The title of this book is provocative, probably deliberately so. Francis Fukuyama, a professor of International Political Economy at Johns Hopkins University, does not shirk from controversy having authored a clutch of books both about ends (‘The end of history’ and ‘The Last Men’) and beginnings (‘Creation of Prosperity’). He admits on the first page that Orwell’s ‘1984’ and Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ were defining manuscripts for him in his youth. It is relatively easy to see how the rather sombre prospects adumbrated in those volumes might affect views about our collective future.

The core of his message is stated early on:

“The aim of this book is to argue that Huxley was right, that the most significant threat posed by contemporary biotechnology is the possibility that it will alter human nature and thereby move us into a “post human” stage of history”.

Fukuyama’s approach to his text divides the book into three sections. The first half of the book deals with the technologies, their effects, benefits and risks. The third quarter covers human rights, nature and dignity and the final quarter considers the question What to do?

I confess to difficulties with Fukuyama’s logic at the start since human nature, through the 8m or so years during which hominids have evolved, has certainly changed significantly, partly at least, through conscious decision making. Technologies and reasoning of the past, whilst less complex and sophisticated than those of the present and future, have certainly impacted upon our collective nature. The scale of such changes may well be much greater in future, but is that a reason for postulating a qualitative shift in the nature of the human condition? Thus, I would argue, the label post human, whilst it has a catchy ring to it, does not seem to be based upon solid reasoning.

There is slippery logic too elsewhere in the book. At one point in the discussion of the effects of prolongation of life span, Fukuyama points to the deleterious effects of old dictators clinging to office. He cites Franco, Kim Il Sung and Castro as examples. I certainly hold no brief for dictators (elderly or otherwise), but it is at least arguable that all of these individuals behaved in an equally extreme (and in some cases more extreme) fashion when young as when old. China which, incidentally, has a very considerable commitment to many of the technologies discussed in the book, has, after a long spell of gerontocracy in government, recently chosen a relatively young man to lead the country and I suspect that this decision is not unrelated to the very rapid pace of economic and technological progress now manifest in that country.

Of much more interest and importance is another question raised in relation to death. If prolongation of life span is an option, “will they cling desperately to the life that biotechnology offers? Or might the prospect of an unendingly empty life appear simply unbearable?” Much to cogitate on here!

As another example of Fukuyama’s approach, I single out one very interesting section which deals with the conflict in views between some religious conservatives on the one hand and religious liberals and secular groups on the other. In defining the use of embryonic stem cells (ESC) (which offer truly stupendous opportunities for biological engineering) President Bush ensured that a fence to federal funding for work on ESC was constructed so that only the sixty or so lines already in existence at the time (2001) the decision was made would fall within the fence. Clearly a political rather than a rational decision. Fukuyama quotes Charles Krauthammer that those concerned about the use of ESC should concern themselves with the destiny of the cells rather than their source.

This book represents an interesting approach to discussion of the intersection of cutting edge biology and technology and the socio-political context in which this knowledge is generated. A great deal of modem biological knowledge is adduced, generally in a scientifically correct way. However, the chain of reasoning is frequently elliptical – a feature which does not help Fukyama’s thesis.

A very useful and up to date bibliography of some three hundred titles and extensive annotations to individual chapters are included. However, there is no index, which is a surprising and regrettable omission in a book that ranges so widely over such a large diversity of topics.

In conclusion, though I personally was not convinced by the author that his central theme is correct, I recommend this as a stimulating book with much to commend it to the attention of all interested in human society and biology.

John Beardmore