The human being as an engineering problem: Post-biological evolution, transhumanism and philosophical anthropology

References

1. Armstrong, James. ( 1999;), ‘ Principles of engineering design. ’, Royal Academy of Engineering, https://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/other/armstrong-keynote. Accessed 12 July 2021.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bostrom, Nick. ( 2005;), ‘ A history of transhumanist thought. ’, Journal of Evolution and Technology, 14:1, https://jetpress.org/volume14/bostrom.html. Accessed 2 May 2018.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Brumlik, Micha. ( 2016;), ‘ Transhumanism is humanism, and humanism is transhumanism. ’, in J. B. Hurlbut, and H. Tirosh-Samuelson. (eds), Perfecting Human Futures: Transhuman Visions and Technological Imaginations, Wiesbaden:: Springer VS;, pp. 121–40.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Ćirković, Milan M.. ( 2018;), ‘ Post-biological evolution?. ’, Futures, 99:1, pp. 28–35.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Coeckelbergh, Mark. ( 2013), Human Being @ Risk: Enhancement, Technology, and the Evolution of Vulnerability Transformations, Dordrecht:: Springer;.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Feynman, Richard. ( 1988;), ‘ Richard Feynman’s blackboard at time of his death. ’, California Institute of Technology, https://calisphere.org/item/b3e8d3cb9b8adc01314dba1b1f1fcf84/. Accessed 15 March 2022.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Fischer, Joachim. ( 2009;), ‘ Exploring the core identity of philosophical anthropology through the works of Max Scheler, Helmuth Plessner, and Arnold Gehlen. ’ (trans. C., Harrison.), Iris, 1:1, pp. 153–70.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Fischer, Joachim. ( 2014;), ‘ Philosophical anthropology: A third way between Darwinism and Foucaltism. ’, in J. de Mull. (ed.), Plessner’s philosophical anthropology: Perspectives and Prospects, Chicago:: Chicago University Press;, pp. 4–56.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Fuller, Steve. ( 2011), Humanity 2.0: What It Means to Be Human, Past, Present and Future, Basingstoke, and New York:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Gosselin, Mia. ( 2015), Homo Sapiens, a Problematic Species: An Essay in Philosophical Anthropology, Lanham, MD:: University Press of America;.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Ihde, Don. ( 1979), Technics and Praxis, Dordrecht, Boston and London:: D. Reidel Publishing Company;.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Ihde, Don. ( 1993), Philosophy of Technology: An Introduction, New York:: Paragon House Publishers;.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Kroes, Peter. ( 2012), Technical Artefacts: Creations of Mind and Matter, Dordrecht:: Springer;.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Kurzweil, Ray. ( 1999), The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence, New York:: Viking;.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Kurzweil, Ray. ( 2001;), ‘ The law of accelerating returns. ’, Kurzweil: Tracking the Acceleration of Intelligence, https://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns. Accessed 31 December 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Kurzweil, Ray. ( 2005), The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, New York:: Viking;.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Kurzweil, Ray. ( 2012), How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed, New York:: Viking;.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Lee, Newton. ( 2019;), ‘ Brave new world of transhumanism. ’, in N. Lee. (ed.), The Transhumanism Handbook, Cham:: Springer Nature;, pp. 3–48.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Lombo, José Ange, and Russo, Francesco. ( 2017), Philosophical Anthropology: An Introduction (trans. Rev. J., Socias.), Downers Grove, IL:: Midwest Theological Forum;.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Margolis, Joseph. ( 2013;), ‘ Toward a metaphysics of culture. ’, Human Affairs, 23:4, pp. 474–94.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Margolis, Joseph. ( 2014;), ‘ Interview with Joseph Margolis. ’, European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, vi:2, https://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/pdf/301. Accessed 5 March 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Margolis, Joseph. ( 2016), Toward a Metaphysics of Culture, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
23. More, Max. ( 2013a;), ‘ The philosophy of transhumanism. ’, in M. More, and N. Vita-More. (eds), The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology and Philosophy of the Human Future, Malden, MA:: John Wiley & Sons;, pp. 3–17.
    [Google Scholar]
24. More, Max. ( 2013b;), ‘ The proactionary principle. ’, in M. More, and N. Vita-More. (eds), The Transhumanist Reader, Malden, MA:: John Wiley & Sons;, pp. 258–67.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Nesbeth, Darren N.. (ed.) ( 2016), Synthetic Biology Handbook, Boca Raton, FL:: Taylor & Francis Group;.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Nordmann, Alfred. ( 2015;), ‘ Synthetic biology at the limits of science. ’, in B. Giese,, A. von Gleich,, C. Pade, and H. Wigger. (eds), Synthetic Biology: Character and Impact, Berlin:: Springer;, pp. 31–58.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Pauly, Philip J.. ( 1987), Controlling Life: Jacques Loeb and the Engineering Ideal in Biology, New York and Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Roco, Mihail C., and Bainbridge, William Sims. ( 2002;), ‘ Executive summary. ’, in M. C. Roco, and W. S. Bainbridge. (eds), NSF/DOC Sponsored Report: Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science, Dordrecht:: Springer;, pp. ix–xii.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Rogers, Gordon F. C.. ( 1983), The Nature of Engineering: A Philosophy of Technology, London and Basingstoke:: The Macmillan Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Schact, Richard. ( 2018;), ‘ Philosophical anthropology: What, why and how. ’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 50:1, pp. 155–76.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Scheler, Max. ( [1926] 1958;), ‘ Man and history. ’, in Philosophical Perspectives (trans. and ed. O. A., Haac.), Boston:: Beacon Press;, pp. 65–93.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Scheler, Max. ( [1928] 2009), The Human Place in the Cosmos (trans. M. S., Frings.), Evanston, IL:: Northwestern University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Schmidt, Jan Cornelius. ( 2016;), ‘ Prospective technology assessment of synthetic biology: Fundamental and propaedeutic reflections in order to enable an early assessment. ’, Science and Engineering Ethics, 22:4, pp. 1151–70.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Singularity Group ( 2022;), ‘ Home page. ’, https://www.su.org/. Accessed 25 January 2022.
35. Thacker, Eugene. ( 2003;), ‘ Data made flesh: Biotechnology and the discourse of the posthuman. ’, Cultural Critique, 53:1, pp. 72–97.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Vermaas, Pieter E.. ( 2008;), ‘ Design in engineering an architecture. ’, in P. E. Vermaas,, P. Kroes,, A. Light, and S. Moore. (eds), Philosophy and Design: From Engineering to Architecture, Dordrecht:: Springer Science and Business;, pp. 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Vermaas, Pieter E.. ( 2018;), ‘ Engineering design. ’, in J. C. Joseph, and A. Shrew. (eds), Spaces for the Future: A Companion to Philosophy of Technology, New York:: Taylor & Francis;, pp. 196–207.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Wilson, Kit. ( 2021;), ‘ We need to talk about transhumanism. ’, The Spectator, https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/we-need-to-talk-about-transhumanism. Accessed 28 January 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Young, Simon. ( 2006), Designer Evolution: A Transhumanist Manifesto, New York:: Prometheus Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
40. O Brien, David. ( 2022;), ‘ The human being as an engineering problem: Post-biological evolution, transhumanism and philosophical anthropology. ’, Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research, 20:1&2, pp. 79–94, https://doi.org/10.1386/tear_00083_1
    [Google Scholar]