Human Nature: How Normative Might it Be?

Abstract

The question of the moral status of human nature is today being posed above all under the influence of medical and biotechnological aspects. These facilitate not only an increasing number of, but also increasingly far-reaching interventions and manipulations in humans, so that the perspective of a gradual "technologization" of his physical constitution can no longer be regarded as merely utopian. Some authors are convinced that this disturbing development can only be halted when an inherent value is (once again) ascribed to human nature. After a short description of this situation (I), the following paper first examines the difficulties that arise as regards an adequately precise descriptive definition of human nature (II) and, in a second step, the problems posed by the necessity to define the normative status of human nature (III). It hereby comes to the conclusion that a precise definition of "human nature" is not possible for fundamental reasons, and that only a weak normativity can be warranted.

Beyond Therapy and Enhancement: The Alteration of Human Nature

“…The issues are (1) whether the use of these technologies will always be beneficial and/or useful to society and to individuals and (2) where and how to set the limits as it is applied to the human body. This in turn raises the question of the fundamental task of biomedical research.…”

“…developed in the course of human existence according to, but limited by one's biological/genetic make-up. 2 Key to this definition is the idea that human nature is biologically determined, while recognizing that technology can help sustain notions of embodiment when threatened by disease or the outcome of unfortunate events (accidents, etc. ).…”

“…I use the term "normal" in this paper as referring to a set of abilities within biological boundaries. 2 For further discussion on the concept of human nature see the special issue of The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, volume 28, edited by Kurtz Bayertz [2]. 3 "Metaman [beyond, and transcending, humans]…is on the verge of significantly altering human form and capacity.…”

The Evaluation of Psychopharmacological Enhancers Beyond a Normative “Natural”–“Artificial” Dichotomy

“…The Normative ''Natural''-''Artificial'' Dichotomy A normative distinction between the ''natural'', which is said to have an inherent value, and the ''artificial'', which thereby is indirectly devaluated, is accepted intuitively by many people (Bayertz 2003). Therefore, naturalness almost always carries a positive connotation in everyday moral consciousness, whereas ''artificial'' is mostly used ''pejoratively''.…”

Günümüz Düşünürleri ve Habermas’ta İnsan Doğası

“…Ona göre, "insanın katkısı olmaksızın olanlar doğaldır, (oysaki) insanın katkısıyla olanlar yapmadır" (Bayertz 2003: 135). Bu bağlamda "doğal" ve "yapma" arasında akla uygun bir ayrım yaptığını iddia ederek, " 'doğal' olan, olanda temellendirilir, ancak buna karşılık 'yapma' olan değişendir" (Bayertz, 2003:136) diyen Bayertz, "doğal" olanın "natura naturata" ya da "yaratılmış doğa", "yapma" olanın ise "natura naturans" ya da "yaratan doğa" anlamına geldiğini ifade ederek insan doğasına ilişkin yeni bir ayrım yapmış, yeni bir terminoloji ortaya koymuş olur.…”