Ethical Aspects of Engineering Prolongevity

Day: Saturday, April 22   Hour: 12:30 - 1:00 pm

By: Peter Derkx

This paper deals with four different scenario's for life extension: (1) prolonged senescence (a longer period of infirmity); (2) compressed morbidity (an extended "health span"); (3) decelerated or delayed aging (the period of infirmity starts later but is not shortened); (4) arrested aging, negligible senescence or rejuvenation. Some remarks will be made on the probability and technical feasibility of each scenario, but the body of the paper will be devoted to a critical survey of the ethical arguments for and against each of them, from a humanist point of view.

Types of arguments considered relate to: a) aging is not a disease but a natural process (medical therapy versus enhancement); b) demographic, economical, social, political and financial consequences on the level of society; c) consequences for individual human well-being, freedom and suffering; - implications for the meaning(s) of life of individual human beings: "A nonnegotiable limit to our expected time is necessary for each of us as the incentive to number our days and make them count" (Hans Jonas, 1985); d) the reciprocal social relationships of altruism, care and responsibility within families and between generations; e) an increase in social injustice to be expected from life extension technology: "The life-extending eugenics of tomorrow will increase inequality, not because these technologies are evil in themselves - they are not - but because they will flourish in a world that has turned its back on the passion for equality that was once a hallmark of the Enlightenment" (Alex Mauron, 2004). <<Back to Conference program