Abstract
This chapter reconstructs the debate around animal enhancement and describes what is currently being done in experimental research. It then goes on to show how visions of animal enhancement are currently discussed by their transhumanist advocates. These discussions use the positive rhetorical force of an expression like énhancement’, bypass the practical aspects of what supporting ‘animal enhancement technologies’ concretely means — thus the problem of animal experiments — and rely on general arguments that stress the need to eliminate all the negative sides of ‘nature’. Suggesting a strong form of human-centred paternalism, the animal enhancement project presents ‘nature’ as a last frontier which can be colonised by the human technological enterprise.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Birch K. (2008) ‘Neoliberalising bioethics: bias, enhancement and economistic ethics’, Genomics, Society and Policy, 4 (2), 1–10.
Bostrom N. and Savulescu J. (2009) ‘Human enhancement ethics: the state of the debate’, in Bostrom N. and Savulescu J. (eds), Human Enhancement ( Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press ), pp. 1–22.
Chan S. (2009) ‘Should we enhance animals?’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 35, 678–83.
Church S.L. (2006) ‘Nuclear transfer saddles up’, Nature Biotechnology, 24, 605–7.
Coenen C. (2010) ‘Deliberating Visions: The Case of Human Enhancement in the Discourse on Nanotechnology and Convergence’, in: Kaiser M., Kurath M., Maasen S. and Rehmann-Sutter C. (eds) Governing Future Technologies: Nanotechnology and the Rise of an Assessment Regime ( Dordrecht: Springer ), pp. 73–87.
Cooper M. (2008) Life as Surplus: Biotechnology and Capitalism in the Neoliberal Era ( Washington: University of Washington Press).
Donovan D.M. (2005) ‘Engineering disease resistant cattle’, Transgenic Research, 14 (5), 563–7.
Dvorsky G. (2006) ‘All together now: developmental and ethical considerations for biologically uplifting nonhuman animals’, Journal of Personal Cyberconsciousness, 1 (4), http://web.archive.org/web/20070108172808/http://ieet.org/writings/AllTogetherNow.pdf.
European Parliament STOA (2009) Human Enhancement Study, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2009/417483/ IPOL-JOIN_ET(20 09) 417483_EN.pdf.
Ferrari A. (2006) ‘Genetically modified laboratory animals in the name of the 3Rs?’, ALTEX, 23 (4), 294–307.
Ferrari A. (2008) Genmaus and Co. Gentechnisch veränderte Tiere in der Biomedizin ( Erlangen: Harald Fischer Verlag).
Ferrari A. (2010) ‘The control nano-freak: multifaceted strategies for taming nature’, in Kjolberg K. and Wickson F. (eds), Nano Meets Macro Social Perspectives on Nano-scaled Sciences and Technologies ( Singapore: Pan Stanford Publishing ), pp. 307–35.
Ferrari A. (2012a) ‘Animal enhancement: Künftiger Alptraum für Nutztiere?’, http://www.tier-im-fokus.ch/nutztierhaltung/ animal_enhancement/.
Ferrari A. (2012b) ‘Animal disenhancement for animal welfare: the apparent philosophical conundrums and the real exploitation of animals. A response to Thompson and Palmer’, Nanoethics, 6, 65–76.
Ferrari A. (2013) ‘Zwischen Tierschutz und Ausbeutung: Animal Enhancement als Herrschaftsprojekt’, in Rippe K.-P. and Thurnherr U. (Hrsg.), Tierisch Menschlich. Beiträge zur Tierphilosophie und Tierethik ( Erlangen: Harald Fischer ), pp. 97–114.
Ferrari A., Coenen C., Grunwald A. and Sauter A. (2010) Animal Enhancement. Neue technische Möglichkeiten und ethische Fragen ( Bern: Bundesamt für Bauten und Logistik BBL ), http://www.ekah.admin.ch/fileadmin/ekah-dateien/dokumentation/publikationen/EKAH_Animal_Enhancement_Inh_web_V19822.pdf.
Forsberg C.W. et al. (2003) ‘The Enviropig physiology, performance, and contribution to nutrient management, advances in a regulated environment: the leading edge of change in the pork industry’, Journal of Animal Science, 81 (14 Suppl. 2), E68–77.
Fox M. (2010) ‘Taking dogs seriously?’, Law, Culture and the Humanities, 6 (1), 37–55.
Galli C. et al. (2003) ‘Pregnancy: a cloned horse born to its dam twin’, Nature, 424, 635.
Galli C. et al. (2008) ‘Somatic cell nuclear transfer in horses’, Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 43 (Suppl. s2), 331–7.
Golovan S.P., Meidinger R.G., Ajakaiye A., Cottrill M., Wiederkehr M.Z., Barney D.J., Plante C., Pollard J.W., Fan M.Z., Hayes M.A., Laursen J., Hjorth J.P., Hacker R.R., Phillips J.P. and Forsberg C.W. (2001) ‘Pigs expressing salivary phytase produce low-phosphorus manure’, Nat. Biotechnol., 19, 741–5.
Gottlieb S. and Wheeler M.B. (2008) Genetically Engineered Animals and Public Health: Compelling Benefits for Health Care, Nutrition, the Environment, and Animal Welfare (Washington DC: Biotechnology Industry Organization), http://www.bio.org/foodag/animals/ ge_animal_benefits.pdf.
Gruen L. (2011) Ethics and Animals: An Introduction ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Harris J. (2007) Enhancing Evolution ( Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press).
Harvey D. (2007) A Brief History of Neoliberalism ( Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Henschke A. (2012) ‘Making sense of animal disenhancement’, Nanoethics, 6 (1), 41–6.
Hubrecht R. (1995) ‘The welfare of dogs in human care’, in Serpell J. (ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behaviour and Interventions with People ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ), pp. 179–98.
Hughes J. (2004) Citizen Cyborg. Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future ( Cambridge: Westview Press).
Kimmelmann B. (1983) ‘The American Breeders’ Association: Genetics and Eugenics in an Agricultural Context, 1903–1913’, Social Studies of Science, 13, 163–204.
Kues W.A. and Niemann H. (2011) ‘Advances in farm animal transgenesis’, Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 102, 146–56.
Lebedev M.A. and Nicolelis M.A. (2006) ‘Brain-machine interfaces: past, present and future’, Trends in Neuroscience, 29 (9), 536–46.
Lehrer J. (2009) ‘Neuroscience: small, furry… and smart’, Nature, 461 (7266), 862–4.
Lenk C. (2002) Therapie und Enhancement. Ziele und Grenzen der modernen Medizin ( Berlin: Springer).
Liao S.M., Sandberg A., Roache R. (2012) ‘Human Engineering and Climate Change’, Ethics, Policy and Environment, 15(2). 206–221. DOI: 10.1080/21550085.2012.685574.
Lush J.L. (1937) Animal breeding plans ( Ames: Iowa State College Press).
Lyons L.A. (2010) ‘Feline genetics: clinical applications and genetic testing’, Topics in Companion Animal Medicine, 25 (4), 203–12.
Macchiarini F. et al. (2005) ‘Humanized mice: are we there yet?’, Journal of Experimental Medicine, 21, 202(10), 1307–11.
Maga E.A., Shoemaker C.F., Rowe J.D. et al. (2006) ‘Production and processing of milk from transgenic goats expressing human lysozyme in the mammary gland’, Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 518–24.
Mamiya T., Yamada K., Miyamoto Y. et al. (2003) ‘Neuronal mechanism of nociceptin-induced modulation of learning and memory: involvement of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors’, Molecular Psychiatry, 8 (8), 752–65.
Meyers-Wallen V.N. (2003) ‘Ethics and genetic selection in purebred dogs’, Reproduction of Domestic Animals, 38, 73–6.
Palmer C. (2011) ‘Animal disenhancement and the non-identity problem: a response to Thompson’, Nanoethics, 5, 43–8.
Panarace M. et al. (2007) ‘How healthy are clones and their progeny: 5 years of field experience’, Theriogenology, 67, 142–51.
Pearce D. (2007) ‘The abolitionist project. Text adapted from invited talks given at the Future of Humanity Institute (Oxford University) and the Charity International Happiness Conference’, http://www.abolitionist.com/.
Pearce D. (2011) ‘Transhumanism 2011. Interview with David Pearce’, Manniska Plus, http://www.hedweb.com/transhumanism/overview2011.html.
Persson I., Savulescu J. (2012) Unfit for the Future. The Need for Moral Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
President’s Council on Bioethics (2003) Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness ( Washington DC: The President’s Council on Bioethics ), http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/beyondtherapy/beyond_therapy_final_webcorrected.pdf.
Rathbone M. and Brayden D. (2009) ‘Controlled release drug delivery in farmed animals: commercial challenges and academic opportunities’, Current Drug Delivery, 6 (4), 383–90.
Raven P.G. (2011) Uplift ethics and transhuman hubris, http://futurismic.com/2011/07/26/uplift-ethics-and-transhumanhubis/?utm_source=feedburnerandutm_medium=feedandutm_campaign=Feed%3A+futurismic_feed+%28Futurismic+-+the+fact+and+fiction+of+tomorrow%29.
Roco M. and Bainbridge W. (eds) (2002) Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Technology, NSF/DOC-sponsored report (Arlington: World Technology Evaluation Center), http://wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/1/NBIC_report.pdf.
Rollin, B.E. (1995) The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savulescu J. (2011) ‘Genetically modified animals: should there be limits to engineering the animal kingdom?’, in Beauchamp T. and Frey R. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Animal Ethics ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), pp. 641–70.
Schaffer M. (2009) One Nation under Dog ( New York: Henry Holt and Co.).
Schultz-Bergin M. (2014) ‘Making better sense of animal disenhancement: A reply to Henschke’, Nanoethics, 8, 101–9.
Singer (2011) Practical Ethics, 3rd edn ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Steinfield H. et al. (eds) (2006) Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options ( Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation ), http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.htm.
Talwar S.K. et al. (2002) ‘Behavioural neuroscience: rat navigation guided by remote control’, Nature, 417, 37–8.
Tang Y., Shimizu E., Dube G.R. et al. (1999) ‘Genetic enhancement of learning and memory in mice’, Nature, 401 (6748), 63–9.
Thompson P. (2008) ‘The opposite of enhancement: nanotechnology and the blind chicken problem’, Nanoethics, 2, 305–16.
Wall R.J., Powell A.M., Paape M.J. et al. (2005) ‘Genetically enhanced cows resist intramammary Staphylococcus aureus infection’, Nature Biotechnology, 23, 445–51.
Wolbring G. (2008) ‘Why NBIC? Why human performance enhancement?’, 21, Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research, 1, 25–40.
Wolbring G. (2009) ‘Die Konvergenz der Governance von Wissenschaft und Technik mit der Governance des “Ableism”’, Technikfolgenabschätzung–Theorie und Praxis, 2 (18), 29–35.
Wolbring G. (2010) ‘Human enhancement through the ableism lens’, Dilemata, 3, http://www.dilemata.net/revista/index.php/dilemata/article/view/31/46.
Young L. (2009) ‘Pet economy: meet the fur babies’, Telegraph.co.uk, 5 November, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/petshealth/6507575/Pet-economy-meet-the-fur-babies.html.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Arianna Ferrari
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ferrari, A. (2015). Animal Enhancement: Technovisionary Paternalism and the Colonisation of Nature. In: Bateman, S., Gayon, J., Allouche, S., Goffette, J., Marzano, M. (eds) Inquiring into Animal Enhancement: Model or Countermodel of Human Enhancement?. Health, Technology and Society. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137542472_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137542472_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-56352-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-54247-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social Sciences CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)