The future of humans
This post appears on Ash Wednesday. The typical Ash
Wednesday homily or theological reflection addresses sin and repentance,
explaining the symbolism of the ashes imposed on foreheads. For some thoughts
on that subject, read these previous Ethical Musings posts: Rethinking
Ash Wednesday and Getting
Ready for Lent.
Instead, I want to consider the future of humans, not as
individuals but as a biological species. Generally, this subject receives
little explicit theological attention apart from affirmations that God, in
God’s time, will fulfill God’s vision for creation. That also is not the focus
of these musings. I just read two books on evolution, one arguing for a version
of intelligent design and the other describing how Darwin’s theories emerged
from his personal and familial interests. Both books emphasized evolution’s
dynamism; neither book explored what that might mean for humans. Nevertheless,
the books were a catalyst for these musings about future directions of human
evolution.
First, I’m confident that homo sapiens are not uniquely
static. Evolution, even if we cannot see it, evolution continues in our midst
with our species exhibiting minor adaptations to environment that promote the
survival of the fittest.
Second, cyborgs – entities that combine a living being with
a machine – have arrived or soon will, depending upon how one defines machine.
Replacement joints have become commonplace. Replacement sensors (e.g., an eye
or touch in a fingertip or other piece of skin) are in the experimental stage.
Scientists are also experimenting with a human using her/his brain to control
an artificial limb. Perhaps the next major step in human evolution will be a
cyborg with a human brain and an electro-mechanical body.
Third, racial and ethnic differences are disappearing
through increased breeding among persons of different races and ethnicities. In
Hawaii, for example, finding someone who is 100% Hawaiian is now difficult. To
a lesser extent, similar trends are evident globally as global migration
increases and cultural barriers against intermarriage and childbearing by
unmarried women erode.
Fourth, manipulation of an embryo’s genome, selection of a
particular sperm or egg, and modification of a person’s genome all portend
changes to the human species. Once begun, these genetic modifications are
unlikely to stop. And once begun, these genetic modifications may slowly but
permanently alter the human genome. Perhaps one day parents say be able to select
each of a new fetus’s twenty-six chromosomes.
Predicting the outcome of these moves is impossible.
Nevertheless, rejecting all such changes as unethical is wrong. Some changes
may eliminate diseases for which no known cure exists (e.g., sickle cell
anemia), may reduce the incidence of birth defects or diseases such as diabetes
and cancer, or may otherwise dramatically improve the quality of human life or
its longevity. These subjects deserve more attention in Christian ethics,
theology, and churches.
Fifth, I wonder what other evolutionary changes are
currently happening to humans to which all but perhaps a few scientists are
oblivious. For example, are humans, to the extent that these traits are
genetically determined, becoming taller, losing certain physical capabilities, gaining
or losing aggressiveness, gaining or losing resistance to particular diseases,
etc.?
Sixth, how long will the human species survive? I recently
met a professor of biology from Italy who teaches in New Zealand. He wonders
whether popular understandings of the causes of war and other forms of human violence
and oppression bode ill for our species’ longevity.
Seventh, will humans crossbreed with a species from another planet,
producing a new species as unimaginable to us as humans were to their predecessors?
For me, one key theological and ethical implication of
continuing human evolution is that humans do not represent the apex or
culmination of creation. Contrary to the myths in Genesis 1-2, the
understandable anthropocentrism of our spiritual ancestors is incorrect. Humans
are simply part of creation; in calling humans to be stewards of creation, God
valued all creation equally and trusted us to do the same.
Ongoing human evolution also underscores the error of
believing in a utopian Eden from which humans fell out of favor with God. That
erroneous belief also presumes anthropocentrism. Lent, which begins on Ash Wednesday,
is a time in the Christian calendar for self-examination and repenting of our errors
and sins.
Thinking about human evolution identifies more questions than
answers. Human knowledge has expanded exponentially over the last century, yet there
is so much about which we know little or nothing. Humility, not hubris, best prepares
us for today as well as the future.
Finally, ongoing human evolution, along with the continuing
evolution of the entire cosmos, makes life seem like an adventure, even from
God’s perspective, since God may very well not know where the processes that
God initiated will eventually lead. Omniscience, after all, is a human
construct. Omniscience may denote knowing everything about past and present
without necessarily knowing the future.
What are your musings about the future of our species?
Comments