Posthuman Horizons and Realities: Introduction

Kilden Journal of Gender Research Published by the Centre for Gender Research in Norway, Vol. 2, July 2014, pp. 168-172., 2014

Posthumanism is a theoretical frame, as well as an empirical one, which can apply to any field of enquiry, starting from our location as a species, to the individual gaze. Posthumanism addresses the question “who am I?” in conjunction with other related questions, such as: “what am I?” and “where and when are we?”. The existential aspects are not disjunct to political and spatiotemporal elements. On one side, such an approach has a festive element: the loneliness of the Western subject is lost in the recognition of the others as interconnected to the self. On the other side, the awareness of distributed agency in the evolving body of spacetime becomes infinitely resonant, as does each existential performance: there is no absolute “otherness”; we exist in a material net in which everything is actually connected and potentially intra-acting. Such an awareness generates theoretical as well as pragmatic considerations. In the 21st century the impact of anthropocentric habits on earth has become so massive that geologists are addressing the present era as the Anthropocene, in which human actions are seriously affecting the ecosystem. In the past, humans were not recognized as agents directly causing climate changes. It is now common knowledge that the earth is collapsing under the massive quantity of non-recycled garbage produced daily, the high emission of atmospheric greenhouse gases and the level of pollution introduced into the natural environment. The way the majority of current human societies are performing their material interacting in this world is based on anthropocentric premises, which are leading to a point of non-return in ecological and sustainable terms. Since everything is connected, this damaged balance is also directly affecting human well-being: an example can be seen in the alarming global rise on cancer rates. Humanism may not be of help in changing such a direction; posthumanism, on the other hand, can be the turning point, by bringing to the discussion crucial notions such as speciesism, entanglement and non-human agency, among others.

Journal Theology and Science, Vol 18: No 1, Routledge, 2020

The current era can be defined as posthuman. Why? Because the traditional notion of the human has been radically challenged not only by emerging bio-technologies, but also by our new understanding of the significance, and impact, of our species on planet Earth. In the era of the Anthropocene, the human is perceived as a geological force that can no longer be addressed in separation from its planetary and cosmic location. Aware of the importance of these realizations, scholars in the fields of Theology and Science are realizing the urgency of the posthuman debate. This is a unique opportunity for generative exchanges, that are forging not only public opinion, but also laws and regulations, as in the case of genetic “enhancements”i in humans. We as scholars produce what is valued as scientific knowledge, which constitutes the basis for laws, civic norms and social evolutions. The issues at stake are very high. This is why it is of key relevance to level the playing field, so that the discussion can be open, generative and informative; this is something we need to address right now. In fact, what is happening, is that out of excitement, or concern, for the possibilities involved by these bio-technological and ecological developments, some scholars have promptly entered the posthuman field, without a thorough investigation of the posthuman debate itself, thus basing their arguments on unwarranted premises and assumptions, generating confusion and even dismay. The discussion is happening, and it needs our voices. We bear great responsibility and we can make a difference; but before jumping into the posthuman, let's inform ourselves rigorously, openly and in nonsectarian ways. This is urgent, exciting, and necessary. The time is now, to connect and envision the posthuman turn.

Scientific and technological advances have questioned predominant doctrines concerning the human condition. Transhumanism and posthumanism are among the most recent and prominent manifestations of this phenomenon. Debates on trans- and posthumanism have not only gained a considerable amount of academic and popular attention recently, but have also created a widespread conceptual confusion. This is no surprise, considering their recent dates of origin, their conceptual similarities, and their engagements with similar questions, topics, and motifs. Furthermore, trans- as well as posthumanism frequently question their relationship to humanism and reconsider what it means to be human. In this regard both movements are streaming beyond humanism. What this means, however, is far from clear and shall be subject of discussion in this volume.

The term " posthumanism " was used for the first time in the critical sense that entered then common language by Ihab Hassan in 1977. In its almost four decades of existence, posthuman theory has witnessed several evolutions, transformations and refinements, not least because this concept does not name an homogeneous and compact field, but is rather a " discourse " in the Foucauldian sense, a multiplicity of different streams, heterogeneous and fragmented, held together by a basic idea: the notion that old humanism is over. This issue of " Lo Sguardo " intends to attempt a sort of assessment of the last four decades, in order to analyse the limits and boundaries of the concept of posthuman. The leading thread of this issue is thus the question: what is still alive and topical, today, in the question of the posthuman? What themes and trends have progressively run out, and what instead have come to the foreground? How did the questions, and most importantly the answers, to the problem of the posthuman evolve? The question of technology, that is of the hybridization between human and machine, is still for many the most " showy " trait of the posthuman, both in popular culture and for the common understanding within academia; and yet the triumphalism of a certain posthumanism – and above all of its transhumanist deviations – alienated a number of scholars, starting precisely with one of the " mothers " of posthuman theory, Donna Haraway. The fact remains that the levels of technology's intimacy and intrusion into the human have, if anything, enormously increased sinceA Cyborg Manifesto (1983), and so have also the oppositions to it (Habermas, Fukuyama), and this keeps raising inexhaustible ontological, ethical and aesthetic questions (decisive are here Bostrom's reflexions).

Posthumanism is used as a collective term to understand ''any discursive or bodily configuration that displaces the human, humanism, and the humanities'' (Halberstam and Livingston 1995:vii, emphasis added). There are compelling reasons for introducing posthumanism to consumer research. Consumer research often theorises technology as an externalised instrument that the human creates, uses, and controls. In the 21 st century we are beginning to realise that, far from being a mere tool, technology is the centre of critical thought about culture and about nature. It has recently been suggested that marketing and consumer research now need to think about technology in a manner which reflects its ubiquity, its deeper symbolic and aesthetic dimensions, and the ways in which it can radically change humanness and human-centred approaches to researching the world. Posthumanism is fundamental to theorising humanness in an era that is witnessing the complexification of new technologies. To follow a posthuman mode of thinking will lead to important ethical and metaphysical insights.

Journal of Posthuman Studies

Studies in Sociology of Science, 2014

The author provides a philosophical and moral evaluation of a number of arguments against and in favour of posthumanism. Some of the arguments explored are: the claim that current evils are necessary to maintain our humanity; Sandel's association of radical enhancement with the striving for mastery and perfection; psychological concerns about posthumanism; the "simple conservative argument" (Buchanan); the idea of unlimited longevity; as well as possible issues in the relationship between unenhanced people and posthumans. The author defends the idea that radical enhancements are justified in view of the possible lag of natural selection to select desirable/ necessary current human traits. He also rejects the idea that "human nature" ought to be regarded as a moral desideratum. His conclusion is that the possibility of radical (also biomedical) human enhancements does not warrant blanket moral approval or disapproval. We ought to see what specific possibilities arise, and then judge those possibilities on their own, specific merit.

Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies

A central task in understanding the theme of the posthuman involves relating it to the concept of the human. For some, there is continuity between the concepts of the human and the posthuman. This approach can be understood in the tradition of the great chain of being. Another approach posits a conceptual, and perhaps ontological, saltus (μετάβασις εἰς ἄλλο γένος). Here, the concept of the posthuman is taken to represent a radical departure from the realm of the human. After considering Lovejoy’s scheme of the great chain of being, Aristotle’s view of a conceptual saltus (μετάβασις εἰς ἄλλο γένος), and their historical significance, I will suggest how we might distinguish various concepts of the posthuman from the human by applying Rudolf Carnap’s approach to defining multiple concepts of space. We can thus create a linguistic convention that will assist in constructing useful conceptions of the human and posthuman – these can clarify the prospects of a posthuman future.