Home → Releases → 2023, №4 (48) →

HUMANITARIAN IMPACTS OF CONVERGENT TECHNOLOGIES: IN SEARCH OF CONSENSUS

Social Philosophy , UDC: 1:316 DOI: 10.25688/2078-9238.2023.48.4.5

Authors

  • Matronina Lilia Fyodorovna Candidate of Philosophical Sciences
  • Skorodumova Olga Borisovna Doctor of Philosophy

Annotation

The rapid development of convergent technologies in the first quarter of the 21st century actualizes the problem of identifying their essence, development prospects and, most importantly, the impact these technologies have on the essence and existence of a person. The article attempts to reveal the specifics of NBIC convergence as a synergy of nano-, bio-, info-, cognitive technologies that make up the essence of the fourth industrial revolution (“Industry 4.0”). It is shown that, along with new opportunities, NBIC technologies lead to global risks, primarily humanitarian ones. The authors note that in the context of modern technological expansion, the confrontation between humanists and their critics in assessing the humanitarian consequences caused by NBIC convergence has sharply escalated. Based on the analysis of modern research, potential humanitarian risks are identified, leading to the leveling of the unique nature of man, the destruction of his integrity and individual “I”. he article concludes that the conditions for the formation of a new hybrid techno-anthropological reality in order to overcome the crisis of humanism and the dehumanization of a technologized society require a consensus in the development of legal and ethical mechanisms aimed at regulating convergent technologies, involving specialists and technology developers, scientists, politicians, as well as the general public. An important role belongs to education as an organizational and communicative process of teaching and educating a person, the formation of its integrity.
Tags:
Convergent technologies , dehumanization , Humanism , humanitarian risks , NBIC convergence

How to link insert

Matronina, L. F. & Skorodumova, O. B. (2023). HUMANITARIAN IMPACTS OF CONVERGENT TECHNOLOGIES: IN SEARCH OF CONSENSUS Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", 2023, №4 (48), 57. https://doi.org/10.25688/2078-9238.2023.48.4.5
References
1. 1. Laslo, E. (2004). Macroshift (Toward the stability of the world by the course of change). Moscow: Tidex Ko, 208 p. (In Russian).
2. 2. Rozin, V. M. (2014). The evolution of engineering and design activities and thought. Engineering: formation, development, typology. Moscow: LENAND. 200 p. (In Russian).
3. 3. Dobrenkov, V. I., & Kravchenko, A. I. (2018). Technological challenges: monograph. Moscow: Rusajns. 416 p. (In Russian).
4. 4. Shvab, K. (2018). Technologies of the fourth industrial revolution. Moscow: Bombora. 317 p. (In Russian).
5. 5. Hockfield, S. (2020). The Age of Living Machines: How Biology Will Build the Next Technology Revolution. W.W. Norton & Company. 256 p.
6. 6. Lektorsky, V. A. (2020). Technologization of science as an existential challenge. In: Shipovalova, L. V., & Kasavin, I. T. (Scientific Ed. and Comp.). Science as a public good (Vol. 7, 8–9). Сollection of theses: In 7 vols. Moscow: Russian Society for the History and Philosophy of Science. (In Russian). Retrieved from: http://rshps.ru/books/congress2020t7.pdf
7. 7. Markov, B. V. (2021). Man in a network society. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Philosophy and conflictology, 3, 2, 194–207. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2021.201
8. 8. Budanov, V. G. (Ed.). (2022). Anthropomerism as a challenge and response of our time. A collective monograph. Kursk: University Book. 309 p. (In Russian).
9. 9. Leonhard, G. (2018). Technology against man. Translated from the English by A. O. Yurkov et al. Moscow: AST. 320 p. (In Russian).
10. 10. Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (Eds). (2002). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science (NBIC). In: Roco, M. C., & Bainbridge, W. S. (Eds). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, 2002, June (pp. 1–23). Retrieved from: https://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/articles/NBIC_pre_publication.pdf
11. 11. Kovalchuk, M. V. (2011). Convergence of sciences and technologies — a breakthrough into the future. Russian Nanotechnologies, 6, 1–2, 13–23. (In Russian). Retrieved from: https://www.nanonewsnet.ru/articles/2011/konvergentsiya-nauk-technologii-proryvv-budushchee
12. 12. Convergence of biological, information, nano- and cognitive technologies... (2012). Convergence of biological, information, nano- and cognitive technologies: a challenge to philosophy (Materials of the “round table”). Questions of Philosophy, (12), 3–23. (In Russian).
13. 13. Pico dela Mirandola, Dzh. (2001). Speech on the Dignity of Man. Anthology of World Philosophy: Renaissance. Minsk: Harvest; Moscow: AST, 265–274. (In Russian).
14. 14. Berdyaev, N. A. (1994). The fate of man in the modern world (Toward an understanding of our era). In: Berdyaev N. A. Philosophy of the free spirit (pp. 318–363). Moscow: Respublika. (In Russian).
15. 15. Soper, K. (1986). Humanism and Anti-Humanism. London: Hutchinson. 159 p. Retrieved from: https://posthumanism.com; https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02206738
16. 16. Britt, Ch. (2021). Humanism in an Age of Anti-humanism. In: Britt, Ch., & Subirats, E. Intellectuals in the Society of Spectacle (pp. 51–111). Publisher Palgrave Macmillan Cham. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-73106-9_2
17. 17. Mercer, C., & Troth, T. J. (2021). Religion and the Technological Future: An Introduction to Biohacking, Artificial Intelligence, and Transhumanism. Palgrave Macmillan. 284 p.
18. 18. Gordijn, B. (2006, Winter). Converging NBIC Technologies for Improving Human Performance: a Critical Assessment of the Novelty and the Prospects of the Project. Law, Medicine & Ethics, 34 (4), 726–732. Retrieved from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17199814/ (assesed: 10.08.2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00092.x
19. 19. Sylvester, S. (2022). BioHacking für Unternehmer: Mit der 110 % Methode zur High Performance. Tolino media. 396 p.
20. 20. Bratlie, S., & Kvale, H. (2020). Fremtidsmennesket — hva den bioteknologiske revolusjonen betyr for deg. Kagge. 206 p.
21. 21. Almécija, S. (2023). Humans: Perspectives on Our Evolution from World Experts. Columbia University Press. 520 p.
22. 22. Fedorov, N. F. (1906). Philosophy of the common cause. Articles, thoughts and letters of Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov. Edited by V. A. Kozhevnikov, & N. P. Peterson. Vol. I. Verny. 473 p. (In Russian).
23. 23. Spencer, М. (2014). What is biohacking and why should we care? Science, Sep., 23. Retrieved from: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/biohacking-care
24. 24. Espri, D. (2018). Brain biohacking. A proven plan for the maximum pumping of your brain in two weeks. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber Publishing House. 272 p. (In Russian).
25. 25. Graziano, M. S. A. (2019). Rethinking Consciousness: A Scientific Theory of Subjective Experience. WW Norton & Company, 256.
26. 26. ChatGPT... (2023). ChatGPT and Business, Changing the Game. Revolutionizing Customer Success: Book 1. AI and Business Book Series. 257 p.
27. 27. Arshinov, V. I. (2009). “Network way” of modern nano-techno-scientific practice. Post-non-classical practices and sociocultural transformations (pp. 60–72). Moscow. (In Russian).
28. 28. Alekseeva, I. Yu., Arshinov, V. I., & Chekletsov, V. V. (2013). “Techno-people” against “post-people”: NBICS-revolution and the future of man. Questions of Philosophy, 3, 12–21. (In Russian).
29. 29. Skorodumova, O. B., Matronina, L. F., & Koval, T. I. (2015). Anthropological risks of the information society. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 33, 279–285. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3s3p295
Download file .pdf 388.66 kb