JUDAS: A Modern Journal

The Encyclopædia Britannica, the oldest English-language encyclopaedia, defines the social and philosophical movement of Transhumanism as: A philosophical and intellectual movement which advocates the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies that can greatly enhance longevity and cognition. To help us grasp the ideas and ethics of Transhumanist ideology, I'll use an example from David DeGrazia, a Bioethicist and Professor of Philosophy at George Washington University. Professor DeGrazia imagines a woman called Marina, who has insecurities and anxieties and is generally unhappy with herself. Marina wants to take Prozac (Fluoxetine) because she's heard that it can make people more confident. Marina, essentially, wants to use a drug (biotechnology) to go beyond her limitations. DeGrazia asks if this is okay, if she's still the same person, is this acceptable, but what he's really trying to ask is  what defines ...

Decisions concerning only oneself are not arguments, but simple decisions. Often framed in terms of pros and cons, this simple debate is one where either answer is valid and acceptable. You shouldn't be forced to get vaccinated just because it's good for you. As an autonomous individual, you get to decide when to take risks, when to go against statistics, and when to engage in a little recreational danger. This kind of risk is something we do a lot of as a species: motorcycling because it's fun even though cars are safer; base jumping from the Burj Khalifa when it's much safer to just not ; dodging essential vaccines even though that's really stupid (whatever gets you that adrenaline rush, I guess.) I would have no objection to people opting out of vaccination if it only affected them, but it doesn't, it affects everyone, like all 7.97 billion of us. Because it affects more people than just yourself, it's a moral question.  So, let's talk about how your ...