Dawid Misztal

Dla przedstawicieli posthumanizmu dystopijnego dokonujący się na naszych oczach postęp w dziedzinie tzw. biotechnologii, obok nadziei na rozwiązanie szeregu problemów, niesie ze sobą także szereg niebezpiecznych konsekwencji: groźbę modyfikacji istniejącego porządku społecznego, podkopania obowiązujących norm moralnych, konieczność zmiany rozumienia naszej tożsamości. Dla myślicieli takich, jak Fukuyama, Kass, Sandel czy Habermas, niebezpieczeństwa te związane są z naturą ludzką. Stąd też prognozowane kierunki postępu naukowo-technicznego interpretują oni jako zagrożenie dla tej natury. W prezentowanym tekście przyglądam się, w jaki sposób wykorzystują oni pojęcie natury ludzkiej w swoich argumentacjach.

For the prominent figures of dystopic posthumanism biotechnological progress means not only new possibilities of solving the most nagging problems, but also many extremely dangerous consequences: a modification of social organization, an undermining of morality, and some changes in the way we understand our identity. Thinkers such as Fukuyama, Kass, Sandel and Habermas consider those consequences as a threat to human nature. In the article I examine the way they construct the latter notion (i.e. human nature) in their arguments.

The text examines methodological consequences of anti-metaphysical turn of British empiricism in the field of anthropology. I argue that this shift reinforces anthropology in its descriptive and interdisciplinary form, because destruction of metaphysically grounded subjectivity carried out in the course of evolution of empiricism provides epistemological legitimization of the idea of anthropological research as morally neutral and religiously indifferent procedure. In the final part of the article the difficulties caused by application of this new methodology are emphasized.

Odczytywanie filozoficznego przedsięwzięcia Locke’a przede wszystkim jako krytyki kartezjańskiego natywizmu przysłania zwykle napięcia, jakimi obciążona jest myśl Anglika, oraz skutkuje przemilczeniem sporej części stojących za nią motywów. Choć nie zamierzam w prezentowanym tekście całkowicie zerwać z tą popularną wykładnią, chciałbym zaproponować ujęcie wolne od właściwych jej uproszczeń. Dzięki temu możliwe będzie ukazanie złożoności stosunku filozofii Locke’a do podstawowych idei natywizmu, wydobycie sprzecznych interesów, które Locke chciałby dzięki swojej refleksji pogodzić, oraz zasygnalizowanie w zakończeniu znaczenia wypracowanych przez niego rozwiązań dla późniejszych form antropologicznego dyskursu.

The paper presents anthropological issues as one of the main topics of Nietzsche’s philosophy. I begin with how Nietzsche defines the goals of his anthropological reflection and then I identify the perspective of naturalism as its central interpretational tool. Subsequently I try to show how it is instrumentalized in order to develop correct – according to Nietzsche – characteristics of human being, and as a mean of Nietzsche’s critique of metaphysics. In this way conceiving man as “homo natura” allows to reflect on human in axiological context not limited by old metaphysical beliefs. This attempt of combining naturalistic dimension with axiological one determines specific character and importance of Nietzsche’s anthropology.

The starting point of our considerations is the two books published in 2010: "Ill Fare the Land" by late Tony Judt and "Not for Profit" by Martha Nussbaum. The authors of both books share the conviction that neoliberal changes in the world of global capitalism radically impoverish culture and their consequences may be dramatic and irreversible. In our paper we would like to emphasize the dangers to solidarity and social cohesion posed by neoliberal postulates. We also claim that promoting the neoliberal ideology in the context of higher education and institutions of civic society endangers the very democracy understood as reasonable pluralism (in John Rawls' terminology), consisting in rationality, plurality of opinions, lifestyles, and conceptions of good, as well as consensus as the aim of social and political practices.

The article presents relations between transhumanism and religion with emphasis on their ambiguity. Despite its decidedly secular self-interpretation, tranhumanism appears to be smuggling religious or crypto-religious contents. Attempting to show this, I begin with short, general characteristics of transhumanism. Then its eschatological and metaphysical themes are pointed as the main bearers of religious dead weight. This allows to depict the ways transhumanist thinkers try to elaborate religious undercurrent of their own stance, and the critique of transhumanism developed by Christian theologians and philosophers of religion.

As one of the most prominent figures of dystopic posthumanism Francis Fukuyama views biotechnological revolution as presumably the most dangerous challenges we are going to face in what he calls our posthuman future. In his opinion human enhancement will lead inevitably to some forms of eugenic practices, blurring the difference between humans and other live forms, posing the problem of legal status of modified individuals, etc. Hence he calls for establishment of a new regulatory instruments for controlling biotechnological research and development. Those instruments, Fukuyama says, should refer to and protect his original notion of human nature. In the article I try to criticaly examine the way Fukuyama constructs this notion.