Eva Kittay ended her lecture last week by noting that the most terrible things have come from the brightest minds in science. The allusion refers to the most famous paradox in modern history where the great Physicists of the 1940’s produced the atom bomb and the ensuing arms race. Kittay’s statement serves as a helpful reminder that technological progress does not always translate into automatic good and benefit for the human race. Nuclear weapons offer an excellent example of good intentions that go awry in actual practice. Today human enhancement presents the same daunting task for scientists, politicians and the public in discerning what should and should not be pursued. The potential for good in human enhancement such as the elimination of disease, longer life expectancy and higher quality of life for many disable persons appears undeniable. Who could argue with a cure for any debilitating disease, injury or birth defect? No one could argue against the quick resolution to World War Two and the millions of lives saved by use of the atom bomb. But today, we wish they did take more time to reflect on their decision, both to build and deploy the terrible weapon. The path of wisdom demands that we wait and weigh our options even in light of the obvious practical advantages of immediate success.
It appears counter-intuitive for philosophers to tell scientists, politicians and the public to stop, pause and reflect at the brink of discovery. Innovation moves so fast and promises so much in terms of human benefit that to resist the avalanche of progress seems incredible. It did not appear possible for the momentum of bomb building to have ceased or slowed down in 1940’s in light of the immediate advantages the possession of such weapons bestowed. So today will we resist a cure for any disease even if it may mean something quite costly in the future? The combination of immediate advantage and lack of foresight, patience and sagacity reveals the depth of our quandary concerning human enhancement. We want all the immediate benefits of technology but give little thought to the long term consequences. Our great danger is that we will create another arms race scenario or genetic atom bomb that will threaten to undo us.
It is inexcusable for scientists, politicians and the public not to assume a philosophical stance on these issues even though it may slow development and the acceleration of many advances. Plato argued that philosophers must become kings or kings must become philosophers to attain a just society, but today, given the power of science over society I would rephrase the problem by saying that scientists and engineers must become philosophers or philosophers must become scientists not simply to reach a just society, but to avoid catastrophe.