Normative Limits of Interference in Human Nature
Abstract
The text, based on norms protecting human nature, first invokes normality, which has sensibly shaped and continues to shape customs and a culture that protects the natural environment for human development. This normality is associated with the order of love (ordo amoris) as developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, which opposes the so-called optimization of the world promoted by utilitarian thinkers. The article reinforces these findings of norms protecting human nature by referring to the substantial, fundamental potentialities and tendencies of human nature, interpreted in the context of the ontological dignity of every human being. From this perspective, the technocratic treatment of the human body by transhumanism turns out to be a replication of the destructive path of technocracy towards nature, except that the destruction of human nature can be more dangerous, as it concerns the destruction of man as a bodyspirit entity, i.e., the destruction of his normal, dynamic, and creative functioning and action, which no machines can replace, as they are only artificial tools at his disposal.
References
Peeters Marguerite, Gender – światowa norma polityczna i kulturowa, tłum. Leszek Woroniecki SAC (Warszawa: Wyd. Sióstr Loretanek, 2013).
Possenti Vittorio, Osoba nową zasadą, tłum. Jarosław Merecki (Lublin: Polskie Towarzystwo Tomasza z Akwinu, 2017).
Słownik wyrazów obcych (Warszawa: PWN, 1980).
Spaemann Robert, “About normality”, Close by the Incurable Sick Person and the Dying: Scientific and Ethical Aspects, Provisional Papers for the XIV General Assembly, Vatican City, 25–26 February 2008, https://medische-ethiek.nl/ wp-content/uploads/2019/12/pav2008.pdf (dostęp: 14.06.2024).
Spaemann Robert, Löw Reinhard, Cele naturalne. Dzieje i ponowne odkrycie myślenia teleologicznego, tłum. Andrzej Półtawski (Warszawa: Oficyna Naukowa Elżbieta Nowakowska-Sołtan, 2008).
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Eugenika w propozycjach legalizacji prawa do zdrowej reprodukcji”, Logos i Ethos 50 (2) (2019): 27–46.
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Roberta Spaemanna próba przywrócenia myślenia teleologicznego we współczesnej filozofii”, Logos i Ethos 2 (55) (2020): 41–62.
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Właściwe i niewłaściwe cele medycyny”, Medycyna Praktyczna 5 (159) (2004): 20–25.
Savulescu Julian, “Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children”, Bioethics 15 (5/6) (2001): 414–426.
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Godność osoby ludzkiej a normy etyczne”, w: Spór o naturę ludzką. Zagadnienia współczesnej metafizyki, t. 16, red. Andrzej Maryniarczyk (Lublin: PTTA, 2014), 567–584.
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Prawo naturalne a genderowa ideologia wyzwolenia”, w: Etyka obowiązku i wartości, red. Andrzej Kobyliński, Andrzej Waleszczyński (Warszawa: WN UKSW, 2023), 405–420.
Biesaga Tadeusz, „Teleologia natury ludzkiej i autoteleologia osoby a ulepszanie poznawcze człowieka”, w: Ulepszanie poznawcze człowieka. Perspektywa filozoficzna, red. Piotr Duchliński, Grzegorz Hołub (Kraków, WN AIK, 2021), 243–258.
Seifert Josef, “The Right to Life and the Fourfold Root of Human Dignity”, w: The Nature and Dignity of the Human Person as the Foundation of the Right to Life. The Challenges of the Contemporary Cultural Context, red. Juan de Dios Vial Correa, Elio Sgreccia (Citta del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2003), 194–215.
Styczeń Tadeusz, Szostek Andrzej, „Liberalizm po marksistowsku. Antropologiczne implikacje marksistowskiej soteriologii”, w: Tadeusz Styczeń SDS, Człowiek darem, red. Cezary Ritter (Lublin: TW KUL, Instytut Jana Pawła II KUL, 2014), 329–348.
Copyright (c) 2024 Ignatianum University in Cracow
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Yearbook only accepts materials for publication that are free of all conflicts of interest, and that in no way involve conflicts over authorship, copyright, etc. The Editors will take action against any cases of plagiarizing, ghostwriting1, guest/honorary authorship2, etc. Where co-authored work is concerned, the Author listed first is expected to take responsibility for the submission, and is required to make clear the contributions of all of the Co-Authors involved. In the event of the publication owing its existence to funding dedicated to this purpose, this fact should be made clear: e.g. in any note of thanks/acknowledgement, or in a footnote, etc. Explicit notification should be given of any form of reprinting, with the appropriate evidence of permission to publish being furnished as required. Any impropriety on the part of Authors/Reviewers risks exposing them to appropriate responses from the relevant institutions.
______
1 This term refers to instances of a person who has made an essential contribution being omitted from the list of authors, or from notes conveying gratitude and/or acknowledgement.
2 This occurs when a person who has made either an insignificant contribution or no contribution at all nevertheless appears on the list of authors.
