Our Posthuman Future [Hardcover]

The author contends that our current political and social institutions are based on the notion of a shared humanity. However, with changes to humanity as profound as the possibility of mixing of our DNA with that of other creatures, to what extent will it be possible to speak of a shared humanity? What will it mean to be human? Will it not be that the definitions with which we are currently familiar will become so overstretched that they will be meaningless? In attempting to address this problem he proposes that the major characteristic we might use to identify human-ness is human emotionality. In the same way that we treat people who are not physically perfect as human, so we might also treat future generations as human by virtue of their emotional makeup.

The book is sensibily divided up into three sections, each one dealing with different aspects of the issue. The first presents us with the general context of human intervention in our health and well-being, the second our current philosophical and legal understanding of the issues, and then finally some ideas as to how we might control the future use of these potentially transfiguring technologies.

The metaphor I kept coming up with was that this is the same sort of problem that affects countries enduring large-scale immigration. How does one manage that process while still retaining control of the identity of your nationality? In the same way, the changes in the human genetic future will be profound, but we will still have to retain some sense of what it means to be human.

If, however, you look for prediction, new insights or full explanations, then you will finish this book with a sense of disappointment. But you will finish it, because it is very well written, with a profound understanding of, and love of humanity and all its foibles. And it does put a new spin on old insights.

Fukuyama’s thesis is that brain science, neuropharmacology, research on ageing, and genetic engineering threaten the very nature of our humanity. He begins by discussing current and expected developments in these fields, and goes on to explore the issues of human rights, human nature and human dignity. The chapter on human dignity is particularly thought-provoking. He concludes by discussing and exploring current controls on applications of knowledge in these fields.

I find two basic problems with the book. I guess it began with horror inspired by the hype of the more extremely optimistic proponents of the sciences mentioned above. But the author’s examination of what these sciences can actually achieve shows that really, there isn’t much to worry about. Prozac and Ritalin are quoted as agents for modifying consciousness by suppressing undesirable but ‘normal’ behaviour. But as the author himself says, consciousness remains as much a mystery as it ever was. And while he abhors germ-line therapy, he shows that it is unlikely ever to be used except for correcting discreet and demonstrable genetic defects like haemophilia. After all, the broad principles of selective breeding have been known for millennia, but apart from the practice of arranged marriages, and a strange experiment by one of the da Vincis, selective breeding of humans has not, to my knowledge, been practised.

The other problem is the moral basis for the author’s view of humanity. He seeks to establish a viewpoint that is modern, but essentially Christian, without accepting the Christian thesis. In his rationale for this, he agrees with Locke that the faithful disagree so much and often so violently, that they cannot form a consensus on morality. But Locke, unlike Fukuyama, never knew the horrors that can be spawned by humanist, atheist moral reasoning. I suppose it is all much simpler if you believe that Man is the high point of creation, and made in the image of a law-giving God. But if you believe that we are but trivial sparks of awareness in a dark, disinterested universe, where do you start? I don’t know, but Francis Fukuyama has made a brave and engaging attempt.