8% opposing polygenic embryo screening, 69.2% opposing gene editing, and 75.3% opposing brain chip implants, reflecting substantial concerns about altering natural human attributes. The results also indicate that numerous Muslim respondents believe that Allah created humans flawlessly and purposefully, asserting that humanity lacks the authority to alter or amend this creation.Discussion/ConclusionA three-pronged governance approach for human enhancement technologies is thus proposed, which encompasses (i) bioethical safeguards, (ii) public engagement and education, and (iii) economic accessibility. It is suggested that the Malaysian government should actively consult relevant stakeholders and various segments of the public before enacting future legislation on these technologies.

A pertinent concern in the human enhancement debate is that human enhancement technologies (HET) are intrinsically bad and, hence, morally impermissible. This article evaluates the related claims about the intrinsic badness of HET by looking into philosophical theories of intrinsic value. It investigates how well-established conceptions of intrinsic value map onto typical bioconservative arguments about HET's intrinsic badness. Three predominant variants of these arguments are explored and found wanting: (i) HET are intrinsically bad owing to their unnaturalness; (ii) the pursuit of HET reveals intrinsically bad character (“the desire for mastery”); and (iii) HET will necessarily undermine intrinsically valuable things (e.g., human dignity). My analysis shows that the debate on intrinsic value places serious constraints on claims about the intrinsic badness of HET. More specifically, the analysis shows that bioconservative arguments are, for the most part, inconsistent, misconceived, and overly speculative. Enhancement interventions cannot be bearers of intrinsic value on any of its plausible understandings, and, even if we could grant such a possibility, there are no compelling reasons to presume that the intrinsic value of HET would be necessarily negative. As a result, claims regarding their moral impermissibility are unwarranted.

The understanding of human nature is very important for human resource development, because that understanding will be a starting point in establishing development objectives, development strategies, method selection, and the types of media used. The main problem that has arisen so far is that the understanding of human nature is only based on the results of quantitative research, without considering the information from the Essence of the Supreme Creator of human (revelation), and consequently there are missing elements which limit the development of human resources. The quantitative studies only discuss things relating to physical, psychological, and social aspects; while important things such as the human creation process and its purpose, humanity's status before God, its potential and its development have not received enough attention. To find answers to the above shortcomings, this qualitative research utilizing document analysis technique of the Quran main verses relating to humanity was conducted using maudhu‘i interpretation method, namely by studying verses which are related to humanity through the understanding of the interpreters of the Quran. For the triangulation purposes, references were also made to the Hadiths – the words of Prophet Muhammad – as well as books of Tafsir, the translated versions of the Quran in local language. The aspects of human creation, the purpose of creation, and potentials and weaknesses of mankind were discussed in details by the researchers.

Catholic social thought (CST), a branch of moral theology, reflects Christian anthropology (an understanding of human nature that draws on Revelation and natural law theory). CST's understanding of what communities (such as the corporation) are for and how they can best achieve their ends are coloured by its anthropological underpinnings. The same, it is argued, is true for economic theories such as the theories of the firm based on Coase. This paper compares Christian anthropology with the implicit anthropology underpinning some of the dominant economic theories of the firm. Differences at this level go a long way to explaining mismatches between CST's vision of the corporation as a community of persons and some of the economic theories of the firm built on Coasean foundations.

Catholic social thought (CST), a branch of moral theology, reflects Christian anthropology (an understanding of human nature that draws on Revelation and natural law theory). CST's understanding of what communities (such as the corporation) are for and how they can best achieve their ends are coloured by its anthropological underpinnings. The same, it is argued, is true for economic theories such as the theories of the firm based on Coase. This paper compares Christian anthropology with the implicit anthropology underpinning some of the dominant economic theories of the firm. Differences at this level go a long way to explaining mismatches between CST's vision of the corporation as a community of persons and some of the economic theories of the firm built on Coasean foundations.

INTRODUCTION:Human enhancement technologies need assessments, but they differ from other health technologies. Therefore we may need other methods for their assessment, also with regard to addressing its ethical issues. The objective of this paper is to describe the elaboration of a method for exposing and elucidating ethical issues with human cognitive enhancement. The approach is elaborated in order to support and facilitate open and transparent deliberation and decision making with an emerging type of technology with great potential and formative implications for individuals and society.METHODS:The literature search identified relevant approaches. Conventional content analysis of the identified papers and methods revealed their suitability for assessing human cognitive enhancement. Four selection criteria were applied and followed by method development. Pilot testing on smart-glasses (1) resulted in amendments.RESULTS:A method for exposing and elucidating ethical issues in the assessment of human cognitive enhancement technologies was developed based on three existing approaches in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (2). The method consists of six steps and a guiding list of forty-three questions. An overview of the approach will be presented.CONCLUSIONS:A method for exposing and elucidating ethical issues in the assessment of human cognitive enhancement has been developed. The method paves the way for context specific ethical assessment and analysis of a new and emerging type of technology.

Human Technological Enhancement and Theological Anthropology

Karl Rahner is not usually thought of as a feminist. Though feminist theology has often made recurs to his theological anthropology, Rahner is assumed to offer feminist theology little in terms of an analysis of sex, gender, and human nature. While Rahner’s explicit writings on women appear fragmentary and ambivalent, an investiga­tion of the philosophical and theological underpinnings of Rahner’s theological anthropology shows that Karl Rahner’s understanding of human nature is imbued with a conception of sex and gender that constitutes an important contribution to an understanding of sex, gender, and human nature in theological anthropology in general and feminist theology in particular.

هذه الدراسة اللغوية متعددة التخصصات، المعنونة "نظرية تشومسكي ودراسة الإدراك"، مدعومة بنظرية المعرفة المعاصرة، بالتزامن مع العلوم المعرفية، وعلم النفس المعرفي، وعلم الأعصاب المعرفي، تهدف إلى دراسة وشرح كيفية مساهمة لغويات تشومسكي في فهم القضايا المعرفية (الإدراك/العملية العقلية) وفقًا لسؤال فرضيته: ما المساهمة التي يمكن أن تقدمها دراسة اللغة لفهمنا للطبيعة البشرية؟ ولدراسة مدى إمكانية تطبيق نظرية تشومسكي في معالجة هذه القضايا، تعتمد هذه الدراسة بشكل أساسي على المنهج اللغوي التحليلي متعدد التخصصات، بالتعاون مع مناهج أخرى. في النهاية، توصلت الدراسة إلى نتائج متعددة، أهمها أن دراسة اللغة وفقًا للّغة الشّخصية لا تُسهم فقط في فهم الذكاء البشري والطبيعة؛ بل إنها جوهرية تمامًا في هذا المجال، وتوفر فهمًا عميقًا لكيفية فكّ لغز الوعي وظواهره من خلال شرح المبادئ العالمية للغة البشرية.

This chapter addresses concerns that the development and proliferation of human enhancement technologies (HET) will be dehumanizing and a threat to our autonomy and sovereignty as individuals. The chapter argues contrarily that HET constitutes nothing less than one of the most effective foreseeable means of increasing the autonomy and sovereignty of individual members of society. Furthermore, it elaborates the position that the use of HET exemplifies—and indeed even intensifies—our most human capacity and faculty, namely the desire for increased self-determination, which is referred to as the will toward self-determination. Based upon this position, the chapter argues that the use of HET bears fundamental ontological continuity with the human condition in general and with the historically ubiquitous will toward self-determination in particular. HET will not be a dehumanizing force, but will rather serve to increase the very capacity that characterizes us as human more accurately than anything else.

This chapter articulates that scholars write about Human Enhancement Technologies (HET) in two ways. This is not a reflection of a reality in the literature but rather a heuristic designed to contextualize democratic citizenship within contemporary HET discussions. The first way is to write about HET as possible realities far off into the future. The second way is to write about HET that can be realised seemingly as soon as tomorrow. For democratic citizenship, writing in the first case is either utopian or dystopian. It is either the projection of democracy's total triumph or its utter collapse caused by the type of rots that lead to democide. But writing in the second case is stimulating and vibrant. There are, for example, numerous calls for HET-led reforms in the literature. These reforms are needed to help answer the crisis of the citizen's august discontent (the growing and increasingly legitimized political apathy and political abstention observed in, and performed by, the citizenry). The purpose of this chapter is to focus on this second case—this more developed body of literature—and to theorise the interface between democratic citizenship and HET.

This paper addresses concerns that the development and proliferation of Human Enhancement Technologies (HET) will be (a) dehumanizing and (b) a threat to our autonomy and sovereignty as individuals. The paper argues contrarily that HET constitutes nothing less than one of the most effective foreseeable means of increasing the autonomy and sovereignty of individual members of society. Furthermore, it elaborates the position that the use of HET exemplifies – and indeed even intensifies – our most human capacity and faculty: namely the desire for increased self-determination, which is referred to as the will toward self-determination. Based upon this position, the paper argues that the use of HET bears fundamental ontological continuity with the human condition in general and with the historically-ubiquitous will toward self-determination in particular. HET will not be a dehumanizing force, but will rather serve to increase the very capacity that characterizes us as human more accurately than anything else.

This chapter addresses concerns that the development and proliferation of human enhancement technologies (HET) will be dehumanizing and a threat to our autonomy and sovereignty as individuals. The chapter argues contrarily that HET constitutes nothing less than one of the most effective foreseeable means of increasing the autonomy and sovereignty of individual members of society. Furthermore, it elaborates the position that the use of HET exemplifies—and indeed even intensifies—our most human capacity and faculty, namely the desire for increased self-determination, which is referred to as the will toward self-determination. Based upon this position, the chapter argues that the use of HET bears fundamental ontological continuity with the human condition in general and with the historically ubiquitous will toward self-determination in particular. HET will not be a dehumanizing force, but will rather serve to increase the very capacity that characterizes us as human more accurately than anything else.

This chapter addresses concerns that the development and proliferation of Human Enhancement Technologies (HET) will be (a) dehumanizing and a threat to human dignity and (b) a threat to our autonomy and sovereignty as individuals. Contrarily, HET can be shown to constitute the most effective foreseeable means of increasing the autonomy and sovereignty of individual members of society. Furthermore, this chapter elaborates the position that the use of HET exemplifies—and indeed even intensifies—our most human capacity and faculty, namely the desire for increased self-determination (i.e., control over the determining circumstances and conditions of our own selves and lives), which is referred to as the will toward self-determination. Based upon this position, arguably, the use of HET bears fundamental ontological continuity with the human condition in general and with the historically ubiquitous will toward self-determination in particular as it is today and has been in the past. HET will not be a dehumanizing force, but will rather serve to increase the very capacity and characteristic that characterizes us as human more accurately than anything else.

Virtually Witness Augmentation Now: Video Games and the Future of Human Enhancement