Journal: Christian Apologetics Journal
Volume: CAJ 10:2 (Fall 2012)
Article: Moral Perspectives For A Possible Posthuman Future – Part 1
Author: Kevin Staley

CAJ 10:2 Fall 2012) p. 61

Moral Perspectives For A Possible Posthuman Future – Part 1

Kevin Staley

A close examination of the streams of thought within transhumanism, reveals the underlying intent of some to sequester the next step in human evolution from natural evolution and to do so by way of advancements in technology. This two–part article treats that which is common to the areas of AI, robotics, and transhumanism, namely, the hypothetical existence of ‘persons’ in a posthuman existence and in other ‘intelligent’ artifacts. The particulars regarding the issues in each of these areas are voluminous, and while important, would encumber a response intended to guide the conversation. Instead, the approach taken here will be to locate the subject in its proper context rather than endeavoring to draw specific ethical lines of demarcation pertinent to each area that the advent of new technology or discovery might render superfluous.

The advantage of such an approach is that it puts humanity in a position to carefully determine in advance the wisdom of appropriating

CAJ 10:2 Fall 2012) p. 62

a technology, and the researcher will prepare a framework essential for locating the direction and motivation of present and future developments in these areas. The imperative to establish a framework that could provide both the meaning of and the responsibility to the created order is evident in the resultant moral ambiguity and susceptibility of creation when severed from secure ontological anchors. This truth is attested to in the postmodern milieu with its moral ambiguity evident in several areas including those under review in this work. In particular, the denial of God’s existence and the ensuing denial of His governance and guidance place the created order into the often notorious and morally capricious hands of humanity. Commenting on the “impossible position of man in general” and “in particular for contemporary man,” Hans Jonas astutely observes that what is now needed most, supreme wisdom, requires “objective value and truth,” but its very existence is denied.1 This kind of wisdom based on a reliable understanding of value and truth requires a framework in which to ground value and truth, and God’s theodrama affords such a ground.2

The anxieties held by Jonas during the time of writing the work cited above stemmed from both the nuclear threat (still present today) and, more disconcertingly to him, from the peril to the integrity of humanity and the natural environment made imminent by the “headlong race of progress.”3 The latter concern finds continued and ...