The present article analyzes the thesis according to which the modern technologies to improve the physical life postulate an adequate knowledge of the human being and its primordial necessities. After the latest events that occurred in this domain this hard penetrating element has become more problematic. In consequence, the author wishes to look into the significance of the human nature concept, presenting from the philosophical and not from the theological point of view different ways of understanding the concept under discussion. In this case, the reference to Habermas J. and Fukuyama F. seems inevitable. With the help of Habermas we can track the future human nature identification, with a pronounced ethical character. With Fukuyama we can remake the human nature concept in a key that can be called neo-aristotelique. The author’s opinion is that the human nature cannot be changed, even if there can be modified lots of accidental elements from the human being when applying the modern technologies from the medical domain. Also, neither the human and social relations can be influenced: the human person cannot ever be modified in its base structure. Because it is an individualized human nature within a singular entity the person is guarantee of man’s unity. The present article contains some justifications for the thesis above, shortly analyzing the disease and therapy concepts and analyzing a little more the risks that the reduction understanding of a reality’s content can have. In the end the author shows how important it is the correct understanding of the human nature concept in domains such as philosophical anthropology, bio-ethics, and also political, moral and educational sciences.