Dignity Schmignity
Tim Dean notes Steven Pinker’s essay on the problem with dignity, and in particular, how such a ‘relative’, ‘fungible’, and ‘dangerous’ term is used by conservatives and religious folk (‘theocons’) to influence bioethics.
As someone who wholeheartedly (dangerously, and somewhat irrationally) encourages individuals to undertake self modification and DIY longevity treatments — preferably in a clean garage with a webcam — I concur with Pinker’s astute observation:
”Ever since the cloning of Dolly the sheep a decade ago, the panic sown by conservative bioethicists, amplified by a sensationalist press, has turned the public discussion of bioethics into a miasma of scientific illiteracy. Brave New World, a work of fiction, is treated as inerrant prophesy. Cloning is confused with resurrecting the dead or mass-producing babies. Longevity becomes “immortality,” improvement becomes “perfection,” the screening for disease genes becomes “designer babies” or even “reshaping the species.” The reality is that biomedical research is a Sisyphean struggle to eke small increments in health from a staggeringly complex, entropy-beset human body. It is not, and probably never will be, a runaway train.”
