BEYOND THE HUMAN: SUBJECTIVITY AT THE TRANSITION OF OUR POSTHUMAN FUTURE

BEYOND THE HUMAN: SUBJECTIVITY AT THE TRANSITION OF OUR POSTHUMAN FUTURE

BDes Dissertation

8,024 Words Session 2016/17 Department of Product Design Supervised by Thea Stevens

Acknowledgement Completing this dissertation was a very ambitious task as this field was a very current and emerging conversation within modern society; resulting in my sources being very speculative and forecasting in nature but nevertheless fascinating! In particular, I would especially like to thank my FoCI supervisor Dr Thea Stevens for not only her support and guidance throughout this dissertation but for her contribution to inspiring me to think beyond what is possible - as such it has been an absolute pleasure to be supervised by Thea for this submission. As for my holistic GSA experience over the past 4 years, I would really like to thank all the other wonderful tutors throughout my Studio practice and FoCI studies who have contributed to my development as a designer and reflective practitioner; Kirsty Ross, Janet Kelly, Mil Stricevic, Nicholas Oddy, Francis Robertson, Graeme Lister, Sarah A Smith, Elaine Boyle, Leona McConnell & Gordon Hush. When submitting this dissertation, I was conscientious that topic was very much a risk but nevertheless believed this topic personifies my interests as a speculative designer of preferable futures.

Synopsis This dissertation aims to articulate the significance of philosophical ‘posthumanism’ within our ever-transient world; citing contemporary technological developments, particularly in relation to the emerging technological revolution of ‘transhumanism' causing an ontological paradigm shift in human subjectivity and ethical consciousness of what is yet to come. ‘Posthumanism’ is a morally ambiguous concept that refers to notions about transcending what it means to be human by means of technology, but to what level does the fusion between natural and artificial becomes indeterminable, as well as ethically unexplainable? Structurally, I will examine each stage of posthumanist discourse, citing philosophers and critics of posthumanist theory to evaluate the ethical considerations and consequences that transitioning would cause humanity as we know it. Chapter 1 presents a review of prominent arguments about the limitations of the human condition and our anxiety towards natural progression. Chapter 2 examines contradiction involved with the implementation of technology with the human model through transhumanist discourse.

Chapter 3 focuses on the concept of the utopian ‘Posthuman’, but how does this being compare with the ideologies and identity of its human predecessors? This dissertation concludes by evaluating the ways in which human subjectivity is constructed and perceived going forward into the future.

Contents List of Illustrations

1

Introduction

2

Chapter 1.

Humanism – Anxiety at the Edge of Human Existence

4

1.1.

A Critical View of Evolution: Mapping the field of Anthropocentrism

4

1.2.

Approaching the Limits of Humanity: The Natural Selection Deadlock

7

1.3.

Technological Transition: Humanity’s Last Chance of Survival?

10

Transhumanism - The Contradiction of Posthuman Transition

13

2.1.

Ethical Enlightenment: Conceptualising the Transhuman

13

2.2.

Spectre of Eugenics: Transhuman Figures and Cartographies of Power

16

2.3.

Duality of Survival: Do we need to Sacrifice to Salvage?

18

Posthumanism - Speculating Human Subjectivity and Identity

20

3.1.

Human to the Posthuman: Subject or Object?

20

3.2.

Influence of the Singularity: Dystopian Future or Harmonic Utopia?

23

3.3.

The Posthuman Subject: Sci-Fi to Sci-Fact?

26

Chapter 2.

Chapter 3.

Conclusion

28

Bibliography

30

List of Illustrations Front Cover: New Horizons Wallpaper URL: https://goo.gl/z1CbHg [accessed 02 January 2017]

Figure 1: Diagram Comparison URL: http://posthumanism.com/ [accessed 14 October 2016]

Figure 2: Geological Periods URL: https://theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropocene-epochexperts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth [accessed 06 November 2016]

Figure 3: “We’re Done” Prediction URL: http://futurism.com/the-next-stage-of-evolution-howwill-the-human-species-evolve/ [accessed 8 November 2016]

Figure 4: Qualitative Categories of Existential Risk Nick Bostrom, “Global Catasphrophic Risks” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) p.53.

Figure 5: Reimagination of Michelangelo’s ‘The Creation of Adam’ implying shift in human subjectivity though human’s creation of technology within transhumanist discourse. URL: http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/transhumanism-how-humanity-destroys-itself/ [accessed 9 November 2016]

Figure 6: Depicting transhuman through the dehumanisation of Leonardo Da Vinci’s ‘Vitruvian Man’ URL: http://igyaan.in/119804/dummies-guide-to-transhumanism-epic-or-epicfail/ [accessed 07 November 2016]

Figure 7: Wire Sculpture 'Die Harder’ by David Mach symbolises the future of humanity’s fate URL: http://thedisorderofthings.com/2015/07/16/secular-bodies-of-pain-and-the-posthumanmartial-corps/ [accessed 11 November 2016]

Figure 8: Uploading the mind, visual depiction of the posthuman transition through stark cybernetic enhancement URL: http://lasiafme.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/cyborgs-the-truthabout-human-augmentation/ [accessed 4 November 2016]

Figure 9: Speculative ontological intertwinement of technology and human DNA URL: http://wakingtimes.com/2014/06/02/transhumanist-singularity-ultimate-escapistagenda/ [accessed 4 November 2016]

Figure 10: Doctor Who phenomena, the Cybermen, as a symbolic subject of posthumanism URL: http://rudetruth.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/whos-posthuman.html [accessed 5 November 2016]

1

Introduction

“Humanism may be coming to an end as humanism transforms itself into something one must helplessly call posthumanism.”1

‘Posthumanism’ is a philosophical concept that refers to transcending what it means to be human by means of technology.2 However, to what level does the fusion between natural and artificial become indeterminable, as well as ethically contentious? Due to the speculative nature of this concept, many philosophers have proposed disputatious and often contradictory hypothetical theories about what lies ahead of humanity. This confusion blurs and mystifies the concept even further - requiring us to formulate a clear perception of what we mean by ‘post-human’? Whilst our understanding of what it means to be ‘human’ can also be critically challenged, we must understand exactly what is ‘post’ about the posthuman. Figure 1 contextualises out current understanding of ‘posthumanism’ (H++) alluding to the mystery and endless possibility this phenomenon possesses. By investigating this theory, I aim to explore the moral, technological and ethical implications for how we think beyond the human.

Figure 1: Diagram Comparison URL: http://posthumanism.com/ [accessed 14 October 2016]

1

Ihab Hassan, "Prometheus as Performer: Towards a Posthumanist Culture." (The Georgia Review no. 31, 1977) p.843 Nick Bostrom, “Posthumanism” URL: http://www.posthumanism.com [accessed 26 December 2016]

2

2

This dissertation aims to articulate the significance of philosophical ‘posthumanism’ within our ever-transient world; citing contemporary technological developments, particularly in relation to the emerging technological revolution of ‘transhumanism' causing an ontological paradigm shift in human subjectivity and ethical consciousness about what is yet to come.

To support my thesis, I will consider emerging philosophical discourse including key sources such as; Andy Miah’s “Posthumanism: A Critical History,” Rosi Braidotti’s “The Posthuman,” Neil Badmington’s “Posthumanism,” Katherine Hayle’s “How We Became Posthuman,” and Cary Wolfe’s “What is Posthumanism?” as these critical texts explore these concepts proposed origins, current development and progression whilst also speculating where this could lead us going forward. Alongside these texts, I will also allude to many other philosophers in this field; like, Nick Bostrom, Derek Parfit, Ray Kurzweil, David Roden and Jürgen Habermas whose accredited critical specialisms are situated within the domain of ‘posthumanism.’

To structure my argument, I will be exploring this pervasive topic by examining three chronologically progressive movements; ‘Humanism’, ‘Transhumanism’ and ‘Posthumanism’.

Humanism being an ethical stance point that emphasises the value of the human condition.3 Transhumanism (H+) being an ideology which seeks to transcend what it means to be human through the advancement of technologies.4 As we continue to become more deeply enmeshed with emerging science and technology, the boundaries between human and machine will begin to blur; where technology will shape human subjectivity as much as humans have shaped technology.5 Posthumanism encompasses these transhumanist values through examining the implications of surpassing subjectivity beyond humanity.6 Through linking these movements with overarching themes of anxiety, contradiction and identity, I will assess the ethical considerations that transitioning would cause humanity. This dissertation concludes by evaluating moral consequences of our posthuman future in which human subjectivity will be reconstructed and perceived.

3

Revolvy, “Humanism” URL: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Humanism&item_type=topic [accessed 27 December 2016] Humanity+, “Transhumanism” URL: https://hpluspedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism [accessed 28 December 2016] 5 IEET, “What is the difference between Posthumanism and Transhumanism?” URL: http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/lagrandeur20140729 [accessed 28 December 2016] 6 Nick Bostrom, “Posthumanism” URL: http://www.posthumanism.com [accessed 26 December 2016]

4

3

Chapter 1: Humanism Anxiety at the Edge of Human Existence “The posthumanist perspective rests on the assumption of the historical decline of Humanism but goes further in exploring alternatives […] towards elaborating alternative ways of conceptualizing the human subject.”7

A significant aspect of posthuman discourse is “decentering the human” in relation to our environmental, ecological, and evolutionary advancement.8 Hence, this first chapter will centrally examine the human condition and subjectivity through our species anxiety and uncertainty towards progressive and sustainable evolution. I will consider why we would need to transcend what it means to be human citing human limitations, existential risk and technological progression as reasons to explore other options than natural progression to ensure the survival and perpetuation of humanity.

1.1. A Critical View of Evolution: Mapping the field of Anthropocentrism To begin my exploration into posthumanist discourse, I will firstly examine human evolution by investigating biological limitation within the natural selection process. Humanity is a product of an unguided natural result of a 3.8-billion-year experiment of evolution.9 Over nearly all that immense time, changing evolution would have been very gradual; hence it is useful to map how we conceive humanity. In 1993, life scientist Cesare Emiliani suggested a start date to humanity’s history to mark our inception; disregarding the antiquity of other biological eras, the Holocene Calendar stretches back over 12,000 years referring to the Human Era of anthropocentrism.10 This mark of our beginning stems from human’s ability to start changing the world around us. Since our primitive historical conception, our autonomy has thrived resulting in change accelerating rapidly during the past century of modern civilisation – a tiny sliver of the Earth’s history. Figure 2 represents the scale of the Holocene epoch which marks humanity’s rapid development in terraforming our planet.

7

Rosi Braidotti, “The Posthuman.” (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2013) p.37 Andy Miah, “Posthumanism: A Critical History” in Gordijn, B. & Chadwick, R (Eds) Medical Enhancements & Posthumanity (New York: Routledge, 2007) p.71 9 Casey Luskin, “What's the matter with evolution?” URL: https://world.wng.org/2015/04/part_1_whats_the_matter_with_evolution [accessed 05 October 2016] 10 Science Alert, “Should our calendar follow the Human Era?” URL: http://www.sciencealert.com/watch-should-our-calendar-follow-thehuman-era [accessed 09 December 2016] 8

4

Figure 2: Geological Periods URL: https://theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropocene-epoch experts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth [accessed 06 November 2016]

Although comparing the rapidity of our progress in recent times can be seen as progression; accumulated through the decades, humans ‘ecological footprint’ has affected nature’s balance and constructed the severe environmental pandemic the world is now experiencing.11 Now, geologists have decided that the impact of our changes have been so profound, so global and so permanent; that we have induced a new geological epoch – ‘the Anthropocene’.12 This human-influenced paradigm shift sets a different trajectory for the future as change of a geological era in history has triggered a substantial impact on humanity - like mass extinction.13 Therefore, humanity’s instigation of the Anthropocene epoch signals a transition from the natural ecosystem to one where humanity influences progression moving forward attempting to overcome biological boundaries and evolutionary restrictions.

11

K.J. Gaston, ‘Biodiversity and extinction: Species and people’, Progress in Physical Geography, vol. 29, no. 2 (2005) p.239 Damian Carrington, “The Anthropocene epoch” URL: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropoceneepoch-experts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth [accessed 05 October 2016] 13 Damian Carrington, “The Anthropocene epoch” URL: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropoceneepoch-experts-urge-geological-congress-human-impact-earth [accessed 05 October 2016] 12

5

Hence, the Anthropocene epoch could be considered an act of secular ‘humanism,’ being a “philosophical stance that emphasizes the agency and value of primitive human beings,” affirming our ability to shape our lives using reason and ingenuity at the center of our ethical decision making.14 This attitude suggests the notion that humans have a profound and pivotal stance and status compared to all current and precedent biological life of Earth on account of our capability and sovereignty faculties to change the world around us.

Juxtaposing this notion to posthumanist theory within the humanities and the social sciences; critical humanist discourse aligns with the anthropocentric views that inspires posthumanist stimulus and phenomenon.15 Philosopher Neil Badmington provides a succinct account of the humanism that posthumanists critique:

“the human being occupies a natural and eternal place at the very centre of things, where it is distinguished absolutely from machines, animals, and other inhuman entities; where it shares with all other human beings a unique essence; where it is the origin of meaning and the sovereign subject of history […]

Therefore, human beings are exceptional, autonomous and set above the world that lies at their feet.”16

Concluding his statement, Badmington proposes that, “anthropocentrism, with its assured insistence upon human exceptionalism, is no longer an adequate or convincing account of the way of the world.”17 Humanity’s moral attitude towards the environment is not only drastically altering Earths ecosystem, but is consequentially also threatening humans’ survival in the nearby future. Due to severe environmental change that anthropocentric consumption poses to our planet, eventually our own species will be effected by the devastating repercussions loss of biological diversity has on nature.18 In essence, we need our planet more than it needs us as the resultant ‘ecological shock’19 could irreversibly affect our “planetary boundaries” with humanity being the prime instigator for an evolutionary pandemic on Earth that could threaten our human existence as we know it.20 14

Richard Norman, “On Humanism (Thinking in Action)” (London: Routledge, 2004) pp.167-95 Cary Wolfe, “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010) pp.3-29 16 Neil Badmington, "Posthumanism." In ‘Routledge Companion to Science and Literature’, edited by Bruce. Rossini Clarke, Manuela (New York, USA: Routledge, 2011) p.374 17 Neil Badmington, "Posthumanism." In ‘Routledge Companion to Science and Literature’, edited by Bruce. Rossini Clarke, Manuela (New York, USA: Routledge, 2011) p.381 18 Paul Wapner, “The Humanity of Global Environmental Ethics”, The Journal of Environment Development, vol. 18, no. 2, (2009) p. 204 19 Andrea Downing et al, “The Resilience and Resistance of an Ecosystem to a Collapse of Diversity” URL: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046135 [accessed 04 October 2016] 20 Johan Rockstrom, “TED Talk: Let the environment guide our development” URL: https://www.ted.com/talks/johan_rockstrom_let_the_environment_guide_our_development?language=en [accessed 02 October 2016] 15

6

1.2. Approaching the Limits of Humanity: The Natural Selection Deadlock Like Earth, humans are now approaching a point of uncertainty within evolution. This anxiety stems from climatologists arguing that it may be irreversible to reserve climate change and our planet will be uninhabitable by life in the reachable future - the extent of which has provoked eminent theoretical scientist Steven Hawking to recently claim that, “humans only have 1,000 more years left on Earth.”21 This stark warning suggests humanity will struggle to survive without a dramatic breakthrough or revelation to stop impending doom. Hawking cautions that, “we must continue to go into space for the future of humanity. I don’t think we’ll survive another 1,000 years without escaping beyond our fragile planet.”22 While the raised notion of transcending Earth for the prospect of interstellar colonisation is intriguing and exciting; we should question whether such an experiment is even practical… or even possible?

Furthermore, is there a better solution to this environmental problem? Thinking about the most prominent anxieties when contemplating space travel; speed, time and human compatibility, I will challenge the feasibility of Hawking’s prediction of interstellar space travel.

Firstly, the fastest we can theoretically travel is the speed of light – about 186,000 miles per second - but this is relatively difficult upper limit to achieve given our space propulsion systems today. 23 Even using the best propulsion systems available, we would only achieve relative speeds of 0.01% of the speed of light to propel just one human through deep space.24 However, some advanced propulsion concepts show more promise for space travel but will barely achieve up to 2% the relative speed of light, so we have a long way to go before we can achieve optimum speeds for space travel.25 Furthermore, given the population of Earth and crew limitations of space travel as a Space shuttle claims to hold up to seven astronauts at once while the International Space Station holds up to six astronauts at a time.26 These capacities would not be suitable for humanities leap into outer space. Secondly, the vast distances between habitable exoplanets combined with the long-term spacecraft suitability

21

Colin Payne, “Stephen Hawking says humans only have 1,000 years left on planet Earth” URL: http://inhabitat.com/stephen-hawking-sayshumans-only-have-1000-years-left-on-planet-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016] 22 Colin Payne, “Stephen Hawking says humans only have 1,000 years left on planet Earth” URL: http://inhabitat.com/stephen-hawking-sayshumans-only-have-1000-years-left-on-planet-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016] 23 BBC Earth. “The real reasons nothing can go faster than light” URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20160429-the-real-reasons-nothingcan-ever-go-faster-than-light [accessed 21 November 2016] 24 The Conversation. “If Earth falls, will interstellar space travel be our salvation?” URL: http://theconversation.com/if-earth-falls-willinterstellar-space-travel-be-our-salvation-35523 [accessed 21 November 2016] 25 The Conversation. “If Earth falls, will interstellar space travel be our salvation?” URL: http://theconversation.com/if-earth-falls-willinterstellar-space-travel-be-our-salvation-35523 [accessed 21 November 2016] 26 The Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. “How many people can a spaceship hold?” URL: https://howthingsfly.si.edu/ask-anexplainer/how-many-people-can-spaceship-hold [accessed 21 November 2016]

7

puts severe constraints on the realities of human space travel. Given that one light-year means we couldn’t arrive at a destination sooner than one Earth year, we would need to develop spacecraft’s that could sustain human life for multiple years in orbit. Given our current top propulsion speed of 0.01% that of the speed of light, humans would take an astounding 425 years to reach our nearest exoplanet ‘Proxima B,’27 that could be suitable to support human life. Current space travel initiatives (and biological restrictions) would not be able to support a human in spaceflight for that length of time. Hypothetically, if modern propulsion technology could achieve speeds relative to light, that time would be drastically reduced but there will still be complications in sustaining human life for multiple years in orbit, while currently the longest astronaut mission in space has maxed out at around 343 days thus far.28 Thirdly, our galaxy has no shortage of potential habitable worlds but when choosing an exoplanet to consider habit, we must analyse what is meant by a “habitable world” to an astrobiologist, this simply means a planet with oceans of water that orbit a sun-like star.29 But human habitability requires more than these bare components, furthermore the probability of ordinary humans populating such a world is slim. In comparison, there is simply be no place like Earth as its atmosphere and living ecosystem is the result of its own unique evolution over the course of time, which is unlikely to occur coincidentally on any other planet but our own.30 Lastly, with the expansion of the observable universe, these potential feats of humanity become ever less likely as time passes by; putting this in perspective, we are currently, “0.00000000001%” of the universe and this percentage will continue to diminish under cosmic inflation going forward.31 Considering how insignificant we are in the universe and uncertainty of survival; space travel wouldn’t be the most practical or sustainable solution for humanity; within Hawking’s proposed 1,000-year deadline, developing space technologies adequate for humanity’s needs in Space before Earth is rendered uninhabitable would prove challenging to say the least.

So, what other options does humanity have to survive? Perhaps instead of running away from our fast-changing planet, we should adapt to it instead; Charles Darwin pioneered 27

TechCrunch, “Astronomers have found the closest exoplanet to Earth” URL: https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/24/astronomers-have-foundthe-closest-exoplanet-to-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016] 28 Space.com, “Astronaut Scott Kelly Sets New U.S. Record for Time Spent in Space” URL: http://www.space.com/30870-scott-kelly-sets-newrecord-time-in-space.html [accessed 3 November 2016] 29 The Conversation, “If Earth falls, will interstellar space travel be our salvation?” URL: http://theconversation.com/if-earth-falls-willinterstellar-space-travel-be-our-salvation-35523 [accessed 21 November 2016] 30 The Conversation, “If Earth falls, will interstellar space travel be our salvation?” URL: http://theconversation.com/if-earth-falls-willinterstellar-space-travel-be-our-salvation-35523 [accessed 21 November 2016] 31 Forbes, “We Still Don't Know How Fast the Universe Is Expanding” URL: http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/01/12/we-stilldont-know-how-fast-the-universe-is-expanding/#65fb0bfe3a93 [accessed 15 December 2016]

8

nearly 150 years ago that “species can adapt to changing environmental conditions through the trial-and-error process.”32 However, studies show that climate change is unfurling at such a rate that evolution can’t keep up - placing our species at risk as we progress. Furthermore, with the progressed rate of change, natural selection would be inferior to human evolution as, “it has taken us over a million years to progress from our ancestors Homo erectus to our species Homo sapiens,”33 this shows how unreliable nature can be and why we cannot depend on it when looking to the future. Even more so, renowned philosopher Sir David Attenbourgh believes that under Darwin’s evolution mechanism, “humans have stopped evolving.”34 Figure 3 illustrates our uncertainty of what will happen next as natural selection ceases to exist.

Figure 3: “We’re Done” Prediction URL: http://futurism.com/the-next-stage-of-evolutionhow-will-the-human-species-evolve/ [accessed 8 November 2016]

This shocking revelation acknowledges that humanity will not last forever as we grow ever anxious over our reliance of natural evolution to perpetuate life on Earth – raising the question whether humanity could survive without evolution? Since the dawn of the Earth, species have since survived five mass extinction events throughout history, which have each wiped out up to 96% of all organisms on Earth.35 Evolution has been our only saviour in continuation of life.

Alarmingly due to humanist actions, we are now at the beginning of the ‘sixth mass extinction’, however, this event will be ‘like nothing in Earth’s history.’36 With the prospects of natural selection dwindling, what will be humanity’s last chance of survival moving forward?

32

Gizmodo, “The Sixth Mass Extinction Will Be Like Nothing in Earth’s History” URL: http://gizmodo.com/the-sixth-mass-extinction-will-be-likenothing-in-earth-1786598392 [accessed 06 November 2016] 33 Stephen Gould, "'What is life?' The Next Fifty Years. Speculations on the future of biology." (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) p.25.

34 Hannah Furness, “Sir David Attenborough: Humans have stopped evolving” URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/evolution/10297124/Sir-David-Attenborough-Humans-have-stopped-evolving.html [accessed 06 October 2016] 35 BBC Nature, “Big Five mass extinction events” URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/extinction_events [accessed 06 October 2016] 36 Gizmodo, “The Sixth Mass Extinction Will Be Like Nothing In Earth’s History” URL: http://gizmodo.com/the-sixth-mass-extinction-will-be-likenothing-in-earth-1786598392 [accessed 06 November 2016]

9

1.3. Technological Transition: Humanity’s Last Chance of Survival?

Throughout the history of our planet, "all species that have existed on Earth, 99.9 percent are now extinct.”37 This mortality statistic should frighten us given that our population make up for just 0.1% of the Earth’s inhabitants. As previous mass extinctions have wiped out up to 96% of all species at a time, without our reliance on natural selection it will be inevitable that potential catastrophes will drastically threaten human civilisation within the near future; whether it be severe climate change, loss of biodiversity or even a human-influenced event. If any of these threats destroys the human race or drastically limits its future potential; then this will increase the risk of an ‘existential catastrophe.’38 Nick Bostrom adds further empirical claim that: “the objective of reducing existential risks should be a dominant consideration whenever we act out of an impersonal concern for humankind as a whole maximize the probability of […] any outcome that avoids existential catastrophe.”39 Bostrom affirms that shaping the future of humanity is overwhelmingly pivotal now, and that forecasting the best way to perpetuate humanity will minimise potential existential risk for the future. Figure 4 shows Bostrom’s measure of the qualitative effects for potential instances of existential risk which can be used to impart perspective to the severity and scope of a catastrophic event.

Figure 4: Qualitative Categories of Existential Risk Nick Bostrom, “Global Catasphophic Risks” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) p.53.

37

Shane Burgess, “99.9% of Species Ever on Earth Are Extinct Now” URL: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-ha/interview-999-of-species_b_5612391.html [accessed 06 November 2016] 38 Ricard A Posner, “Catastrophe: Risk and Response” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004) p.24 39 Nick Bostrom, ‘Existential risk prevention as global priority’ [Global Policy, Vol 4, Issue 1 (2013): 15-31] (2012) p.10

10

This diagram attempts to put existential catastrophe into perspective through categorising the potential effects through a macro and micro lens. Although Bostrom’s attempts to comprehend an event of such devastation are admirable, the stated events true impact will not be met until a catastrophe happens by illuminating us how fragile life can be. Alongside Bostrom, moral philosopher Derek Parfit has also stressed the significance of the future potential of humanity through the context of existential risk, but does so by focusing on the loss of humanity’s future achievements, instead of mourning our current abilities.40 Parfait reflects of the value of humanity’s future in his book, “On What Matters”:

“We live during the hinge of history. Given the scientific and technological discoveries of the last two centuries, the world has never changed as fast. We shall soon have even greater powers to transform, not only our surroundings, but ourselves and our successors. If we act wisely in the next few centuries, humanity will survive its most dangerous and decisive period […] What has occurred so far is at most a tiny fraction of possible human history. Nor should we restrict this question to the lives of future human beings. Just as we had ancestors who were not human, we may have descendants who will not be human…”41

Hence, both Parfit and Bostrom believe that mitigating existential risk is likely to be one of the most important issues for humanity when looking to the future. However, Parfit’s reflection is specifically intriguing when he alludes to future descendants being non-human. Given that homo-sapiens were innately dangerous to their ‘protohuman’ homo-erectus ancestors they evolved from at the beginning of the Human Era, we can assume that our descendants could pose a similar threat to our current civilisation.42 Given that the ponderous perpetual force of natural selection is no longer feasible for continuation of life, we must question how could our descendants evolve? Moreover, if they are ‘non-human,’ what exactly will they be?

With the acceleration of technological progress during the Anthropocene era of uncertainty, humanity is rapidly approaching a critical phase in its saga. Our future – proposing humans will have a future at all - may well be determined by how we take advantage of new evolutionary opportunities that bypass natural selection. Threats of existential risks and events

40

Derek Parfit, “Reasons and Persons.” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984) pp. 453-454 Derek Parfit, “On What Matters.” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) p.616 42 David Tormsen, “10 Post-Human Entities Who Could Inherit the Earth” URL: http://listverse.com/2015/06/10/10-post-human-entities-whocould-inherit-the-earth/. [accessed 06 October 2016].

41

11

that “could cause our extinction or destroy the potential of Earth-originating intelligent life.”43 Given the existential indications, humanity must take control over evolution to go forward.

Hence, technological transition or ‘transhumanism’ proposes the progression of humanity by ensuring our survival over imminent extinction by means of technology. Not only does transhumanism propose to perpetuate humanity into the future, it suggests extending our lifespans, our physical abilities, as well as our intellectual capabilities past natural and biological limitations.44 Through embracing ‘transhumanism’ as a tangible transitory concept of ‘posthumanism’ as it is expected to become humanity’s last feasible chance of survival.

With this in mind, posthumanism is a still emergent discourse. In the book, “What is Posthumanism?” Cary Wolfe, alludes to this transitory moment “in which the decentering of the human by its imbrication in technical, medical, informatic, and economic networks is increasingly impossible to ignore.”45 Insisting that transcending humanity will be a welcomed by humankind in a future where the technological will guide our progression. Whereas, in ‘The Posthuman,’ Rosi Braidotti expands on this concept:

“The posthumanist perspective rests on the assumption of the historical decline of Humanism but goes further in exploring alternatives […] towards elaborating alternative ways of conceptualizing the human subject.”46

Hence, there is still mystery and questions towards humanity’s future, the idea of transhumanism is seen by posthumanists as an “extension and intensification of the tenets of humanism.”47 These concepts attempt to reimagine our existence, often emphasising the fallacy and fragility of the human race in order to propose a better and more brighter future for us all. Therefore, from a humanist perspective, no matter which way you look at it posthumanism is a fascinating prospect. Although the concept of posthumanism is a long way from ever being attained - transhumanism proposes a more tangible and feasible solution for humanity’s existential crisis; but does transhumanism holistically solve the problem our species anxiety and uncertainty towards progressive and sustainable evolution?

43

Nick Bostrom, “Existential Risks - Analysing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards” URL: http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html [accessed 06 October 2016] 44 Matthew Hughes, “How Technology May Be Influencing Human Evolution.” URL: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/technology-mayinfluencing-human-evolution/ [accessed 05 November 2016] 45 Cary Wolfe, “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010) p.26 46 Rosi Braidotti, “The Posthuman.” (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2013) p.37 47 Cary Wolfe, “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010) p.29

12

Chapter 2: Transhumanism The Contradiction of Posthuman Transition “when a subject becomes a transversal agent, she actively permeates and makes permeable the parameters of her subjective territory and generates a continuously shifting series of conditions that challenge the underlying structures of her individuality and social identity. Yet this entropic reconfiguration can produce enhanced reflexive consciousness and agency by triggering new experiences and perspectives never before imaginable.” 48

Within posthumanist theory, more often than not it is the transhumanists who are most interested in exploring the ethical implications of genetic engineering and metamorphosis. In this chapter, I will explore the contradiction between subject and object discussing the human creation and instigation of technology. I will focus in particular on emerging experimental technology that can be embedded or integrated into the human in such a way as to fundamentally alter their natural state to such a level that the fusion between natural and artificial becomes indeterminable, as well as ethically contentious.

2.1. Ethical Enlightenment: Conceptualising the Transhuman Considering humanity as a ‘work in progress,’ 49 Transhumanism is a popular movement within posthumanist discourse that believes we can, and should, transcend the human condition. We are all increasingly aware of the exponential rate at which technology is currently advancing and that its evolutionary limits have thus not yet been reached. Hence, technology will undoubtedly prove to have a substantial influence on humanity going forward, but there exists the possibility that technological progression will eventually depreciate the human condition. Bostrom, therefore defines Transhumanism to be;

“The study of the ramifications, promises, and potential dangers of technologies that will enable us to overcome fundamental human limitations, and the related study of the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies.”50

48

Bryan Reynolds, “Transversal Subjects.” (United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009) p.286 David Roden, “Posthuman Life: Philosophy at the Edge of the Human” (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015) p.5 50 Nick Bostrom, “The Transhumanist FAQ, v. 2.1”. World Transhumanist Association. URL: http://www.transhumanism.org/resources/FAQv21.pdf [accessed 02 October 2016] 49

13

Therefore, transhumanists are interested in the exponential rate at which technology is advancing as this could present opportunities to adapt and transcend our physical, intellectual, and psychological limitations beyond what humans are naturally capable of, enabling us to unlock new and exciting potential moving forward. This emphasis on notions such as rationality, progress and optimism aligns with transhumanism’s philosophical roots within the Enlightenment.51 Also referred to as the ‘Age of Reason,’ the Enlightenment philosophy sought revolutionise rational thought and liberty at a time where religion permeated human belief and hindered progression.52 Advocating intellectual reason; the Enlightenment encouraged resistance from religious ignorance and authoritarianism by allowing humanity to autonomously decipher the duality of mind from matter.53 Therefore, this tendency can be viewed as continuation towards the Enlightenment of humanity’s evolutionary progress and rational efficiency.54 Consequently, it could be said that this transhumanist notion contrasts to that of posthumanism which manifests itself as paradigm shift away from humanism and thus the Enlightenment values. Hence, transhumanism has inherited internal tensions and contradictions in relation to its roots in the Enlightenment.

Figure 5: Reimagination of Michelangelo’s ‘The Creation of Adam’ implying shift in human subjectivity though human’s creation of technology within transhumanist discourse. URL: http://freedomarticles.toolsforfreedom.com/transhumanism-how-humanity-destroys-itself/ [accessed 9 November 2016]

51

James Hughes, “Contradictions from the enlightenment roots of transhumanism.” URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21135025 [accessed 06 October 2016].

52 Live Science Contributor, “What Was the Enlightenment?” URL: http://www.livescience.com/55327-the-enlightenment.html [accessed 09 December 2016] 53 Stanford: Plato, “Dualism" URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/ [accessed 12 December 2016] 54 James Hughes, “Contradictions from the enlightenment roots of transhumanism.” URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21135025 [accessed 06 October 2016].

14

Figure 5 illustrates such Cartesian Dualisms as its recreates Michelangelo’s, ‘The Creation of Adam,’ where God reached to him to impart the spark of life; whereas Adam’s hand is replaced with a cybernetic equivalent instead, symbolising our creation of new life just as “God created man in his own image, in the image of God He created him.”55 This idea of humanity becoming the creator will continue to become more deeply enmeshed in our reasoning with the emergence of advanced science and technology, as the boundaries between human and machine begin to blur until technology shapes human subjectivity as much as humans have shaped technology, reimagining humanity from that of God’s archetype.

The Enlightenment ethos is deeply atheistic; hence, having no need to replace God due to its dismissal of such an entity in the first place. However, transhumanism lends humanity the ability to be God; empowering us to overthrow our almighty creator in our attempt to become our apotheosis. This desire contradicts the values of the Enlightenment as atheism has not provided a new stimulus for human inspiration and potential; whereas the indication of transhumanism encouraged Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of the ‘Overman.’56 Nietzsche predicted long before the notion of autonomous evolution that humanity was an entity to be surpassed; “that creators of new values must blaze forward bravely, and burn down the old complacency.”57 Although Nietzsche forewarned of nihilism’s detrimental consequences on humanity, conversely he did not foresee that it might influence mankind to reach beyond secular humanism in its attempt to become the ‘Overman’.58

This concept of the ‘Overman’ however possesses many problems as this superior figure could become inherently antagonistic as figures of power. Bostrom dismisses the “surface-level similarities with the Nietzschean vision” 59 as fundamentally posthuman and the overman aspirations share many significant similarities with transhumanist discourse. Hence, by experimentally modifying our values and desires, transhumanism means we could become beings we wouldn’t have inherently wanted to be.

55

Come Reason Ministries, “How is Man Created in the Image of God?” URL: http://www.comereason.org/created-in-the-image-of-god.asp [accessed 14 December 2016] 56 Philosophy Now, "Nietzsche’s Übermensch: A Hero of Our Time?" URL: https://philosophynow.org/issues/93/Nietzsches_Ubermensch_A_Hero_of_Our_Time [accessed 20 October 2016] 57 High Existence, "Friedrich Nietzsche’s Guide to Conquering Your Existence" URL: http://highexistence.com/friedrich-nietzsches-guide-toconquering-your-existence/" [accessed 20 October 2016] 58 Ibid.

59 Nick Bostrom, “A History of Transhumanist Thought”, Originally published in Journal of Evolution and Technology - Vol. 14 Issue 1 - April 2005; reprinted in Academic Writing Across the Disciplines, eds. Michael Rectenwald & Lisa Carl (New York: Pearson Longman, 2011)

15

2.2. Spectre of Eugenics: Transhuman Figures and Cartographies of Power Echoing the ‘Overman,’ the transhumanist period is often viewed as the epitome of growth and progress – proposing increased control and stability of our evolution. As modern civilisation becomes increasingly aware of the underlying capacities of contemporary humans, “The human brain has not changed in over 10,000 years […] We are 7 billion cavemen living in a technological society.”60 Human instinct is to move forward by developing and evolving, but what if transhumanism is not a step towards humanity’s evolution but stagnation instead?

Although transhumanism may present many beneficial qualities for human enhancement, conversely, it can also be considered a very threatening concept because of the hostility the transhuman could impose to the existing human race. As transhumanism focuses directly on improving the human; characteristically it is antagonistic to traditionalist moral stance. With the blisteringly rapid speed of technological development; rational fear is aroused whenever a new entity within a species poses a threat to its existence, this could be paralleled as current natural humans could view the upgrade process as their genocide and a threat to humanity.61 It can be argued that there is risk that a prevailing form of species will dominate the earth from the homo-sapiens by leading them into extinction with their supremacy. When juxtaposing this transition with previous iterations of humankind; homo-sapiens were innately dangerous to their ‘protohuman’ homo-erectus ancestors they respectively evolved from.62 Therefore it could be suggested that there is no compromise - either you support the creation of a new race supreme beings and their cartographies of power or become subsidiary and inferior. Conversely, transhumanity itself owes its very existence, evolution and perpetuation to the subservient human archetype: “Whether it wants to or not, humanity will have to post itself to the Gaian conception of its embeddedness within geobiological phenomena that are planetary and cosmic in scope. Thus the posthuman does not transcend the human as the discourse of the human has imagined transcendence. Rather, the neocybernetic posthuman transcends the human for so long in its own conceit of uniqueness.” 63

60

Future Thinkers, “Cyborg Budda” URL: http://futurethinkers.org/cyborg-buddha-james-hughes-transhuman-enlightenment/ [accessed 14 November 2016] 61 Paul Philips, “Is Transhumanism the Greatest Threat to Humanity?” URL: http://www.newparadigm.ws/my-blogs/is-transhumanism-thegreatest-threat-to-humanity/ [accessed 06 October 2016].

62 David Tormsen, “10 Post-Human Entities Who Could Inherit the Earth” URL: http://listverse.com/2015/06/10/10-post-human-entities-whocould-inherit-the-earth/. [accessed 06 October 2016].

63 Bruce Clarke, “Posthuman Metamorphosis: Narrative and Systems.” (New York, USA: Fordham University Press, 2008) p.196

16

Hence, Transhumanism can be considered a contentious philosophy that “unsettles the very foundations of what we call “the human,”64 as it underlines serious existential risk to humanity as we know it. This dystopic depiction of the transhuman conveys how existing natural humans would view the upgrade process as potential genocide and a threat to their existence. Hence opposing transhumanism could simply be realising the imminent demise of your own species and your fundamentals of evolution, resistance is futile.

Figure 6 depicts the transhuman figure as the schematics of the archetypal man by alluding to the dehumanisation of Leonardo Da Vinci’s ‘Vitruvian Man,’ which in itself a portrait of the ideal man using accurate mathematical and scientific proportions. Da Vinci himself believed that, “the workings of the human body to be an analogy for the workings of the universe." 65 Hence, by superimposing the cyborg onto this infamous pictorial, it could be suggested that transhumanism looks to become the next archetype for humanity. However, what do we stand to lose on our journey into transhumanism?

Figure 6: Depicting transhuman through the dehumanisation of Leonardo Da Vinci’s ‘Vitruvian Man’ URL: http://igyaan.in/119804/dummies-guide-to-transhumanism-epic-or-epic-fail/ [accessed 07 November 2016] 64

Cary Wolfe, “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010) p.69 Stanford: Leonardo Da Vinci, “History: Leonardo's Vitruvian Man.” URL: http://leonardodavinci.stanford.edu/submissions/clabaugh/history/leonardo.html [accessed 09 December 2016] 65

17

2.3. Duality of Survival: Do we need to Sacrifice to Salvage?

Although transhumanism proposes many advancements and benefits over the human archetype, there are many key components of humanism that we would have to sacrifice to holistically achieve transition. One empirical trait being our emotions – which could be deemed the single most distinguishing feature of a human - our ability to be sentient. As the transhuman focuses towards removing the natural body with a cybernetic shell with computer like processing, our ability to feel would become impaired alongside our vital senses.66 While modern computer technology can sense basic sensorial attributes like temperature, light and sound, more complex physiological implications would present difficulty in conducting common human emotions like sleep, happiness or even love - which cannot be felt or emulated by a machine as these are triggered by our bodies natural hormones.67 Furthermore, to downgrade our emotional intelligence would result in our reason being affected as the mind would suffer to derive purpose or value in life, hence is the transhuman an upgrade after all?

Katherine Hayles’ “How We Became Posthuman,” traces the emergence of transhumanist discourse through the development of cybernetics as she compares literary texts that are; “contemporaneous with the development of the scientific theories and cybernetic technologies [and] clearly influenced by the development of cybernetics” alluding to, “the (lost) body of information, the cyborg body, and the posthuman body.”68 Hayles therefore cites the body as catalyst for upgrading as the human becomes corpse for transhuman augmentation and reinvention. Hayle’s reasoning for the mind is inspired by roboticist Hans Moravec’s dream of assimilating human consciousness into artificial intelligence to achieve transcendence from biological limits, as her impetus is a: “version of the posthuman that […] recognizes and celebrates finitude as a condition of human being, and that understands human life is embedded in a material world of great complexity, one on which we depend for our continued survival.”69 However, uploading the mind to a dream like virtual space can be deemed contentious as it challenges our notions of reality and reason for being, hence is extracting our consciousness from the body a viable and ethical way to survive?

66

Humanity+, “Morality of the Machine: Sentience, Substance, and Society” URL: http://hplusmagazine.com/2012/02/07/morality-of-themachine-sentience-substance-and-society/ [accessed 08 December 2016] 67 Humanity+, “Could a machine or an AI ever feel human-like emotions?” URL: http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/04/29/could-a-machine-or-anai-ever-feel-human-like-emotions/ [accessed 09 December 2016] 68 Katherine Hayles, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.21 69 Katherine Hayles, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.5

18

Even with these uncertainties, due to increasing rate of scientific discoveries, the predicted prolificacy for upgrading to transhuman is becoming ever more a reality. As natural humans, we will approach a point eventually where the ubiquitous and infinite advancement of technology will make forecasting the future inconceivable. This revolution is known as ‘Singularity,’ which as Ray Kurzweil claims, is pattern of exponential growth of technological progress. His “Law of Accelerating Returns” stipulates that new technologies will surmount barriers that older generations couldn’t, leading to "technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history."70 In the 2005 book, “The Singularity Is Near,” Kurzweil proclaims the singularity will come "within several decades."71 With this drastic acceleration, the end of natural humanity sooner than forecasted and extreme measures could be taken to avoid existential risk.72 Hence, humanity could be sacrificed in the attempt to salvage our naturalism as the transhumanist age reigns supreme.

Figure 7: Wire Sculpture 'Die Harder’ by David Mach symbolises the future of humanity’s fate

URL: http://thedisorderofthings.com/2015/07/16/secular-bodies-of-pain-and-the-posthumanmartial-corps/ [accessed 11 November 2016]

Figure 7 shows the sculpture 'Die Harder' by David Mach which depicts Christ on the Cross, symbolising the human agony of Crucifixion, where we sacrifice ourselves for the survival of others, just as Jesus underwent as an act of love on behalf of the people that hung him. Mach states that, "he does not believe in either God or Jesus,"73 but retold this religious story from the perspective of humanity being sacrificed to path way for generations to come, but what more will we sacrifice and lose for the impetus of the posthuman age?

70

Ray Kurzweil, "Law of Accelerating Returns" URL: http://lifeboat.com/ex/law.of.accelerating.returns [accessed 07 November 2016] Ray Kurzweil, "The Singularity is Near" (London; Penguin Group, 2005) pp. 135–136.

72 Colin Payne, “Stephen Hawking says humans only have 1,000 years left on planet Earth” URL: http://inhabitat.com/stephen-hawking-sayshumans-only-have-1000-years-left-on-planet-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016] 73 The Guardian, “Not all Religious Art is Made by Believers” URL: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/23/religious-artmach [accessed 14 December 2016] 71

19

Chapter 3: Posthumanism Speculating Human Subjectivity and Identity “[the posthuman] unsettles the very foundations of what we call ‘the human’.” 74 This final chapter will conclude analysing the decentering of the human and the ethics of posthumanism, by focusing on the speculative identity of the utopian ‘Posthuman’ juxtaposed against the supposedly inferior human archetype. To what extent will the Posthuman progress humanity? Or to what extent will we retrogress into a dystopic nightmare? By exploring phenomena such as the Singularity and alluding to Science Fiction, I will argue that the ‘Posthuman’ will depreciate human ideologies (like survival) as humanity will not exist in a posthuman world. Hence this movement will always be objectified and feared by humanity but resistance is futile within an existential context.

3.1. Human to the Posthuman: Subject or Object?

Posthumanism is an undefined concept that examines how such an entity could surpass the human archetype. The term ‘posthuman’ first made its appearance under the section, “Eugenic Measures and the Prevention of Poverty” in 1916 as sociologist Maurice Parmelee contemplated:

“[E]ven though it is not possible, at present at any rate, to do much to improve the quality of the human stock by eugenic means, it is interesting and profitable to consider what would be the result if socially undesirable types could be eliminated entirely or in large part […] it is evident, in the first place, that it is inconceivable that human nature could be changed to the extent that is contemplated by the theory of perfectibility [...] But even if such ‘post-human’ did come into existence, it is difficult to believe that it could carry on the necessary economic activities without using a certain amount of formal organization, compulsion, etc.” 75

Therefore, Parmelee pinpoints several drivers informing the lexicographic context of “posthuman” ideals. Given that Parmelee’s century old hypothesis hasn’t materialised and considering how much technology and society has rapidly evolved; we must question, when will we become posthuman?

74

Cary Wolfe, “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010) p.69 Maurice Parmelee, “Poverty and Social Progress” (New York: Macmillian, 1916) p.350

75

20

Seminal to this discourse is Hayles’ book “How We Became Posthuman”- the use of “became” connotes that the transition from human to posthuman has already occurred. Unlike Parmelee, Hayles refers to this ambiguity as her rhetoric is more complex than the binary opposition of human versus posthuman.76 Hayles further alludes to human subjectivity being ‘historically specific’ with “changes [to human subjectivity] were never complete transformations or sharp breaks; without exception, they re-inscribed traditional ideas and assumptions even as they articulated something new.” 77 Hence as her title alludes, the transition to the posthuman will be instigated by us as, “people become posthuman because they think they are posthuman.”78 However, Hayles does not deny that the technological revolution plays an integral part in the realisation of posthumanity; in her essay “Visualizing the Posthuman,” Hayle’s claims we are, “no longer a cloud on the horizon, the posthuman is rapidly becoming an everyday reality.” 79

Hayles elaborates that technology has created new notions of identity and subjectivity that will delineate posthuman ontology. However, technology advancement will not be the sole catalyst for the posthuman object. Instead technology’s influence on humanity will enable the prospect of a posthuman subject; “[T]echnologies do not develop on their own. People develop them.”80 Hayles continues to debate our subjectivity:

“We [are] already are cyborgs in the sense that we experience, through the integration of our bodily perceptions and motions with computer architectures and topologies, [this signals] a changed sense of subjectivity.”81

Thus, Hayles proclaims we are at the crossroads of our posthuman future but this “does not really mean the end of humanity. It signals instead the end of a certain conception of the human.”82 For Hayles, a predominant question is whether the human body is superfluous for the posthuman subject; “… should the body be seen as evolutionary baggage that we are 76

Katherine Hayles, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.6 77 Ibid.

78 Ibid.

79 Katherine Hayles, “Visualizing the Posthuman” as sited within “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.50 80 Katherine Hayles, “Condition of Virtuality.” as sited within “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.14 81 Katherine Hayles, “Condition of Virtuality.” as sited within “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.12 82 Katherine Hayles, “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.286

21

about to toss out as we vault into the brave new world of the posthuman?”83 This notion, linked with science fiction desires of downloading human brains, derives from modern age values to separate mind from matter; discarding the body while preserving the mind. Figure 8 starkly depicts the posthuman transition through extraction of the mind using a cybernetic extrapolation.

Figure 8: Uploading the mind, visual depiction of the posthuman transition through stark

cybernetic enhancement URL: http://lasiafme.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/cyborgs-the-truthabout-human-augmentation/ [accessed 4 November 2016]

Although this prospect can be considered fascinating and a marvel of scientific engineering, the implications of such a system could alter human subjectivity dramatically as our consciousness would no longer belong to a body, hence would we be objects instead? Given that our consciousness would live outside its host body opens interpretation for how this new entity could be explored and how life could succeed outside the boundaries we designate as reality.

Hayles disputes this concept as our subjectivity is defined within a context by the “inextricable intertwining of body with mind.”84 Thus, we could never contemplate isolation of the mind by rejecting the human body when alluding to a subject within the Posthuman era. Hence, human classification of subjectivity could still be deemed as a subject because even if our mind transcends our bodies, we still have ownership to our mortal shell. On the other hand, posthumanism could spawn new life without the need for a surrogate body and hence could be classified as objects as their host body would be provisional and enable alternating notions of identity. So, how could contradiction in terms turn out between both species?

83

Katherine Hayles, “Visualizing the Posthuman” as sited within “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.50 84 Katherine Hayles, “Visualizing the Posthuman” as sited within “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999) p.54

22

3.2. Influence of the Singularity: Dystopian Future or Harmonic Utopia?

When considering the posthuman form, notions of the human body become quite important, especially when juxtaposed with concepts of the physically disabled. A prolific example of cyborgisation being prosthetic limbs, which like body modifications are used to appear ‘normal’. When considering the human body, the binary between 'abled' and disabled' is a potent example of how technology aims to equalise the human form by cementing notions of 'acceptable' bodies and reinforces hegemonic discourses surrounding corporeality. Disability is only one area of a broad range of dualities and distinct difference within modern culture and civilisation but when does the desire of perfectibility become extreme and controversial?

Figure 9: Speculative ontological intertwinement of technology and human DNA

URL: http://wakingtimes.com/2014/06/02/transhumanist-singularity-ultimate-escapist-agenda/ [accessed 4 November 2016]

‘Deoxyribonucleic Acid’ or ‘DNA’ is what human genes are made of, guiding our growth, development, function and reproduction of everything alive.85 DNA has been a finite measure of our individual uniqueness and personal identity – until now. Genetic modification has been a prominent scientific discourse for hundreds of years and has led to many scientific breakthroughs that permeate modern life. This involves changing the instructions of DNA as illustrated in Figure 9 to fundamentally change the being who carries it – enabling experimentation of the genetic code.86 Up until now, gene editing was extremely expensive, complex and time-consuming due to its trial and error process. However, these problems have been eradicated with the emergence of a revolutionary new technology – CRISPR, with the potential to change humanity forever.87 Advanced gene editing, ending of diseases and 85

Genetics Home Reference, “What is DNA?” URL: https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/basics/dna [accessed 20 December 2016] Wired, “Easy DNA Editing Will Remake the World. Buckle Up.” URL: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/crispr-dna-editing-2/ [accessed 22 December 2016] 87 Nature, “CRISPR: gene editing is just the beginning” URL: http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-gene-editing-is-just-the-beginning-1.19510 [accessed 14 December 2016] 86

23

genetically modified humans that never age are just some of the potential uses for such technology moving forward as current pandemics like HIV, malaria and cancer become priority applications heading into the next decade.88 This technology has the power to change humanity infinitely with ideas reserved for science fiction suddenly becoming reality. However, these medical applications are limited to the individual and die with them unless genetic engineering is applied to reproductive cells or early stage embryos, where CRISPR’s effects can become much more questionable – the creation of modified humans or ‘designer babies,’ which could create gradual but irreversible changes to the human gene pool.89 Although the ability to edit a human embryo exists, the technology is still in its early stages. Therefore, when genetic modification becomes more prolific, temptation to enhance our heirs will propagate until modified humans become the new standard for human subjectivity. But where does modification become too far? CRISPR allows us to solve many prohibiting factors facing humanity but also inherits a customisability compulsion as we get to choose descendants and design our genes to eradication imperfection like disability or disease. However, by doing so, also aspire for human perfection by augmenting our species beyond what is evolutionary possible. Hence, genetic engineering technology like CRISPR possesses exponential potential to help guide humanity into future but in doing so could detrimentally inspire us to reach for a goal of perfectibility and similarity.

As a staunch defender of diversity and difference in “The Future of Human Nature,” liberal philosopher Jürgen Haberma confronts these emerging genetics discourse as “obliterating the boundary between persons and things”90 as gene evolution becomes subject to objectification, which in turn dehumanises the human being as a subject. This posthumanist value of decentering of the human correlates to the invalidation of the theory of humanism, as “a decision on existence or nonexistence is taken in view of the potential essence.”91 However, this idea makes us question, whether nature being augmented in such a way “changes the ethical self-understanding of the species in such a way that we may no longer see ourselves as ethically free and morally equal beings guided by norms and reasons.”92 Within the context of

88

Nature, “First CRISPR clinical trial gets green light from US panel.” URL: http://www.nature.com/news/first-crispr-clinical-trial-gets-greenlight-from-us-panel-1.20137 [accessed 15 December 2016] 89 Nature, “Cell Research: Correction of a genetic disease by CRISPR-Cas9” URL: http://www.nature.com/cr/journal/v25/n1/full/cr2014160a.html [accessed 13 December 2016] 90 Jürgen Habermas, “The Future of Human Nature.” (London: Blackwell, 2003) p.13 91 Ibid. p.50 92 Ibid. p.40

24

genetic modification this is problematic as consciousness is affected before inception, hence subjects will not be aware that their characteristics are moderated and have been altered.

Thus, body modification will undermine embryonic humanity causing a paradigm shift in ontological subjectivity and species hierarchy that could irradiate our genetic variance.

Hence, the effect that the posthuman poses on humanity can be elaborated on more clearly through the concept of the technological ‘Singularity,’ where Ray Kurzweil describes as the “period during which the pace of technological change will be so rapid, its impact so deep, that human life will be irreversibly transformed.”93 Kurzweil predicts in 2045; the singularity will be a point where technological progress is so rapid – it will outstrip human comprehension. This signals our natural intellectual and evolutionary capacity as technology is expected to progress exponentially over the next few decades. Addressing what will become of humanity, Kurzweil argues that a core feature of the singularity will be transcending the "limitations of our biological bodies and brain,"94 such that, the predominance of “human” intelligence will become non-biological. Alluding to human mortality, in the future human life expectancy will, “accelerate rapidly, now that we are in the early stages of reverse engineering the information processes underlying life and disease.” 95 However, this evolutionary progression relies on the ubiquity of nanotechnology – which Kurzweil predicts could rapidly augment us into a far superior race than what nature had ever intended.

Therefore, will the effects of the singularity pose a positive or negative influence on humanity as we know it? As a contentious and often paradoxical subject, the singularity poses many advantages and threats to humanity. With a key element of the singularity involving the surpassing of the human as the most intelligent and essential being in known existence, this change could signify the de-subjectification of humanity as we become inferior compared to the all supreme posthuman race. Humans could be objectified by the posthuman in the same way that we treat animals, as subordinate beings with inferior intelligence and power.

However, this advancement in technology and intelligence will be the key catalyst to surpassing our human limitations and beyond! Therein lies uncertainty and mystery about what will surpass the human and how advanced will this entity be in comparison?

93

Ray Kurzweil, "The Singularity is Near" (London; Penguin Group, 2005) p.7 Ray Kurzweil, "The Singularity is Near" (London; Penguin Group, 2005) p.9 95 Ray Kurzweil, "The Singularity is Near" (London; Penguin Group, 2005) p.323 94

25

3.3. The Posthuman Subject: Sci-Fi to Sci-Fact?

It is deceiving to propose that the theory of posthumanism is a concise or compressed category of discussion. As bioethicist Andy Miah states, “the history of posthumanism has no obvious beginning, middle or end point in philosophical thought.”96 Popular theory suggests two distinct discourses of ‘speculative’ and the ‘critical’ posthumanism. Neil Badmington remarks, “…the debate about the end of humanism…was not the exclusive property of critical theory” 97 Moreover, there can be considered another realm where posthuman figure may be manifest; science fiction. It will be useful to consider this discursive realm within the holistic context of posthumanism; although, the division separating them are somewhat ambiguous and blurred.98 Badmington refers to “…the boundaries between theory and fiction has been breached beyond repair,” giving birth to a new genre of what he terms ‘fictive theory’.99 Therefore; posthumanists, transhumanists, and creators of sci-fi can be viewed as striving to establish new conceptual scope and societal analogy relative to technological advancement.

Figure 10: Doctor Who phenomena, the Cybermen, as a symbolic subject of posthumanism URL: http://rudetruth.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/whos-posthuman.html [accessed 5 November 2016]

Dongshin Yi’s “A Genealogy of Cyborgothic Aesthetics and Ethics in the Age of Posthumanism,” closely relates to developing an ethico-aesthetic character of posthuman subjectivity, “emphasizes the necessity of an imaginary/imaginative approach to 96

Andy Miah, “Posthumanism: A Critical History”. in Gordijn, B. & Chadwick, R (Eds) Medical Enhancements & Posthumanity. (New York: Routledge, 2007) p.95 97 Neil Badmington, “Posthumanism” (USA, New York: Palgrave, 2000) p.8 98 Ibid. p.8 99 Ibid. P.9

26

posthumanism.” 100 In her view, central to posthuman subjectivity, there is a “path to an ontology of change and becoming.” 101 Hence, fiction presents many exciting opportunities to conceive the posthuman through its inherent speculative identity and perception.

To explore this idea further, I will be alluding to the fictional characteristics from the Doctor Who’s TV series; the Cybermen, as depicted in Figure 10. I have chosen to unpack and analyse these characters as their purpose and agency closely aligns with that of the posthuman and its alluring identity. The Cybermen are depicted as a ‘race’ of cybernetically augmented humanoids who persist human to “upgrade” to robotisation as, “information would never be lost and that the humans' physical and emotional weaknesses were abolished.”102 This ‘Cyberconversion’ entailed “upgrading” the human form through the brain removal of the subject and transplanting it within a cyber suit of armour.103 This process is reminiscent of a posthuman transition to ensure invincibility and strength within the new subject; however, the Cybermen advocate of removal of emotions from each subject. 104 The rationale behind this concept came from a similar process to posthuman discourse where the ‘perfect’ or ‘ideal’ human is constructed, which in this case included omitting the Cybermen’s sentience. Although this concept was well intended – through removing this medium, Cybermen will be able to live without any negative emotions – for example; pain, sadness, loneliness – which in turn ensures the Cybermen remain single minded and focused on it purpose. But by completely removing all emotions, Cybermen were not able to express or even understand love and compassion.

Hence, their story is one of dystopic articulation and embodiment of posthuman values.

Therefore, by analysing the essence of this fictional character, we can see how posthumanism can become problematic, as even the most innocent and thought provoking concepts can create something of a nightmarish dystopia. Hence, we should view humanity for its strengths and not just its weaknesses. As we progress into our posthuman form, we should celebrate our uniqueness and our status as sentient beings. However, such fiction can become fact, by looking at how much we have changed in the last century – who knows what’s next?

100

Dongshin Yi “A Genealogy of Cyborgothic Aesthetics and Ethics in the Age of Posthumanism.” (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2010) p.3 Dongshin Yi. “A Genealogy of Cyborgothic Aesthetics and Ethics in the Age of Posthumanism.” (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2010) p.5 th Fandom, ‘Cyberman’ URL: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Cyberman [accessed 12 November 2016] 103 Ibid.

104 Ibid.

101 102

27

Conclusion No matter which way you look at it; ‘posthumanism’ is a fascinating prospect - although it may be a long way from ever being attained; each day we are getting closer to our posthuman future. As the beginnings of a posthuman era unfurl and increasingly intertwine within our everyday, I believe we should be discussing ethical considerations and consequences of posthumanism now, before it’s too late.

As we are no longer dependent on natural selection to ensure sustainability or viability for the future, it is time for humanity to seize control of our evolutionary progression by the reigns. Hence, posthumanism moderates the notion of human autonomy by acknowledging human heteronomy. We are at a point where humanity can and should evolve beyond our natural and biological limitations as humans are no longer subject to natural evolutionary process. Hence we must take our evolution as our responsibility.

We have and will continue to embrace technology, adapting ourselves and our futures; however, the choices facing us are as challenging and formidable as they are promising. To ensure success in this evolutionary transition, our notions of perceived moral and ethnic beliefs must undergo a drastic transformation as we eventually gather the courage and confidence to embrace our progressive obsolescence if we are to survive and continue to explore our potential.

Considering oneself to be posthuman should not automatically infer the eradication of humanity or any other existential uncertainty but instead be a reconfiguration of humanity’s essence and survival spirit, and in turn how this can be interpreted and devised going into the future. Therefore, Posthumanism is a recovery of our humanity, which is lost in abstract conceptions of human exceptionality and egotism. However, if the only way the human can consider moving toward a posthuman world is to refigure the essence of humanity and progress this further, one must wonder will we ever be truly posthuman?

Therefore, posthumanism can be considered a form of existentialist humanism, encouraging us to view ourselves as not just humans but the beginnings of posthumans.

28

Whether we are ready to acknowledge our posthumanism or not, it cannot be denied that humans have changed and altered by our relationship and increasing dependence on technology. Hence, it is because of this relation that we must consider ourselves posthuman, or at the very least, on the way to becoming ‘post’.

Although the sources used for this dissertation allowed me to grasp a comprehensive

oversight of the concept of posthumanism, I believe this field should be more structurally partitioned to understand the intricacies of such a complex and all-encompassing topic going forward through segregation and careful consideration of distinct stages of paradigm shifts within Humanism, Transhumanism and Posthumanism. Hence, my theoretical application of these movements were sporadic in arrangement as this field is still within its infancy; as time progresses, our knowledge and interpretation of this area will expand as we eventually grasp how we think beyond the human.

As a Product Design student, it could be questionable why I choose this discourse to

expand on for my dissertation. However, I believe that Posthumanism will be an emerging discourse within the fields of Design within the near future as our focus drifts from humancentred design philosophy to that of transcendence of this notion. Hence, this opportunity presents unlimited potential as a designer and I look forward to continuing my involvement further through future practical and theoretical design projects when these concepts are more enlightened and tangible in the years of progress to come; towards our posthuman future.

29

Bibliography

BOOKS

Agar, Nicholas. “Humanity's End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement” (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2013)

Badmington, Neil. "Posthumanism." In ‘Routledge Companion to Science and Literature’, edited by Bruce. Rossini Clarke, Manuela (New York, USA: Routledge, 2011)

Buchanan, Allen. “Beyond Humanity? The Ethics of Biomedical Enhancement” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)

Bostrom, Nick. “Global Catasphophic Risks” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011)

Braidotti, Rosi. “The Posthuman.” (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2013)

Fukuyama, Francis. “Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution” (London, Profile Books Ltd, 2006)

Giddens, Anthony. “Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age” (Cambridge: Polity, 2003)

Glover, Johnathan. “Choosing Children: Genes, Disability and Design” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)

Gould, Stephen. "'What is life?' The Next Fifty Years. Speculations on the future of biology."

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)

Habermas, Jürgen. “The Future of Human Nature.” (London: Blackwell, 2003)

Hayles, Katherine. “How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics.” (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999)

Kurzweil, Ray. "The Singularity is Near" (London; Penguin Group, 2005)

Levy, Steven. "Artifical Life: The Quest for a New Creation” (Pantheon Books: New York, 1992)

Lyotard, “The Inhumane: Reflections on Time.” (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003)

Nayar, Pramod K. “Posthumanism” (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013)

Norman, Richard. “On Humanism (Thinking in Action)” (London: Routledge, 2004)

Parfit, Derek. “On What Matters.” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011)

Parfit, Derek. “Reasons and Persons.” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984)

Parmelee, Maurice. “Poverty and Social Progress” (New York: Macmillian, 1916)

30

Posner, Richard, A. “Catastrophe: Risk and Response.” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004)

Roden, David. “Posthuman Life: Philosophy at the Edge of the Human” (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015)

Sandel, Michael, J. “Case against Perfection” (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2006)

Toffler, Alvin. “Future Shock” (Turtleback Books, England, 1999)

Wolfe, Cary. “What is Posthumanism?” Edited by Cary Wolfe, ‘posthumanities.’ (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010)

Yi, Dongshin. “A Genealogy of Cyborgothic Aesthetics and Ethics in the Age of Posthumanism.”

(Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2010)

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Bostrom, Nick. “A History of Transhumanist Thought”, Originally published in Journal of Evolution and Technology - Vol. 14 Issue 1 - April 2005; reprinted (in its present slightly edited form) in Academic Writing Across the Disciplines, eds. Michael Rectenwald & Lisa Carl (New York: Pearson Longman, 2011)

Bostrom, Nick. “Existential risk prevention as global priority.” [Global Policy, Vol 4, Issue 1 (2013): 1531] (2012)

Bostrom, Nick. “Human Genetic Enhancements: A Transhumanist Perspective” Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 37 (2003)

Bostrom, Nick. “In Defense of Posthuman Dignity” Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 19 (2005)

Bostrom, Nick. “Technological Revolutions: Ethics and Policy in the Dark”, Journal Published in Nanoscale: Issues and Perspectives for the Nano Century, eds. Nigel M. de S.Cameron and M.Ellen Mitchell (John Wiley, 2007)

Bostrom, Nick. “Why I Want to be a Posthuman When I Grow Up” Published in: Medical Enhancement and Posthumanity, eds. Bert Gordijn and Ruth Chadwick (Springer, 2008): pp. 107-137. First circulated: 2006

Callus, Ivan & Herbrechter, Stefan. "Posthumanist Subjectivities, Or, Coming After the Subject..." in ‘Subjectivity’ no. 5.3 (2012)

Gaston, K.J. ‘Biodiversity and extinction: Species and people’, Progress in Physical Geography, vol. 29, no. 2 (2005)

Hassan, Ihab. "Prometheus as Performer: Towards a Posthumanist Culture." (The Georgia Review no.

31, 1977)

Wapner, Paul. ‘The Humanity of Global Environmental Ethics’, The Journal of Environment Development, vol. 18, no. 2, (2009)

31

WEBSITES

BBC Earth, “The real reasons nothing can go faster than light” URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20160429-the-real-reasons-nothing-can-ever-go-faster-than-light [accessed 21 November 2016]

BBC Nature: Prehistoric Life, “Big Five mass extinction events” URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/extinction_events [accessed 06 October 2016]

Biba, Erin. “A Transhuman Conundrum: Elective Bionic Limb Replacement” URL: http://www.tested.com/science/weird/458506-transhuman-conundrum-elective-bionic-limbreplacement/ [accessed 06 October 2016].

Bostrom, Nick. “Existential Risks - Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards” URL: http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html [accessed 06 October 2016]

Bostrom, Nick. “Posthumanism” URL: http://www.posthumanism.com [accessed 26 December 2016]

Bostrom, Nick. “World Transhumanist Association - The Transhumanist FAQ, v.2.1” URL: http://www.transhumanism.org/resources/FAQv21.pdf [accessed 02 October 2016]

Brandom, Russell. “Humanity and AI will be inseparable” < http://www.theverge.com/a/verge2021/humanity-and-ai-will-be-inseparable [accessed 15th November 2016]

Burgess, Shane. “99.9% of Species Ever on Earth Are Extinct Now” URL: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-ha/interview-999-of-species-_b_5612391.html [accessed 06 November 2016]

Carrington, Damian. “The Anthropocene epoch” URL: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/29/declare-anthropocene-epoch-experts-urgegeological-congress-human-impact-earth [accessed 05 October 2016]

Downing, Andrea et al. “The Resilience and Resistance of an Ecosystem to a Collapse of Diversity” URL: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046135 [accessed 04 October 2016]

Eng, Matthew. “The Future of Humanity - Emotions” URL: http://thefutureofhumanity.weebly.com/emotions.html [accessed 06 October 2016]

Fandom, “Cyberman” URL: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Cyberman [accessed 12th November 2016]

Forbes. “We Still Don't Know How Fast the Universe Is Expanding” URL: http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/01/12/we-still-dont-know-how-fast-the-universeis-expanding/#65fb0bfe3a93 [accessed 15 December 2016]

Furness, Hannah. “Sir David Attenborough: Humans have stopped evolving” URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/evolution/10297124/Sir-David-Attenborough-Humanshave-stopped-evolving.html [accessed 06 October 2016]

Gan, Eugene. “Transhumanism: Would You Agree to an Upgrade of Your Brain and Body?” URL: http://aleteia.org/2015/04/22/transhumanism-would-you-agree-to-an-upgrade-of-your-brain-andbody/ [accessed 05 October 2016]

32

Genetics Home Reference, “What is DNA?” URL: https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/basics/dna [accessed 20 December 2016]

Gizmodo, “The Sixth Mass Extinction Will Be Like Nothing In Earth’s History” URL: http://gizmodo.com/the-sixth-mass-extinction-will-be-like-nothing-in-earth-1786598392 [accessed 06 November 2016]

Hughes, James. “Contradictions from the enlightenment roots of transhumanism.” URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21135025 [accessed 06 October 2016].

Hughes, Matthew. “How Technology May Be Influencing Human Evolution.” URL: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/technology-may-influencing-human-evolution/ [accessed 05 October 2016]

Humanity+, “Could a machine or an AI ever feel human-like emotions?” URL: http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/04/29/could-a-machine-or-an-ai-ever-feel-human-like-emotions/

Humanity+, “Morality of the Machine: Sentience, Substance, and Society” URL: http://hplusmagazine.com/2012/02/07/morality-of-the-machine-sentience-substance-and-society/ [accessed 08 December 2016]

Humanity+, “Transhumanism” URL: https://hpluspedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism [accessed 28 December 2016]

IEET, “What is the difference between Posthumanism and Transhumanism?” URL: http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/lagrandeur20140729 [accessed 28 December 2016]

Kunzru, Hari. “You are Cyborg” URL: http://www.wired.com/1997/02/ffharaway/ [accessed 29th September 2016]

Kurzweil, Ray. "Law of Accelerating Returns" URL: http://lifeboat.com/ex/law.of.accelerating.returns [accessed 07 November 2016]

Live Science Contributor, “What Was the Enlightenment?” URL: http://www.livescience.com/55327the-enlightenment.html [accessed 09 December 2016]

Luskin, Casey. “What's the matter with evolution?” URL: https://world.wng.org/2015/04/part_1_whats_the_matter_with_evolution [accessed 05 October 2016]

More, Max. “Principles of Extropy: An evolving framework of values and standards for continuously improving the human condition” URL: http://extropy.org/principles.htm [accessed 06 October 2016]

Munkittrick, Kyle. “When Will We Be Transhuman? Seven Conditions for Attaining Transhumanism.”

URL: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/sciencenotfiction/2011/07/16/when-will-we-be-transhumanseven-conditions-for-attaining-transhumanism/#.VmaB7ZPtlBc [accessed 05 October 2016]

Nature, “CRISPR: gene editing is just the beginning” URL: http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-geneediting-is-just-the-beginning-1.19510 [accessed 14 December 2016]

Nature, “First CRISPR clinical trial gets green light from US panel” URL: http://www.nature.com/news/first-crispr-clinical-trial-gets-green-light-from-us-panel-1.20137 [accessed 15 December 2016]

33

Newitz, Annalee. “Why Humans Will Survive the Next World-Ending Catastrophe” URL: http://io9.com/why-humans-will-survive-the-next-world-ending-catastrop-486158068 [accessed 06 October 2016]

Payne, Colin. “Stephen Hawking says humans only have 1,000 years left on planet Earth” URL: http://inhabitat.com/stephen-hawking-says-humans-only-have-1000-years-left-on-planet-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016]

Philips, Christopher. “Building a Better You? The Era of Trans-Human Technology” URL: http://www.livescience.com/45872-transhuman-technology.html [accessed 07 October 2016].

Philips, Paul. “Is Transhumanism the Greatest Threat to Humanity?” URL: http://www.newparadigm.ws/my-blogs/is-transhumanism-the-greatest-threat-to-humanity/ [accessed 06 October 2016].

Rockstrom, Johan. “TED Talk: Let the environment guide our development” URL: https://www.ted.com/talks/johan_rockstrom_let_the_environment_guide_our_development?languag e=en [accessed 02 October 2016]

Revolvy, “Humanism” URL: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Humanism&item_type=topic [accessed 27 December 2016]

Science Alert, “Should our calendar follow the Human Era?” URL: http://www.sciencealert.com/watchshould-our-calendar-follow-the-human-era [accessed 09 December 2016]

Scott, Gray. “5 FUTURE FORECASTS THAT WILL CHANGE THE WORLD” URL: http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/01/02/5-future-forecasts-that-will-change-the-world/ [accessed 06 October 2016].

Space.com, “Astronaut Scott Kelly Sets New U.S. Record for Time Spent in Space” URL: http://www.space.com/30870-scott-kelly-sets-new-record-time-in-space.html [accessed 3 November 2016]

Stanford Plato, “Dualism" URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/ [accessed 12 December 2016]

Stanford: Leonardo Da Vinci, “History: Leonardo's Vitruvian Man” URL: http://leonardodavinci.stanford.edu/submissions/clabaugh/history/leonardo.html [accessed 09 December 2016]

TechCrunch. “Astronomers have found the closest exoplanet to Earth” URL: https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/24/astronomers-have-found-the-closest-exoplanet-to-earth/ [accessed 21 November 2016]

Teilhard de, Chardin. “Transhumanism or Ultrahumanism?” URL: http://www.academia.edu/8474707/Transhumanism_or_Ultrahumanism_Teilhard_de_Chardin_on_Te chnology_Religion_and_Evolution [accessed 07 October 2016].

The Conversation, “If Earth falls, will interstellar space travel be our salvation?” URL: http://theconversation.com/if-earth-falls-will-interstellar-space-travel-be-our-salvation-35523 [accessed 21 November 2016]

34

The Guardian, “Not all Religious Art is Made by Believers” URL: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/23/religious-art-mach [accessed 14 December 2016]

The Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, “How many people can a spaceship hold?” URL: https://howthingsfly.si.edu/ask-an-explainer/how-many-people-can-spaceship-hold [accessed 21 November 2016]

Tormsen, David. “10 Post-Human Entities Who Could Inherit the Earth” URL: http://listverse.com/2015/06/10/10-post-human-entities-who-could-inherit-the-earth/. [accessed 06 October 2016].

Wired, “Easy DNA Editing Will Remake the World. Buckle Up.” URL: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/crispr-dna-editing-2/ [accessed 22 December 2016]

35

PRODUCT DESIGNER