分道而行:技术时代人类命运的超人类主义和后人类主义想象  

Diverging Paths:Transhumanist and Posthumanist Imaginations of Human Destiny in the Age of Technology

作　　者：苏晨生 SU Chensheng(School of Philosophy,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学哲学院,北京100872

出　　处：《东北大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第5期23-32,共10页Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science)

基　　金：中国人民大学2024年度拔尖创新人才培育资助计划。

摘　　要：当代人工智能、生物工程等技术的发展延伸了人类关于自我的理解,但传统人文主义与新兴技术的碰撞与交融诞生的各种形式的超人类主义、后人类主义及其复杂关系又成为人类理解自我的重要障碍。一种清晰区分超人类主义和后人类主义的新人类主义哲学谱系可以以人类中心主义、反人类中心主义和非人类中心主义为核心被建构。其中人类中心主义可分为人文超人类主义、悲观技术后人类主义和技术超人类主义;反人类中心主义存在人文后人类主义和人文—技术后人类主义两种立场;非人类中心主义主要表现为乐观技术后人类主义。三种立场之间既相互对立又存在内在关联,澄清它们之间的区别与联系将为深入思考技术将人类带往何方的问题提供基本的概念框架。Contemporary technological developments such as artificial intelligence and bioengineering have extended the self-understandings of human beings,but various forms of transhumanism and posthumanism born from the collision and fusion of traditional humanism and emerging technologies,and their complex relationships,have become great obstacles to it.A new philosophical genealogy of humanism that clearly distinguishes transhumanism from posthumanism can be constructed with anthropocentrism,anti-anthropocentrism,and non-anthropocentrism as its core.Anthropocentrism can be divided into humanistic transhumanism,pessimistic technological posthumanism,and technological transhumanism;anti-anthropocentrism exists in the form of both humanistic posthumanism and humanistic-technological posthumanism;and non-anthropocentrism manifests itself mainly in the form of optimistic technological posthumanism.The three perspectives are both antagonistic and intrinsically related,and clarifying their differences and connections will provide a basic conceptual framework for in-depth thinking about the future and destiny of the mankind.

关 键 词：技术时代 超人类主义 后人类主义 新人类主义 人类中心主义 

分 类 号：N031[自然科学总论—科学技术哲学]