Les tecnologies de millora humana i els arguments a favor del cosmopolitisme

Autors/ores

  • Javier Rodríguez-Alcázar University of Granada
  • Lilian Bermejo-Luque University of Granada

Resum

Segons el minimalisme polític, un debat és polític quan intenta respondre en últim terme la pregunta «què fem?». Aquesta posició filosòfica explica per què seria més fructífer considerar des d’una perspectiva política algunes qüestions relacionades amb les tecnologies de millora humana que tradicionalment s’han tractat com a problemes d’ètica aplicada. Però llavors sorgeix la pregunta sobre qui és el «nosaltres» que s’interroga, és a dir, quines comunitats són les que afronten els reptes polítics provocats per les tecnologies de millora humana. Defensem que la comunitat humana global s’enfronta a alguns d’aquests reptes, la qual cosa dona lloc a una perspectiva cosmopolita. Alguns autors han defensat anteriorment la necessitat d’una aproximació cosmopolita a assumptes com la pobresa o el canvi climàtic; no obstant això, en no haver-hi una diferenciació adequada entre ètica i política, tendeixen a advocar pel cosmopolitisme amb arguments morals. Defensem que les tecnologies de millora humana proporcionen bones raons en suport del cosmopolitisme, entès com una postura política. En suport d’aquesta tesi, examinem dos casos: el de les píndoles que ens permetrien menjar sense engreixar-nos i el de l’elecció entre diferents tècniques de millora cognitiva.

Paraules clau

millora humana, moralisme polític, minimalisme polític, cosmopolitisme, millora cognitiva, gen RCAN1

Referències

ALEXANDER, James (2014). “Notes Towards a Definition of Politics”. Philosophy, 89 (2), 273-300.

BEITZ, Charles (1979). Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

BERMEJO-LUQUE, Lilian (forthcoming). “Williams, For and Against: Politics as a Constitutively Normative Practice”.

BERMEJO-LUQUE, Lilian and RODRÍGUEZ-ALCÁZAR, Javier (forthcoming). “Politics, Normativity, and Political Normativity”.

BIJKER, Wiebe; HUGHES, Thomas and PINCH, Trevor (eds.) (1989). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

BLANK, Robert H. (2016). Cognitive Enhancement: Social and Public Policy Issues. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

BOSTROM, Nick and ROACHE, Rebecca (2011). “Smart Policy: Cognitive Enhancement and the Public Interest”. In: SAVULESCU, Julian; TER MEULEN, Ruud and KAHANE, Guy (eds.). Enhancing Human Capacities. Oxford: Blackwell.

CABRERA, Laura (2012). Rethinking human enhancement: social enhancement and emergent technologies. London: Palgrave McMillan.

CABRERA, Luis (2004). Political Theory of Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Case for the World State. London: Routledge.

CLOOTS, Anacharsis (1792). La République universelle ou adresse aux tyrannicides. Paris: Chez les Marchands de Nouveautés.

COLZATO, Lorenza; HOMMEL, Bernhard and BESTE, Christian (2020). “The Downsides of Cognitive Enhancement”. The Neuroscientist, 27 (4), 322-330.

FIRTH, Roderick (1952). “Ethical absolutism and the ideal observer”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 12 (3), 317-345.

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (2019). The state of food and agriculture. Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Rome: FAO.

HARE, Richard M. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

KAMM, Francess (2009). “What Is and Is Not Wrong with Enhancement?” In: SAVULESCU, Julian and BOSTROM, Nick (eds.). Human Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

KANT, Immanuel (1795). Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch, translated by H.B. Nisbet. In: REISS, H.S. (ed.). Kant: Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.

KLEINGELD, Pauline and BROWN, Eric (2019). “Cosmopolitanism”. In: Edward N. ZALTA (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/cosmopolitanism/

LATOUR, Bruno (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford UP.

POGGE, Thomas (1992). “Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty”. Ethics, 103, 48-75.

POGGE, Thomas (1993). “Cosmopolitanism”. In: GOODIN, Robert E.; PETTIT, Philip and POGGE, Thomas (eds.). A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.

POGGE, Thomas (2008). World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge: Polity Press.

RAWLS, John (1999). The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

RODRÍGUEZ-ALCÁZAR, Javier (2017a). “Beyond Realism and Moralism: A Defense of Political Minimalism”. Metaphilosophy, 48, 727-744.

RODRÍGUEZ-ALCÁZAR, Javier (2017b). “Political Minimalism and Social Debates: The Case of Human-Enhancement Technologies”. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 14, 347-357.

RODRÍGUEZ-ALCÁZAR, Javier; BERMEJO-LUQUE, Lilian and MOLINA-PÉREZ, Alberto (2021). “Do Automated Vehicles Face Moral Dilemmas? A Plea for a Political Approach”. Philosophy of Technology, 34, 811-832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00432-5

ROSSI, Enzo (2019). “Being realistic and demanding the impossible”. Constellations, 26, 638-652.

ROTTER, David et al. (2018). “Regulator of Calcineurin 1 helps coordinate whole-body metabolism and thermogenesis”. EMBO Reports, 19. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201744706

SANDBERG, Ander and SAVULESCU, Julian (2011). “The Social and Economic Impacts of Cognitive Enhancement”. In: SAVULESCU, Julian; TER MEULEN, Ruud and KAHANE, Guy (eds.). Enhancing Human Capacities. Oxford: Blackwell.

SHARIF, Safia; GUIRGUIS, Amira; FERGUS, Suzanne and SCHIFANO, Fabrizio (2021). “The Use and Impact of Cognitive Enhancers among University Students: A Systematic Review”. Brain Sciences, 11 (3), 355. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11030355

SINGER, Peter (2009). The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty. New York: Random House.

SINGER, Peter (2016). One World Now: The Ethics of Globalization. New Haven: Yale University Press.

STIGLER, George Joseph (1972). The Adoption of Marginal Utility Theory (History of Political Economy, Vol. 2). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

TÄNNSJÖ, Torbjörn (2008). Global Democracy: The Case for a World Government. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

UNITED NATIONS (2015). Millennium Development Goals website. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/. Accessed 5 September 2022.

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (2021). Food Waste Index Report 2021. Nairobi: UNEP.

WENDT, Alexander (2011). “Why a World State is Inevitable”. In: CABRERA, Luis (ed.). Global Governance, Global Government: Institutional Visions for an Evolving World System. Albany, NJ: SUNY Press.

WILLIAMS, Bernard (2005). In the beginning was the deed: Realism and moralism in political argument. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

WINNER, Langdon (1986). The whale and the reactor: a search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Biografies de l'autor/a

Javier Rodríguez-Alcázar, University of Granada

Javier Rodríguez-Alcázar és professor titular de filosofia moral i política a la Universitat de Granada. És autor del llibre Ciencia, valores y relativismo (Comares) i de nombrosos articles sobre epistemologia, filosofia política i filosofia de la tecnologia, que ha publicat en revistes com Philosophical Issues, Dialectica, Metaphilosophy, Philosophy and Technology i Ethics in Science and Enviromental Politics.

Lilian Bermejo-Luque, University of Granada

Lilian Bermejo-Luque és professora titular de filosofia moral i política a la Universitat de Granada. Treballa en teoria de l’argumentació i la seva relació amb la normativitat. Ha estat la primera presidenta europea de l’Association for Informal Logic, Argumentation Theory and Critical Thinking i directora de la Unitat Científica d’Excel·lència sobre Controvèrsies Públiques FiloLab.

Publicades

15-09-2023

Descàrregues

Les dades de descàrrega encara no estan disponibles.