Most Helpful Customer Reviews
36 of 38 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Libertarian Case for Biotechnology, September 4, 2005
This review is from: Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution (Hardcover)
This is a clear and vigorous statement of the libertarian position on biotechnology. Bailey argues for "liberation biology" as "the earthly quest to overcome the physical and mental limitations imposed on us by nature, enabling us to flourish as never before."
Bailey insists that the technological manipulation of nature to satisfy human desires has been part of human life at least since the development of civilization based on agriculture. Using biotechnology to enhance human nature--to promote our physical and mental health and to extend our life span--is a continuation of this ancient human effort to conquer nature by articial means.
Although he recognizes the need for some legal regulation to secure the safety and efficacy of biotech products and to protect against force and fraud, Bailey prefers to leave adults free to decide for themselves (and their children) whether to employ biotechnology to enhance life. People will make mistakes. But they will learn by trial and error what uses of biotech are desirable and what not. Some people will decide to avoid such biotech advancements--following in the tradition of the Amish and other groups that choose to restrict their reliance on technology.
In arguing for this libertarian position, Bailey attacks both the bioconservatives (such as Francis Fukuyama and Leon Kass) and the Leftist bioluddites (such as Jeremy Rifkin and Bill McKibben).
I find Bailey's reasoning generally persuasive, although I think that at some points he exaggerates the power of biotech for changing human nature. He appeals to the natural human desires as the moral motivation for biotech--for example, the natural desire of parents to care for the health and happiness of their children. It's hard for me to see how biotech is going to alter, or even abolish, those desires. (I have elaborated this point in my book DARWINIAN CONSERVATISM.)
Bailey has a clear argument that is forcefully presented. He has made a great contribution to the continuing debate over biotechnology and the future of human nature.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Must Read, September 21, 2009
This review is from: Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution (Hardcover)
Ronald Bailey presents both a sensible investigation into human enhancement technologies and an inviting discourse that is better written and more thoroughly researched than most books on the same topic. Bailey does not skirt issues and does not cut and paste information. If you want knowledge that is pertinent and from a voice of logic - read this book!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Disjointed but Effective Transhumanit Arguments, April 12, 2008
This review is from: Liberation Biology: The Scientific and Moral Case for the Biotech Revolution (Hardcover)
It seems that everyone agrees biotechnology will have a profound effect on our species' future; where they disagree is how much of a good thing this is. "Liberation Biology" is written by Ronald Bailey, who takes an essentially Transhumanist position on this; that the options given to us by biotechnology will give us longer, happier, healthier lives.
Bailey is a writer for Reason magazine and a libertarian, so it's choice and freedom that drives his moral arguments. I have a hard time disagreeing with him when it comes to the blatantly paternalistic arguments that he deals with from biotechnology critics like Fukuyama and McKibben. (McKibben's arguments that genetic selection will turn kids into products and not people are particularly awful, although this may be in how Bailey presents them I suppose). The critics can romanticize suffering, death, and ignorance all they want, but I'd rather improve my chances of choosing where and how I die.
Bailey has more trouble in other areas - although he very effectively deals with concerns over GM food safety, as a libertarian he's far too inclined to believe that corporations won't misbehave when they get a good deal of control (as in the case of biotech crops - they've obviously helped, but farmers being dependent on one or two companies for their food supply unsettles me).
The book's biggest issue is the format, however. This is adapted from web essays, and it shows - the topics are disjointed, and the chapters are an odd mess of a tour of current technology and batches of moral arguments. This makes it a slow read; one topic bounces to another, and while it's true that moral issues are often dependent on specific technology, taking a more planned approach would have read to a better and more readable book - a broad argument instead of a bunch of discussions of individual topics.
Still, it's often informative, and although due to the fast pace of technology a couple of sections (most notably the stem cell chapter) are somewhat out of date, this will give you a good grounding in a lot of the current science and moral arguments surrounding biotechnology.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|