The New Gnosis and the Denial of Ontological Differences
| Autor | Jesús Ballesteros |
| Cargo | Professor Emeritus of Philosophy of Law and Political Philosophy at University of Valencia (Spain) |
| Páginas | 151-166 |
Revista de Derecho. Vol. 10 (I) (2021), pp. 151-166. ISSN: 1390-440X — eISSN: 1390-7794
Recepción: 19-12-2020. Aceptación: 30-3-2021. Publicación electrónica: 11-4-2021
https://doi.org/10.31207//ih.v10i1.261
vol. 10 (I) (2021), p. 151
THE NEW GNOSIS AND THE DENIAL OF ONTOLOGICAL
DIFFERENCES
LA NUEVA GNOSIS Y LA NEGACIÓN DE LAS DIFERENCIAS ONTOLÓGICAS
Jesús Ballesteros*
Abstract: The current transhumanist or posthumanist movements continue
the thesis of the old gnosis devaluing the creation like something imperfect.
Its novelty is to believe in the possibility of overcoming the creation thanks
to technology (biotechnology and bionics). The ideology of gender partly
anticipates this way of thinking by devaluing the somatic difference between
male and female. This denial of the differences then applies to those existing
between the human and the non-human (on one side the primates, and on the
other the computer). Posthumanism and transhumanism believe that
technology will not only overcome the ontological differences, which form
the human, but also the so-called boundary situations, such as illness,
suffering and death itself. In this case, by copying the brain information as
software to a hard disk. The intellectual myopia of these movements is clear:
they reduce the scope of knowledge to mere genetic or electronic
information, denying knowledge and, more importantly, wisdom. Their
current success is due to their connection with the central thesis of financial
capitalism: the need for total manipulation of the real and indefinite growth.
Far from advancing the human being, they create malfunctions.
Keywords: Boundary-Situations, Creation, Gender Ideology, Indefinitive
Growth, Transhumanism
* Professor Emeritus of Philosophy of Law and Political Philosophy at University of
Valencia (Spain). jesus.ballesteros@uv.es.
Jesús Ballesteros
| v. 10 (I) (2021), p. 152
Resumen: Los actuales movimientos transhumanistas o posthumanistas
continúan la tesis de la vieja gnosis, desvalorizando la creación como algo
imperfecto. Su novedad es creer en la posibilidad de superar la creación
gracias a la tecnología (biotecnología y biónica). La ideología de género
anticipa, en parte, esta forma de pensar, devaluando la diferencia somática
entre hombre y mujer. Esta negación de las diferencias se aplica entonces a
las que existen entre lo humano y lo no humano (de un lado, los primates, y
de otro, el ordenador). El posthumanismo y el transhumanismo creen que la
tecnología no solo superará las diferencias ontológicas, que conforman lo
humano, sino también las llamadas situaciones extremas, como la
enfermedad, el sufrimiento y la misma muerte (en este caso, copiando la
información del cerebro como software a un disco duro). La miopía
intelectual de estos movimientos es clara: reducen el alcance del
conocimiento a mera información genética o electrónica, negando el
conocimiento y, lo que es más importante, la sabiduría. Su éxito actual se
debe a su conexión con la tesis central del capitalismo financiero: la
necesidad de una manipulación total del crecimiento real e indefinido. Lejos
de hacer crecer al ser humano, estas corrientes crean disfunciones.
Palabras clave: Situaciones-límite, creación, ideología de género,
crecimiento indefinido, transhumanismo
Summary. I. Introduction. II. The New Gnosticism and the Denial of the Ontological
Differences. III. Denial of the Inevitable Deficiencies and the Increase of Inequalities,
Technolatry and Market Society. IV. Recover Sanity. V. Conclusions. References.
I. INTRODUCTION
1
The essence of the old gnosis was the opposition to the idea of
creation, due to the conviction of living in a world created by a perverse
demiurge who seeks our perdition
2
. The current gnosis, represented by the
poorly titled posthumanism and transhumanism, still stands firm on the
rejection of the idea of creation, but at the same time considers that it can be
improved and even surpassed due to the technological progress. In his book
The New Science of Politics, Eric Voegelin (1987) wrote:
1
English translation by Mari Luz Sáez.
2
Marcion of Sinope and Valentinus of Alexandria are some of the most important Gnostics,
who were criticised by Irenaeus Lyon and Tertullian, among others. There are many books
from various authors on this subject, including Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (1963), as
well as Pope Benedict XVI, The God of Jesus Christ (1979) and Church Fathers (2008).
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba