tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post7606367409564979736..comments2023-10-26T22:06:11.166+11:00Comments on Metamagician3000: Human enhancement and the religious worldviewRussell Blackfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-57136112647336914632006-11-22T11:13:00.000+11:002006-11-22T11:13:00.000+11:00It is not "my argument"; it is Fukuyama's. I have ...It is not "my argument"; it is Fukuyama's. I have merely reconstructed it for clarity.<br /><br />Perhaps I misunderstand your point, but I find your comment very confusing. I am the last person to assume that "enhancement" is some sort of homogenous category - perhaps you mean that Fukuyama assumes this, but even that would not be a fair inference from anything I've written here.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-37274433459728196322006-11-22T03:19:00.000+11:002006-11-22T03:19:00.000+11:00Your argument is a an elaborate strawman, assuming...Your argument is a an elaborate strawman, assuming "enhancement" to be homogenous and ignoring millenia of ethical and philosophical reasoning - primarily from the religious world view.<br /><br />If the enhancement does not depend on the destruction of human life or infringe against the rights of other human beings, it's unlikely that an argument against enhancement from a religious world view will stand.LifeEthics.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14136517859663946965noreply@blogger.com