In this blog post, we philosophically explore the question of what it means to be human by examining the existence of replicants through the lens of the film ‘Blade Runner’.
‘Blade Runner’ begins in 2019, set against the backdrop of a Los Angeles where human science and technology have advanced to a cutting edge. The film builds a peculiar tension by emphasizing the gloomy cityscape and the ominous gaze upon it. This city, evoking unease from the outset, seems to symbolize the dark side of future society. In the following scene, a man testing an android in a dim office is suddenly shot by the android, abruptly shifting the previously dazed and lethargic atmosphere. Thus, the film progresses slowly at times, only to abruptly reverse its mood, plunging the audience into tension.
The protagonist, Deckard, is a ‘Blade Runner’ like the man who was shot. Blade Runners are special police tasked with tracking down and eliminating replicants—artificial humans originally designed to handle dirty work in space—who have infiltrated Earth. Deckard pursues six replicants hiding in Los Angeles after hijacking a spaceship and murdering its entire crew. These replicants were manufactured for a specific purpose and possess a short lifespan of only four years. Driven solely by the goal of extending their lives, they search for their creators, driving the film’s progression. In this process, the replicants challenge their creators, blurring the boundaries between themselves and humans.
The replicants possess an appearance and biological characteristics nearly indistinguishable from humans. The test used by the Blade Runners to identify replicants within the film is based not on biological analysis, but on ‘memory’. This emphasizes that the most significant factor distinguishing humans from replicants is their emotions and memories. If we imagine a technologically advanced future, distinguishing cloned humans biologically will become increasingly difficult. At this point, the film explores humanity, posing the philosophical question of what makes humans human.
So, can we distinguish androids using the criteria that currently define humans? For example, can high intelligence, physical structure and abilities like bipedalism, and rich sensitivity truly serve as criteria? Roy in the film possesses extremely high intelligence and knowledge on par with the CEO of Tyrell Corporation. In terms of physical structure and capabilities, he is also equivalent to a human. However, they differ from humans in aspects like lack of experience, absence of memories, and violence. These differences lead to the conclusion that replicants cannot be considered equal to humans. But what if advancements in science and technology resolve these issues? Would replicants then be the same as humans?
Here, the author argues that they are not. Clones remain merely replicas of humans and cannot be considered equal. They are created from birth with a specific purpose and exist solely for that purpose. This is the fundamental difference between humans and clones. While humans may develop a certain directionality influenced by environmental factors, clones are created from the outset to fulfill a specific purpose. This raises ethical questions concerning human dignity. If cloned humans are nearly equivalent to humans, can they also possess dignity? If cloned humans possess the same dignity as humans, they cannot be used as means. This leads to the conclusion that cloning itself should not be permitted.
If cloned humans are equal to humans, using them as means would cause a moral contradiction. So, is it correct to view cloned humans merely as products of science and technology? The answer to this question may vary depending on the values of the era. Just as slaves were excluded from the category of human dignity in ancient Greece, the Middle Ages, and pre-modern Korea, cloned humans are also likely to be excluded. However, this inevitably leads to a discussion about the essence of humanity. If cloned humans are recognized as beings equal to humans, the boundary between human and non-human becomes blurred, leading to social and ethical confusion.
In conclusion, cloned humans are biologically similar to humans but cannot be equated with them. They are created for specific purposes and become unnecessary once those purposes are fulfilled. Therefore, cloned humans should not be permitted, and the very act of creating them must be prohibited to safeguard human dignity. In an era where technological advancement threatens humanity, we must deeply contemplate what it means to be human and how to preserve it. This film can serve as a starting point for that contemplation.
