“Radical [life] enhancement is a way of exiting the human species” (Agar). Radical enhancement is referring to an attempt to permanent or temporary alterations to the human body, in this case, the human life span. The social movement of supporting radical life enhancement is known as transhumanism. Within the past few years, there has been much more talk of radical life enhancement. This would mean possibly adding years to the average human life span. There is much controversy over the topic and whether it is ethical or not. Some say that it will improve life and how people live their everyday lives. Others however, are completely against the idea for many reasons such as personal views and beliefs and the fact that they see it as being just plain unnatural. Many individuals support radical life extension, but the idea should not be carried out because it has already been explored, it will cause a divide among people and it is unhuman.
Although human life extension is seen by most as a negative topic there are some positives to it. People who support the idea of using science technologies to elongate human life point out the fact that by doing so it could help cure diseases. The life enhancement technique many not necessarily lengthen life all of them time, but one may seem to stay younger for just a little bit longer. This would cause age-associated diseases to become less common and eventually they could fade out altogether. Although this may be a possibility, it would not cure dying altogether, it would just put it off for a little while, “The fact is that no medical treatment reduces a person’s overall risk of dying” (Gems). Those who support radical life enhancement also see it as a way of getting to experience...
... middle of paper ...
...Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "On Singer and
Radical Life Extension." Sentient Developments 26 Dec. 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in
Context. Web. 26 Nov. 2013.
Gems, David. "Aging Is a Disease That Science Should Cure." Extending the Human Lifespan.
Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Aging: To
Treat, or Not to Treat? The Possibility of Treating Aging Is Not Just an Idle Fantasy."
American Scientist 99.4 (July-Aug. 2011). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 25 Nov.
2013.
Grey, Aubrey de. "Reasons and Methods for Promoting Our Duty to Extend Healthy Life
Indefinitely." Journal of Evolution and Technology 18.1 (May 2008). Rpt. in Extending the
Human Lifespan. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue.
Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
A reason why life expectancy is so short in the novel is because of the "Great Rebirth", the "Great Rebirth" led to a new world that doesn't have machinery or electronics. Because of this there was a lack of medicine. Life expectancy is so short in this society because there isn't any advanced medicine. They think that by cutting them open and letting them bleed the infections would go away. In fact, this would cause someone to bleed to death. This relates to us because in the beginning we didn't know much about medicine or technology, which lead to many deaths. Now, our society has greatly improved because medicine has been greatly developed and diseases that were once thought to be incurable now have a cure. Also, educa...
old age, is a risk or a benefit, and what is the true purpose of
...teract. Many of the medications are very powerful in and of themselves. This article also presents additional approaches to medicating the elderly, including focus on reduction of number of medications prescribed. Both articles present the importance of considering the normal physiological changes within geriatric patients.
-- Contrary to some clinical studies, there is inconclusive scientific evidence to support the theory of increasing a person’s lifespan
Recent breakthroughs in the field of genetics and biotechnology have brought attention to the ethical issues surrounding human enhancement. While these breakthroughs have many positive aspects, such as the treatment and prevention of many debilitating diseases and extending human life expectancy well beyond its current limits, there are profound moral implications associated with the ability to manipulate our own nature. Michael Sandel’s “The Case Against Perfection” examines the ethical and moral issues associated with human enhancement while Nick Bostrom’s paper, “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity” compares the positions that transhumanists and bioconservatists take on the topic of human enhancement. The author’s opinions on the issue of human genetic enhancement stand in contrast to one another even though those opinions are based on very similar topics. The author’s views on human enhancement, the effect enhancement has on human nature, and the importance of dignity are the main issues discussed by Sandel and Bostrom and are the focus of this essay.
This will even be further refined and we will simply print out replacement parts as needed using a modified 3-d printer similar to what we have today. Whether printed or grown this advancement will have the potential to extended human life well beyond what we currently think the limits are. The pros for this advancement would be simply that what we consider life altering diseases or accidents would simply be a temporary condition until replacement parts are either printed or grown and then used to replace the defective areas. This has a clear potential to end several common modern conditions and allow people a normal life beyond what we can manage today. Cons to this advancement are numerous but the most apparent is when we combine genetic manipulation and this technology we can produce genetically superior body parts. Thus, the human condition we have at birth will be thrown out and replaced with something beyond our imagination. This also has a con in that as with genetic manipulation towards a superior human if someone had an ulterior motive they could in fact insert a type of gene marker that if activated could potentially kill the recipient or be used to control a person through either overt blackmail or covert control. AS is the case with all advancements we have looked at thus far we would need to manage this one and ensure the safety of anything being used to replace a body part is not modified to the detriment of the person receiving the replacement
At this stage of the aging individual’s life it should be noteworthy and documented. The
The two controversial topics discussed below share a single goal: to enhance the quality of life of a human individual. The first topic, transhumanism, is a largely theoretical movement that involves the advancement of the human body through scientific augmentations of existing human systems. This includes a wide variety of applications, such as neuropharmacology to enhance the function of the human brain, biomechanical interfaces to allow the human muscles to vastly out-perform their unmodified colleagues, and numerous attempts to greatly extend, perhaps indefinitely, the human lifespan. While transhumanist discussion is predominantly a thinking exercise, it brings up many important ethical dilemmas that may face human society much sooner than the advancements transhumanism desires to bring into reality. The second topic, elective removal of healthy limbs at the request of the patient, carries much more immediate gravity. Sufferers of a mental condition known as Body Integrity Identity Disorder seek to put to rest the disturbing disconnect between their internal body image and their external body composition. This issue is often clouded by sensationalism and controversy in the media, and is therefore rarely discussed in a productive manner (Bridy). This lack of discussion halts progress and potentially limits citizens' rights, as legislation is enacted without sufficient research. The primary arguments against each topic are surprisingly similar; an expansion on both transhumanism and elective amputation follows, along with a discussion of the merit of those arguments. The reader will see how limits placed on both transhumanism and elective amputation cause more harm to whole of human society than good.
...th professionals, were significantly more cynical toward and distrustful of older adults” (p. 63). The findings in Meisner’s (2012) conveyed that physicians demonstrated attitudes about older patients including feelings of these individuals being “disengaged and unproductive” while assuming that these characteristics applied to all of the older patients regardless of each person’s actual abilities (p. 63). Combing all older adults into one category defined by disability and dysfunction is detrimental to the well-being of each patient. Chronological age is not the determining factor relative to treatment; functional age is a better testament to expected outcomes for a patient. It is imperative that physicians understand what is “normal aging” rather than searching for pathologies based on symptoms that are just part of this aging process. According to Meisner
The concept of successful aging is also termed as super aging or optimal health, coined by Rowe & Kahn in 1987. Fundamentally, successful aging in the elderly illustrates neither usual aging (a gradual decrease in biological and psychological functioning) nor pathological aging. Instead, it illustrates a form of aging connected to a reduced possibility of disability or disease, increased physical and cognitive functioning, including autonomy maintained. Aging and old age for a long time presented as dominated by negative traits and states such as sickness, depression and isolation. The aging process is not simply senescence; most people over the age of 65 are not senile, bedridden, isolated, or suicidal (Aldwin & Levenson, 1994).
In an attempt to define ageing one must take in consideration the biophysiological together with the psychosocial aspects; these two aspects are intertwined.
Shaw, A. B. “In Defence of Ageism.” Journal of medical ethics 20.3 (1994): 188–194. Print.
Human enhancement is any attempt to temporarily or permanently overcome the current limitations of the human body through natural or artificial means. It is in our human nature that we somehow increase our life expectancy, become stronger, fearless, independent and smarter. It is no surprise we turn to all sorts of technologies – neurotechnology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology – to improve human performances. While they might improve our performances and abilities, their use raises serious health, ethical and economic issues, furthermore, not enough is known about the long-term consequences.
Technology in terms of medicine has also increased the life expectancy of the average person. With new technological advancements in surgeries, medicines and treatments the average life expectancy is still on the increase. A recent study shows that the average life span for 2004 of a United States Citizen is 77.4 years old. This has increased significantly from 1900 where the average lifespan for a male was 48.2 and for the female 51.5. Thanks to technology we can now live longer.
Genetic Engineering may or may not be beneficial. In terms of being an advantage, it can help decrease the death rate by destroying disease and has the potential to increase the lifetime of humans. Based on what scientists have discovered , genetic engineering is used as a beneficial technique to slow down the aging process of people, meaning it helps to store more life existence. Cloning is one of its biggest successful advantages which developed a whole new discovery in today’s life making life more interesting and easier. This cloning process has made it pos...