
Ethics Explainer: Post-Humanism
ArticleBig Thinkers + Explainers
BY The Ethics Centre 22 FEB 2018
Late last year, Saudi Arabia granted a humanoid robot called Sophia citizenship. The internet went crazy about it, and a number of sensationalised reports suggested that this was the beginning of “the rise of the robots”.
In reality, though, Sophia was not a “breakthrough” in AI. She was just an elaborate puppet that could answer some simple questions. But the debate Sophia provoked about what rights robots might have in the future is a topic that is being explored by an emerging philosophical movement known as post-humanism.
From humanism to post-humanism
In order to understand what post-humanism is, it’s important to start with a definition of what it’s departing from. Humanism is a term that captures a broad range of philosophical and ethical movements that are unified by their unshakable belief in the unique value, agency, and moral supremacy of human beings.
Emerging during the Renaissance, humanism was a reaction against the superstition and religious authoritarianism of Medieval Europe. It wrested control of human destiny from the whims of a transcendent divinity and placed it in the hands of rational individuals (which, at that time, meant white men). In so doing, the humanist worldview, which still holds sway over many of our most important political and social institutions, positions humans at the centre of the moral world.
Post-humanism, which is a set of ideas that have been emerging since around the 1990s, challenges the notion that humans are and always will be the only agents of the moral world. In fact, post-humanists argue that in our technologically mediated future, understanding the world as a moral hierarchy and placing humans at the top of it will no longer make sense.
Two types of post-humanism
The best-known post-humanists, who are also sometimes referred to as transhumanists, claim that in the coming century, human beings will be radically altered by implants, bio-hacking, cognitive enhancement and other bio-medical technology. These enhancements will lead us to “evolve” into a species that is completely unrecognisable to what we are now.
This vision of the future is championed most vocally by Ray Kurzweil, a chief engineer of Google, who believes that the exponential rate of technological development will bring an end to human history as we have known it, triggering completely new ways of being that mere mortals like us cannot yet comprehend.
While this vision of the post-human appeals to Kurzweil’s Silicon Valley imagination, other post-human thinkers offer a very different perspective. Philosopher Donna Haraway, for instance, argues that the fusing of humans and technology will not physically enhance humanity, but will help us see ourselves as being interconnected rather than separate from non-human beings.
She argues that becoming cyborgs – strange assemblages of human and machine – will help us understand that the oppositions we set up between the human and non-human, natural and artificial, self and other, organic and inorganic, are merely ideas that can be broken down and renegotiated. And more than this, she thinks if we are comfortable with seeing ourselves as being part human and part machine, perhaps we will also find it easier to break down other outdated oppositions of gender, of race, of species.
Post-human ethics
So while, for Kurzweil, post-humanism describes a technological future of enhanced humanity, for Haraway, post-humanism is an ethical position that extends moral concern to things that are different from us and in particular to other species and objects with which we cohabit the world.
Our post-human future, Haraway claims, will be a time “when species meet”, and when humans finally make room for non-human things within the scope of our moral concern. A post-human ethics, therefore, encourages us to think outside of the interests of our own species, be less narcissistic in our conception of the world, and to take the interests and rights of things that are different to us seriously.
Ethics in your inbox.
Get the latest inspiration, intelligence, events & more.
By signing up you agree to our privacy policy
MOST POPULAR
ArticleLifestyle + Health
Vaccines: compulsory or conditional?
ArticleLaw + Human Rights
He said, she said: Investigating the Christian Porter Case
ArticleBeing Human
Free speech has failed us
ArticleBig Thinkers + Explainers
Ethics Explainer: Ethics, morality & law

BY The Ethics Centre
The Ethics Centre is a not-for-profit organisation developing innovative programs, services and experiences, designed to bring ethics to the centre of professional and personal life.
4 Comments
Happiness also is found in limits, says Agar of Victoria University. “There are things that I value and am proud of in my life, like my recent book,” he says. “But how can I value the writing of my book if I’ve been cognitively enhanced, and doing such a thing becomes much easier?”
Reply[…] When Saudi Arabia granted citizenship to a Robot, Sophia last year, it opened doors for debates and arguments globally which were unheard before. (https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-post-humanism/) […]
ReplyIn a very deepest thought, I just say that when we are no longer human, we cannot have the capacity to language who we are. I cannot imagine this. This matter differs to the technological advancement where densely populated humanoid robots inhabit the world and human beings will be abdicated his own dignity to the non-human and in turn, either happiness or the worthy of happiness, only these two options.
ReplyWhy can’t posthuman entities have the capacity to define what form that those entities are? We do it now with gender preferences. Why would robots in the future become problematically over-dense? Robots 100 years from now will be nano-tech smart hives working together to 4d print whatever we need or can imagine. Humans losing dignity to robots? Nah, we’d never do that as a species. We do need to recognize that, given the odds that alien life exists outside our solar system, that we are not the moral center of the universe we think we are. We need to get along together before the universe will allow mankind to traverse the stars, finally escaping our ancient quarantine to our natural star system. Perhaps the universe needs to judge first if man is either happy or worthy of happiness, regardless of the displacement robot sizes in the future matter. 😉
Reply
Join the conversation
What are we when we're no longer human?