I found the Commencement Address, which I downloaded and read yesterday, very intriguing. The implications of the speech hit a key note on something I’ve been writing in my spare time. I’ve found a great amount of inspiration from Aristotle’s definition, “Monsters are failures of that for the sake of which they are”; and I’ve decided to write with regards to humanity what it is to be a monster and what it is to fail (the Attic word used is the same as the Koiné word for “sinner”—a misser of the mark). My writing is concerned with the contrast between humanity and monstrosity, righteousness and unrighteousness, purposiveness and vanity; Dr. Kass addressed several of these topics in his address titled, “How Brave a New World?”
He used the themes of Huxley’s Brave New World to address the problems found in bioethics, but not only on an academic level. His assertion is that bioethics both reflects and influences the personal ethics, attitudes, and behaviors of this nation, and that the quest of modern science in the name of humanitarianism often treads dangerously close to dehumanization.
Biology, the science that seeks to give an account for life, has also become the science that struggles to admit humans are much more than well-organized rocks. Dehumanization seemed to me the thrust of his point.
Though my biblically centered writing does not dare to approach the same points as this noted bioethicist, who was a St. John’s tutor in the 1970’s, the topic of humanity is very near to my present thoughts, especially humanity being “in the image of God,” as opposed to these “creatures of human shape but of stunted humanity” that claim to be made in their own image instead. The humanity versus monstrosity contrast, mentioned above.
I think this is a brilliant speech to give at a college’s commencement, whether you agree with it or not. People on campus were buzzing after he spoke, and I heard about it from a few people, though I didn’t even attend. Tim thought it was wonderful. Most of his classmates, however, thought the guy was a nut, and it caused a minor controversy among the graduates. They’ll get over it. I think it’s something the teachers at Haverling would do well to read, being that Brave New World is part of the ACE English and Science Fiction courses, and some of the points he brings up could provoke students to do a bit more research into the literary and scientific thoughts behind the book.
Those are my thoughts for the day. Toodles.
He used the themes of Huxley’s Brave New World to address the problems found in bioethics, but not only on an academic level. His assertion is that bioethics both reflects and influences the personal ethics, attitudes, and behaviors of this nation, and that the quest of modern science in the name of humanitarianism often treads dangerously close to dehumanization.
Biology, the science that seeks to give an account for life, has also become the science that struggles to admit humans are much more than well-organized rocks. Dehumanization seemed to me the thrust of his point.
Though my biblically centered writing does not dare to approach the same points as this noted bioethicist, who was a St. John’s tutor in the 1970’s, the topic of humanity is very near to my present thoughts, especially humanity being “in the image of God,” as opposed to these “creatures of human shape but of stunted humanity” that claim to be made in their own image instead. The humanity versus monstrosity contrast, mentioned above.
I think this is a brilliant speech to give at a college’s commencement, whether you agree with it or not. People on campus were buzzing after he spoke, and I heard about it from a few people, though I didn’t even attend. Tim thought it was wonderful. Most of his classmates, however, thought the guy was a nut, and it caused a minor controversy among the graduates. They’ll get over it. I think it’s something the teachers at Haverling would do well to read, being that Brave New World is part of the ACE English and Science Fiction courses, and some of the points he brings up could provoke students to do a bit more research into the literary and scientific thoughts behind the book.
Those are my thoughts for the day. Toodles.
2 comments:
That was quite a remarkable speech, and he was quite right. I've always found Brave New World a fascinating and scary book, precisely because I can see it happening. I always thought that between 1984 and BNW, BNW was a lot more likely.
I found the speech very interesting as well, and can see why it caused a buzz-- so many people, young and old, find references to the soul, human love, and the concept of a mind apart from neurochemistry obsolete and uncomfortable.
Post a Comment