American biofutures: ideology and utopia in the Fukuyama/Stock debate.
Francis Fukuyama, in his Our Posthuman Future, and Gregory Stock, in his Redesigning Humans, present competing versions of the biomedical future of human beings, and debate the merits of more or less stringent regimes of regulation for biomedical innovation. In this article, these positions are shown to depend on a shared discourse of market liberalism, which limits both the range of ends for such innovation discussed by the authors, and the scope of their policy analyses and proposals. A proper evaluation of the human significance and policy imperatives for biomedical innovation needs to be both more utopian in its imagination, and more sophisticated in its political economy. In essence, the Fukuyama/Stock debate tells us more about current US political ideology than it does about the morality of human genetic and biopsychological engineering.
Ashcroft
R E
RE
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, Department of Primary Health Care and General Practice, ICSTM Charing Cross Campus, London, UK. r.ashcroft@ic.ac.uk
D001290:Attitude; D001709:Biotechnology / Q000639:trends*; D004467:Economics / Q000639:trends; D005544:Forecasting; D005818:Genetic Engineering / Q000639:trends; D006040:Goals; D006806:Human Rights; D006801:Humans; D010684:Philosophy; D011056:Political Systems; D012306:Risk; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors