Friedrich Nietzsche, an atheistic existential philosopher, who coveted to dethrone the all-powerful God so as to enthrone man, famously said, “Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman – a rope over an abyss”[1]. This ambition to excel has taken different turnings in the contemporary epoch, tied to the human body. Two would be worth of drawing our attention: namely, biohacking and sex as an alterable fact of personal choice. Biohacking aims at rejuvenating the body through intravenous (IV) therapy and cryotherapy (use of extreme cold) aimed at supporting bioregulatory systems and to deal with the issue of neuro-degenerative systems. However, it has gone to the extent of preventing aging and prolongation of life or becoming immortal. Secondly, the deep cry for the unrestricted liberalism in west has unleashed a flood of ideas that provide the space to alter one’s sex, facilitated by conceptually differentiating sex from gender. These both try to dismantle two important aspect of human life held for centuries: personal integrity and the human desire to be part of a society[2]. The first one is troubled by sacrificing life guarding intellectual capabilities that aim at transcendental ideals and replacing it with the fleeting sensations. The second one is disturbed by the post-individualistic tendency, that fails to provide any definite social category – male/female – that can empower a human politically as well as economically and the care for the society.
photo: freepik.com
Biohacking as well as sex of choice is concerned with the body. The first one tries to overcome death through scientific peddling in the body and the second one tries to alter one’s physical and physiological attributes of sex artificially.The
term biohacking was coined by Dave Asprey and he defined it as: “changing the
environment outside of you and inside of you so you have full control of your
biology”. He introduced the bulletproof coffee, a combination of coffee, MCT –
medium chain triglycerides, fats that are made in a lab from coconut and palm
kernel oils – and grass-fed butter, that would kick your day off with new
energy. Then it was picked up by the giants of Silicon Valley, who wanted to be
ever young. Among them Los-Angeles-based multimillionaire Bryan Johnson, who is
obsessed with everlasting life, spends two million US dollars annually. The
covetous concept of superhuman has rivetted the multimillionaires of India as
well. Once found in the metropolitan cities is now spreading to other cities
and towns through the online platforms. Obviously, biohacking has become a
business and thereby commodification of body takes place[3].
Philosophically
speaking, this falls under the ambit of the philosophical trend: unethical materialistic
egoism. Materialism, has different forms. Dialectical materialism,
philosophized by Karl Marx, cared for the socioeconomically and politically
downtrodden. The hero such as Bhagat Singh, a materialist, had dreamt of a
transcendental meaning for his death. He wrote: “we do not believe in God, hell
and heaven, punishment and rewards, that is in any Godly accounting of human
life. Therefore, we must think of life and death on materialistic lines… a man
with beliefs and ideals like mine, could never thing dying uselessly. We want
to get the maximum value for our lives. We want to serve humanity as much as
possible”[4]. (One of the great
theologians of the Catholic Church, Irenaeus would say: “the glory of God is
human being fully alive”. According to Christian theology, God is glorified by
every sacrifice that humans make for his fellow human being. Therefore, the
author finds no contradiction in accepting God and working for the society).
Philosopher Aristotle and social psychologist Durkheim would see this as the
natural desire of the humans to surpass natural inclination, that is connected
to body, and be part of a society, the higher part of human life. Levinas, the
French philosopher would call this as the transcendental desire for the other –
other than oneself.
In
today’s world there is a growing unethical materialism which is reflected in
the lives of both biohackers and the people who fight for sex of choice. There
is a growing tendency in today’s world that promote a concept that the rich are
entitled to spend their money as they wish to. There is no transcendental
value, as expressed by Bhagat Singh to be concerned about the less privileged.
There is the myth of meritocracy. It is widespread among the society providing
the rich sociopsychological uninhibited freedom and the political right to be
extravagant. The society, inclusive of all classes, view the economic
deprivation of many as the consequence of not being meritorious. This accords
“lower status”[5],
silencing the cry to treat everyone equally dignified, to the economically
deprived, and the social-psyche has accepted this without any prick of
conscience. Thereby the rich enjoy the immunity to be selfish, enjoy the
license to accumulate unlimited wealth at any cost and of the late it is viewed
as the privilege to live forever on this earth. The natural desire of the
humans to be part of a larger society and be responsible towards them is
forgotten. The body and its desires have taken the prime place. To care about
oneself, and show little concern for the other is seen by the traditional
wisdom as unwise, unethical, useless. The missing out of the transcendental
element, results in the disintegration of human life. It is an utter
reductionism: reduction of worthy human life to biological corpse.
Then,
the idea sex of choice. The west has differentiated sex from gender and has
made the conceptual clarity for bodily sexual alteration. Accordingly, sex is
defined as having some biological attributes associated with certain physical
and physiological features. Gender on the contrary, is seen as a social
construct, that are related to behaviours, expression and identities as girls,
boys, men women and other gender people. The differentiation further states: “gender
is usually conceptualized as binary (girl/woman and boy/man) yet there is considerable
diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience, and express it[6]”. This sort of differentiated understanding
about gender too centre around male – female binary. Although without any
specific possibility for alternative sex, beyond this binary, the
differentiation goes on to say that, with regard to gender there can be
“considerable diversity.” This has provided one the liberty to define one’s
sex. This is carried forward by altering one’s physical attributes.
The
trouble with the above mentioned two phenomena is, with regard to the integrity
of person and she/he/? belonging to a society through specific category –
male/female. The above definition ends as “how individuals and groups
understand, experience, and express it”. A range of disturbing questions arise
here. When does one understand, experience, and express that the particular
person is male/female/?? Can we set an age mark to it? Can an understanding or
experiencing capacitate one to alter body? What will happen if the understanding
or experience changes sometimes later? Can she/he/? make bodily change? Is it
not rational to think that, the body is given to achieve a certain goal in life
and thereby contribute something useful for the other? What should control a
person’s life, fleeting experiences, or sound rational thinking? What is the role
of a human person in bringing up the next generation? Is not the right of the
child to have father and mother. Can there be a family at all? If not, who will
inculcate the habit of social living, care and love for the other? If these are
connected to the integrity of the person, then there are other puzzling
problems that are linked to social living.
Categories
are important for any sociopolitical and economic empowerment. The fluidity of
gender identities creates uncertain social categories. One is not sure of
gender affiliation. Liberty has almost become a religion in the west. In the
process of securing sociopolitical freedom for the large section of the humans,
in the course of history, aided by philosophical and theological concepts,
liberty has accumulated layers of rights. These rights have become a set of
principles that are to be revered. Thereby as it happens in any religion,
illiberal ideas are also to be tolerated.
Materialistic
understanding of body and unwanted glorification of body that cares little
about the other is troublesome. Let the multimillionaires worry more about the
socioeconomically other. Secondly, fleeting experiences cannot be the basis for
altering one’s sex. Let the life be guided by reason that aim at some
transcendental ideals and do not be carried away by the bodily feelings that
condition the reason.
by
Appu Santhosh Kumar
[1] Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke
Zarathustra, Walter Kaufmann (trans.), 14, Penguin Books, New York, 1985,
14)
[2] Cf. E. Durkheim, Emile Durkheim on Morality
and Society, 149.
[3] The Hindu,
Magazine, April 28, 2024.
[4] As quoted in Prathmesh Kher, “Ethics and Epistemology
of ancient Indian Materialists”, The Hindu, November 23, 2023.
[5] Cf. A. Faizur Rahman & Santhosh Mehrotra,
The Psychology of extravagance, The Hindu, August 8, 2024.
[6] International
Food Policy Research Institute, Global Food 50/50 (2021), 15.
0 கருத்துகள்