超人类主义、佛教超人类主义与佛教现代主义自我观的思考

IF 1.1 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Nanoethics Pub Date : 2023-10-21 DOI:10.1007/s11569-023-00445-2
Vera Borrmann
{"title":"超人类主义、佛教超人类主义与佛教现代主义自我观的思考","authors":"Vera Borrmann","doi":"10.1007/s11569-023-00445-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A claim made by Buddhist or Buddhism-affine scholars such as Michael LaTorra and James Hughes is that transhumanism, neuroscience, and the teachings of Buddhism are compatible because they aim to alleviate suffering and pain and attain a stable state of happiness. This claim can be challenged. At first glance, the approach seems valid, because since the 1980s there have been dialogues and scientific collaborations with representatives of Tibetan Buddhism and scientists on the topics of neuroscience, consciousness, ethics and technology, and in this context new interpretations of Buddhist thought have emerged such as ‘Buddhist modernism’ (E. Thompson). In this discussion note, however, two main arguments are advanced as to why the claim and terminology of Buddhist transhumanism are difficult to reconcile with Buddhist terminology, values, and methods: (1) the difference between the use of such methods as meditation and contemplation and the application of so-called human enhancement technologies (2) and differences concerning self-understanding in Western science and Buddhism.","PeriodicalId":18802,"journal":{"name":"Nanoethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on Perspectives of Transhumanism, Buddhist Transhumanism, and Buddhist Modernism on the Self\",\"authors\":\"Vera Borrmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11569-023-00445-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A claim made by Buddhist or Buddhism-affine scholars such as Michael LaTorra and James Hughes is that transhumanism, neuroscience, and the teachings of Buddhism are compatible because they aim to alleviate suffering and pain and attain a stable state of happiness. This claim can be challenged. At first glance, the approach seems valid, because since the 1980s there have been dialogues and scientific collaborations with representatives of Tibetan Buddhism and scientists on the topics of neuroscience, consciousness, ethics and technology, and in this context new interpretations of Buddhist thought have emerged such as ‘Buddhist modernism’ (E. Thompson). In this discussion note, however, two main arguments are advanced as to why the claim and terminology of Buddhist transhumanism are difficult to reconcile with Buddhist terminology, values, and methods: (1) the difference between the use of such methods as meditation and contemplation and the application of so-called human enhancement technologies (2) and differences concerning self-understanding in Western science and Buddhism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nanoethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nanoethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-023-00445-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nanoethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-023-00445-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Michael LaTorra和James Hughes等佛教或佛教学者提出了一个主张,即超人类主义、神经科学和佛教教义是兼容的,因为它们的目标是减轻痛苦和痛苦,达到稳定的幸福状态。这种说法可以受到质疑。乍一看,这种方法似乎是有效的,因为自20世纪80年代以来,藏传佛教的代表和科学家就神经科学、意识、伦理和技术等主题进行了对话和科学合作,在这种背景下,对佛教思想的新解释出现了,比如“佛教现代主义”(E. Thompson)。然而,在这个讨论笔记中,关于为什么佛教超人类主义的主张和术语很难与佛教的术语、价值观和方法相协调,提出了两个主要论点:(1)冥想和沉思等方法的使用与所谓的人类增强技术的应用之间的差异(2)以及西方科学和佛教中关于自我理解的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reflections on Perspectives of Transhumanism, Buddhist Transhumanism, and Buddhist Modernism on the Self
Abstract A claim made by Buddhist or Buddhism-affine scholars such as Michael LaTorra and James Hughes is that transhumanism, neuroscience, and the teachings of Buddhism are compatible because they aim to alleviate suffering and pain and attain a stable state of happiness. This claim can be challenged. At first glance, the approach seems valid, because since the 1980s there have been dialogues and scientific collaborations with representatives of Tibetan Buddhism and scientists on the topics of neuroscience, consciousness, ethics and technology, and in this context new interpretations of Buddhist thought have emerged such as ‘Buddhist modernism’ (E. Thompson). In this discussion note, however, two main arguments are advanced as to why the claim and terminology of Buddhist transhumanism are difficult to reconcile with Buddhist terminology, values, and methods: (1) the difference between the use of such methods as meditation and contemplation and the application of so-called human enhancement technologies (2) and differences concerning self-understanding in Western science and Buddhism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nanoethics
Nanoethics HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: NanoEthics: Ethics for Technologies that Converge at the Nanoscale will focus on the philosophically and scientifically rigorous examination of the ethical and societal considerations and the public and policy concerns inherent in nanotechnology research and development. These issues include both individual and societal problems, and include individual health, wellbeing and human enhancement, human integrity and autonomy, distribution of the costs and benefits, threats to culture and tradition and to political and economic stability. Additionally there are meta-issues including the neutrality or otherwise of technology, designing technology in a value-sensitive way, and the control of scientific research.
期刊最新文献
Addressing Multiple Responsibilities in the Early Stages of R&D with Provenance Assessment Gene Editing Cattle for Enhancing Heat Tolerance: A Welfare Review of the “PRLR-SLICK Cattle” Case Representations of (Nano)technology in Comics from the ‘NanoKOMIK’ Project Reflection on Gene Editing from the Perspective of Biopolitics Roberto Marchesini, Technophysiology, or How Technology Modifies the Self, Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2023, 242pp
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1