diff --git a/_index.db b/_index.db index 7689adcc5..f2ae26e5e 100644 Binary files a/_index.db and b/_index.db differ diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..52b0bfb8f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +--- +title: "Ethics of terraforming" +chunk: 1/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The ethics of terraforming has constituted a philosophical debate within biology, ecology, and environmental ethics as to whether terraforming other worlds is an ethical endeavor. + +== Support == +On the pro-terraforming side of the argument, there are those like Robert Zubrin and Richard L. S. Taylor who believe that it is humanity's moral obligation to make other worlds suitable for Terran life, as a continuation of the history of life transforming the environments around it on Earth. They also point out that Earth will eventually be destroyed as nature takes its course, so that humanity faces a long-term choice between terraforming other worlds or allowing all Earth life to become extinct. Dr. Zubrin further argues that even if native microbes have arisen on Mars, for example, the fact that they have not progressed beyond the microbe stage by this point, halfway through the lifetime of the Sun, is a strong indicator that they never will; and that if microbial life exists on Mars, it is likely related to Earth life through a common origin on one of the two planets, which spread to the other as an example of panspermia. Since Mars life would then not be fundamentally unrelated to Earth life, it would not be unique, and competition with such life would not be fundamentally different from competing against microbes on Earth. Zubrin summed up this view: + +Some people consider the idea of terraforming Mars heretical—humanity playing God. Yet others would see in such an accomplishment the most profound vindication of the divine nature of the human spirit, exercised in its highest form to bring a dead world to life. My own sympathies are with the latter group. Indeed, I would go farther. I would say that failure to terraform Mars constitutes failure to live up to our human nature and a betrayal of our responsibility as members of the community of life itself. Today, the living biosphere has the potential to expand its reach to encompass a whole new world. Humans, with their intelligence and technology, are the unique means that the biosphere has evolved to allow it to make that land grab, the first among many. Countless beings have lived and died to transform the Earth into a place that could create and allow human existence. Now it's our turn to do our part. +Richard Taylor more succinctly exemplified this point of view with the slogan, "move over microbe". +Some human critics label this argument as an example of anthropocentrism. These critics may view the homocentric view as not only geocentric but short-sighted, and tending to favour human interests to the detriment of ecological systems. They argue that an anthropocentrically driven approach could lead to the extinction of indigenous extraterrestrial life, or interplanetary contamination. +Martyn J. Fogg rebutted these ideas by delineating four potential rationales on which to evaluate the ethics of terraforming—anthropocentrism, zoocentrism, ecocentrism, and preservationism—roughly forming a spectrum from placing the most value on human utility to placing the most value on preserving nature. While concluding that arguments for protecting alien biota can be made from any of these standpoints, he also concludes with an argument, similar to Zubrin's, that strict preservationism is "untenable", since "it assumes that human consciousness, creativity, culture and technology stand outside nature, rather than having been a product of natural selection. If Homo sapiens is the first space faring species to have evolved on Earth, space settlement would not involve acting 'outside nature', but legitimately 'within our nature'." + +== Criticism == + +Strong ecocentrists like Richard Sylvan feel there is an intrinsic value to life, and seek to preserve the existence of native lifeforms. This idea is usually referred to as biocentrism. In response to these objections, weak anthropocentrism incorporates biocentric ethics, allowing for various degrees of terraforming. +Christopher McKay strikes a position between these two, what may be termed weak ecocentrism, proposing that an entire biosphere of alien life, even if only microbial life, has far more value than individual microbes, and should not be subject to interference by Earth life. However, he also proposed that it would be valuable and desirable to terraform a planet to nurture the alien life, to allow it to thrive as well as to exhibit a broader range of behavior for scientific study, and that such activity is ultimately justified by the utilitarian value to humans of being able to study and appreciate the still somewhat undisturbed alien life. McKay put his views in these words: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7af6ac39c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Ethics of terraforming" +chunk: 2/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +If we discover living or dormant organisms on Mars and these forms represent a different type of life than the life we have on Earth, then we should not bring life from Earth to Mars. Instead, we should alter the Martian environment so that this native Martian life can expand to fill a planetary scale biosphere. [...] [I]t is essential to maintain the categorical distinction between killing individual microorganisms and extinguishing an entire alternative system of life. There is no logical argument against killing microorganisms per se, either for research, medical, sanitary, or even casual reasons. However [...] it does not logically follow that destroying or displacing the first example of life beyond Earth is acceptable if the only examples of that life are microscopic. [...] If we terraformed Mars to allow the expansion of that life we would then reap the maximum benefits from the scientific study of that life form and its development into a full scale global biosphere. We would also enjoy the educational and [aesthetic] benefits of life in a biologically richer solar system. +Even this "help" would be seen as a type of terraforming to the strictest of ecocentrists, who would say that all life has the right, in its home biosphere, to evolve at its own pace as well as its own direction, free of any outside interference. The impact of the human species on otherwise untouched worlds and the possible interference with or elimination of alien life forms are good reasons to leave these other worlds in their natural states; this is an example of a strong biocentric view, or object-centered ethic. Critics claim this is a form of anti-humanism and they assert that rocks and bacteria can not have rights, nor should the discovery of alien life prevent terraforming from occurring. +Pragmatists argue that humanity on other planets is sociologically impractical. The basis is that being on another planet would not change human nature, so it would not be long until pollution and destruction by humankind began, and on a planet that has probably only known peace since its formation. Since life on Earth will ultimately be destroyed by planetary impacts or the red giant phase of the Sun, all native species will perish if not allowed to move to other objects. +Some advocates of animal welfare have pointed out the ethical issues associated with spreading Earth-based wild-animal life by terraforming. In particular, they claim it may be ethically objectionable to bring into existence large numbers of animals that suffer greatly during their often short lives in the wild. There are also concerns that even with full terraformation, distinct differences between Earth and Mars, such as gravity, lengths of the day and night cycles, and differing/lacking magnetic fields, would cause harm to many introduced species that have evolved for millions of years under Earth conditions. Though some species may survive, and others possibly could be adapted through genetic modification, if the introduced species were isolated on Mars and not frequently interbred with Earth counterparts, the species would eventually evolve through many generations in order to better suit their new environment, possibly leading to different evolutionary lines. Thus, the introduced life may eventually look and act different from their Earthly counterparts and/or ancestors. +Another aspect of terraforming ethics deals with an opposing extreme in this debate. Terraforming could be seen as a potential waste of precious materials, in light of alternative uses. Critics believe that it would constrict the growth potential of humanity by encapsulating the material inside of an astronomical object. Once the surface is terraformed and people have taken residence there, all the interior material is needed to sustain the maximum gravity potential for those inhabitants. If all of the material were utilized to produce space habitation systems, a much greater number of lives would then be supported. + +== Future prospects == +The contrasts between these arguments are fully explored in the field of environmental ethics. Debates often focus on how much time and effort should be expended on investigating the possibility of any microscopic life on a planet before deciding whether to terraform, and what level of sophistication or chances for future development alien life would deserve varying levels of commitment to non-interference. Such debates have been engaged in live, between Zubrin and McKay and others, at various conferences of the Mars Society, which has made written and video records of the debates available. For example, a written account of some of these debates is available in On to Mars: Colonizing a New World, as a joint article, "Do Indigenous Martian Bacteria have Precedence over Human Exploration?" (pp. 177–182) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..073a55ebc --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Ethics of terraforming" +chunk: 3/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Ethics of terraforming in fiction == +A fairly thorough non-fictional analysis of the ethics of terraforming is also presented under the guise of the fictional Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson, particularly between the characters Ann Clayborne and Sax Russell, with Clayborne epitomizing an ecocentric ethic of non-interference and Russell embodying the anthropocentric belief in the virtue of terraforming. +The idea of interplanetary colonization and its ethical implications are also explored by C.S. Lewis in the first book of his Space Trilogy Out of the Silent Planet published in 1938. +The plot of the 1982 film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is based around the use of the so-called "Genesis Device" to create the conditions and organic building-blocks for life on previously lifeless planets. In debating the ethics of the device, Dr. McCoy, Spock and Admiral Kirk reflect on the Device's ability to replace any existing lifeforms with "its new matrix". McCoy describes the ethics of the Device in the following terms: "According to myth, the Earth was created in six days. Now watch out - here comes Genesis! We'll do it for you in six minutes!" The technology is shown to be flawed in the 1984 sequel, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. +Star Trek: The Next Generation dealt with terraforming. In the episode "Home Soil", terraformers are causing harm to the native lifeforms on Velara III, with disastrous consequences. +In the novel Revelation Space by Alastair Reynolds, there was a political dispute in the human colony of a fictional planet called Resurgam between a faction who were in support of terraforming the planet and another faction of archeologists who were against terraforming due to the discovery of the remains of an extinct alien civilisation on the planet and due to the fear that any attempt to terraform the planet would destroy the valuable artifacts that still might be buried underground. +The ethics of terraforming, as well as deep space colonization, are recurring themes in Firefly, in which they are compared to the issues of expansionism and imperialism in the American Old West. +In The Outer Worlds, the moon of Monarch is a planet that is improperly terraformed, which leads to the native fauna becoming bigger and more dangerous. + +== See also == +Space ethics +Suffering risks + +== References == + +== Further reading == +Sparrow, Robert. "The Ethics of Terraforming." Environmental Ethics 21.3 (Fall 1999): 227(1). +Otto, Eric. "Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy and the Leopoldian Land Ethic." Utopian Studies 14.2 (Spring 2003): 118(19). +Pinson, Robert. "Ethical Considerations for Terraforming Mars," 32 Environmental Law Reporter 11333 (2002). +Schwartz, James. "On the Moral Permissibility of Terraforming." Ethics and the Environment 18.2 (2013): 1-31. +York, Paul. "The Ethics of Terraforming." Philosophy Now: A Magazine of Ideas. (Oct/Nov 2002). +Cathcart, R.B., Badescu, V. with Ramesh Radhakrishnan, MACRO-ENGINEERS' DREAMS (23 November 2006), a cost-free downloadable 176-page exposition made available at http://textbookrevolution.org Archived 2009-01-05 at the Wayback Machine in its engineering selection of textbooks. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c9638549e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +--- +title: "Kristin Shrader-Frechette" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:20.724658+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Kristin Shrader-Frechette (born 1944) is O'Neill Family Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Philosophy, at the University of Notre Dame. She has previously held senior professorships at the University of California and the University of Florida. Most of Shrader-Frechette's research work analyzes the ethical problems in risk assessment, public health, or environmental justice - especially those related to radiological, ecological, and energy-related risks. +Shrader-Frechette coined the phrase “ecological justice” more than 40 years ago, with the term changing to “environmental justice” over time. Among other things, "environmental injustice" references situations in which certain groups bear disproportionate environmental risks, have unequal access to goods like clean air or water, or have unequal voices in determining the imposition of environmental risks. Shrader-Frechette, who is considered one of the founders of the environmental justice movement, was also an early advocate of the concept of “intergenerational equity,” the idea that the environmental problems of future generations are also significant to the current generation. +Shrader-Frechette has received the Global Citizenship Award, and the Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World." + + +== Education == +Kristin Shrader-Frechette studied physics at Xavier University and graduated (summa cum laude) in 1967. She received her Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Notre Dame in 1972. Shrader-Frechette also did post-doctoral work relating to biology, economics, and hydrogeology. + + +== Publications == +Shrader-Frechette has published more than 380 articles and 16 books/monographs, including Burying Uncertainty: Risk and the Case Against Geological Disposal of Nuclear Waste (1993); Method in Ecology (1993); The Ethics of Scientific Research (1994), Technology and Human Values (1996), Environmental Justice: Creating Equality, Reclaiming Democracy (2002), Taking Action, Saving Lives: Our Duties to Protect Environmental and Public Health (2007), and What Will Work: Fighting Climate Change with Renewable Energy, Not Nuclear Power (2011). Her books and articles have been translated into 13 languages. Shrader-Frechette is currently working on two new volumes: Risks of Risk Assessment and Philosophy of Science and Public Policy. +Shrader-Frechette's 2011 book What Will Work says that nuclear power is not an economic or practical technology: + +This book uses market data, scientific studies, and ethical analyses to show why we should pursue green energy and conservation, and not nuclear fission, to address global climate change. Chapter 6 uses classic scientific studies from Harvard, Princeton, and the US Department of Energy to show how improved conservation and energy efficiency—along with increased use of wind and solar-PV power—can supply all energy needs while costing less than either fossil fuels or nuclear fission. + + +== Professional membership == +Shrader-Frechette has been a member of many boards and committees at the international level. She has been invited to address the National Academies of Science in three different countries. She has served as an advisor to numerous governments and international organizations, including the United Nations and the World Health Organization. Associate Editor of BioScience until 2002, Shrader-Frechette is Editor-in-Chief of the Oxford University Press monograph series on Environmental Ethics and Science Policy and spent two terms on the US EPA Science Advisory Board. She also serves on the editorial boards of 22 professional journals. + + +== Awards == +In 2004 Shrader-Frechette received the World Technology Award. In 2007, Catholic Digest named her one of 12 "Heroes for the US and the World" because of her pro-bono environmental justice work with minority and poor communities. In 2011, Tufts University gave her the Jean Mayer Global Citizenship Award. In 2023, she received the International Cosmos Prize, Japan for research and pro bono work on methods of quantitative risk assessment and stopping environmental injustice. + + +== See also == +Non-Nuclear Futures: The Case for an Ethical Energy Strategy +Ruth Faden +Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake +Amory Lovins +Benjamin K. Sovacool +Mark Z. Jacobson +Renewable energy commercialization +100% renewable energy +Peter Frechette +David Warren (director) + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Works by Kristin Shrader-Frechette +Website: Kristin Shrader-Frechette \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..df77c8f37 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +--- +title: "Space ethics" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:23.169627+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Space ethics, astroethics or astrobioethics is a discipline of applied ethics that discusses the moral and ethical implications arising from astrobiological research, space exploration and space flight. It deals with practical contemporary issues like the protection of the space environment and hypothetical future issues pertaining to our interaction with extraterrestrial life forms. +Specific issues of space ethics include space debris mitigation, the militarization of space and the ethics of SETI and METI, but also more theoretical topics like space colonization, terraforming, directed panspermia and space mining. The field also concerns itself with more fundamental moral questions, such as the value of abiotic environments in space, the intrinsic value of extraterrestrial life, and how humans should treat extraterrestrial non-intelligent life (like microbes) and extraterrestrial intelligent life (and whether this distinction should be made in the first place). +Astroethical issues are often discussed as elements of broader issues such as general environmental protection and imperialism. Astroethics have been described as an emerging discipline gaining in attention, a "necessity for astrobiology" and a "true issue for the future of astrobiology". + +== Ethical guidelines for space exploration == + +=== Planetary Protection === + +A guiding principle in astroethics is that of Planetary Protection (PP), which seeks to prevent the introduction of lifeforms from Earth to other celestial bodies (forward contamination) and vice versa (back contamination), and thereby possible adverse consequences on existing ecospheres resulting from such contamination. This principle is anchored in the UN Outer Space Treaty, which was established in 1967 and has since been signed and ratified by all space-faring nations. + +=== Precautionary Principle === + +The precautionary principle was defined in the 1998 Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle. This approach is supposed to guide decisions in the face of a lack of scientific knowledge or consensus on a matter. In a 2010 COSPAR workshop at Princeton University, 26 experts embraced the precautionary principle and concluded that "further investigations before interference that is likely to be harmful to Earth and other extraterrestrial bodies, including extraterrestrial life and the contamination and disturbance of celestial environments", are to be conducted. + +=== Other Astroethical Principles for SETI === +SETI astrobiologist Margaret Race and Methodist theologian Richard Randolph have outlined 4 principles for the search for extra-terrestrial life within the Solar System: + +Cause no harm to Earth, its life, or its diverse ecosystems. +Respect the ecosystem on the surveyed celestial body, do not irreparably alter it or its evolutionary trajectory. +Follow proper scientific procedures with honesty and integrity during all phases of exploration. +Ensure international participation by all interested parties. + +== Issues == +A wide range of concrete issues is discussed in astroethics. Some of them are herein elaborated. + +=== Sterility === +Assumptions about outer space, particularly regarding space colonization, have characterized outer space as sterile and therefore a terra nullius. This assumption does not hold true, particularly considering that Earth is part of it. + +=== Space debris === +Millions of pieces of space debris, defunct artificial objects in space, are orbiting Earth. On average, one cataloged piece of space debris falls back onto the planet every day, potentially posing a risk to organisms and property. In total, an estimated 80 tons of space debris re-enter Earth's atmosphere every year. Due to the high friction with the atmospheric gases, the debris burns up, causing the release of its chemical components, which may contribute to atmospheric pollution and ozone depletion. Additionally, space debris orbits the Earth at extremely high velocity. In Low Earth Orbit, where all crewed space stations and many satellites are located, debris typically reaches speeds of around 8 km/s (approximately 18,000 mph or 29,000 km/h). As a result, even tiny pieces of debris can severely damage or destroy satellites and spacecraft in the event of a collision. This could pose a threat to the lives of astronauts on crewed missions and lead to the phenomenon of Kessler syndrome, where a collision of objects in space produces new fragments of space debris that could set off a chain reaction of more collisions. This could render the space around Earth untraversable for space missions and unsuitable for the use of satellites. +As of March 2022, there are no legally binding international laws about who is responsible for the extraction of space debris, or mandating a reduction of new space debris brought into Earth's orbit. However, space agencies of several countries have implemented their own standards and policies to reduce introduction of new space debris, and the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) has been founded to address issues regarding orbital debris. Additionally, JAXA is researching an electromagnetic tether that could be used to pull debris down into the atmosphere. +The moral problem is that those in power (space agencies) can launch material into the Earth's orbit for their own gains without being held accountable for it, while the general public has to bear the consequences (such as atmospheric pollution or the risk of being hit by space debris). + +=== Satellite surveillance === +Reconnaissance satellites are used for a variety of military and intelligence purposes, such as optical imaging and signals intelligence. It has been noted that such data could infringe on people's privacy and thereby lead to ethical and legal issues. It could also turn into a source of national security threats if such information got into malevolent hands. In order to ensure ethically correct obtainment and use of satellite data, leading researchers in law, meteorology and atmospheric science have called for new policy which would lead to more transparency and security. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e84e73412 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +--- +title: "Space ethics" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:23.169627+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Weaponizing space === +In 1967, the Outer Space Treaty was signed, spurred by the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, and the following arms race with the United States. The treaty outlaws all kinds of military action (including weapon tests) in space, limits the use of space to peaceful purposes only and ensures that all nations on Earth are free to explore space. +This treaty has since been called into question multiple times, especially by President of the United States Donald Trump. On June 18, 2018, Trump announced plans to establish a space force, which would constitute a new, sixth branch of the United States military. He expressed that "When it comes to defending America, it is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space". On December 20, 2019, the United States Space Force Act was signed into law with votes from both Democratic and Republican senators and House members. As a result, the United States Space Force was founded. +This was seen by some as an American contestation of the Outer Space Treaty. Viktor Bondarev, chair of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security, responded by saying that if the US were to go further and withdraw from the 1967 treaty, there would be "a tough response aimed at ensuring world security." This is despite Russia itself having a space force branch in their military. + +=== Private spaceflight and space tourism === +The emergence of space tourism gives rise to a number of ethical concerns. Future frequent and large-scale landings on celestial bodies like the moon may damage or pollute landing sites and the areas around them. While scientific activity in space is benign, this cannot be guaranteed for actions by private people. If, how, by what criteria and by whom laws should be made to ensure that space tourism doesn't negatively impact other celestial bodies is a question of astroethics. + +=== Terraforming other celestial bodies === + +Terraforming is a controversial astroethical matter. Proponents of terraforming, like Robert Zubrin, argue that humans, being the only technologically advanced and intelligent species on Earth, have a moral obligation to make other celestial bodies habitable for Earth's lifeforms to ensure their survival after the inevitable destruction of our planet. The other, ecocentrist and biocentrist side of the debate criticizes this position as anthropocentrism and argues that other celestial bodies may already contain life which always has intrinsic value, no matter how advanced it may be. They oppose the interplanetary contamination and changes to the other world that would stem from terraforming, as they could endanger the indigenous life and alter its evolutionary trajectory. + +=== Ethicality of SETI and METI === + +SETI and especially METI (Active SETI) are not uncontroversial and come with their own ethical implications. METI has been criticized as incompatible with the precautionary principle because it could reveal the location of our planet to potentially malevolent alien species. It therefore also potentially puts all of humanity at risk without the need for their individual prior consent, which violates the basic scientific rule of informed consent that all other science must abide by. Reflecting on human history, some authors even fear the enslavement of humanity, should we be discovered by a more advanced species. Similarly, Stephen Hawking, one of the most prominent METI critics, warned of the potential consequences of a meeting with such a species, citing the near-extinction of Aboriginal Tasmanians as an equivalent case from human history. +Concerns regarding the ethicality of METI might be a solution to the Fermi paradox. It is proposed that extraterrestrial life forms may abstain from attempting interstellar communication due to the potential danger it may pose to them, in line with the precautionary principle. +Other astroethical considerations regarding METI are the lack of legally enforceable protocols about the steps that should be taken once extraterrestrial life is discovered, the unpredictability of cultural consequences of that discovery (potential paradigm changes in policy, nations, religions, etc.), who will get to speak for humanity in case contact is made, how and by whom that person or group of people should be selected, and what the contents of the messages should be. + +=== Value of extraterrestrial life === +A further point of contention in the field is whether extraterrestrial life has intrinsic value and therefore if humans have a moral obligation to protect it. This becomes even more difficult when considering the wide span of possible extraterrestrial life forms and whether our treatment of them should differ based on criteria such as their advancement and intelligence. As former NASA chief historian Steven J. Dick put it, "Does Mars belong to the Martians, even if the Martians are only microbes?" Dick argues that the first step in deciding how we should interact with life forms is to assess their moral status, which is complicated by our ambiguous relations with animals on earth, sheltering some species as pets while eating and exterminating others. The principle of planetary protection provides that all life on other celestial bodies is worthy of protection from harm (also in the form of contamination) and therefore confers rights even on hypothetical extraterrestrial microbes, a situation that contrasts with our treatment of microbes and even most higher-developed organisms on Earth. This difference in treatment is hardly justifiable. Therefore, according to Dick, astroethical considerations will broaden our current ethical horizon: they will unveil such inconsistencies and double standards and move humanity from an anthropocentric ethic (ascribing intrinsic value only to rationing beings) to a cosmocentric or biocentric one that values all living things. In fact, Dick says that the finding of extraterrestrial life would "necessitate" a transition away from the anthropocentric approach because it would no longer be consistently applicable to a cosmos that harbors life beyond Earth. + +=== Space burial === +The decision to include several grams of human cremains onboard Peregrine Lunar Lander flight 01 was criticized by the Navajo Nation, whose president, Buu Nygren, argued that the Moon is sacred to the Navajo and other American Indian nations, saying "As stewards of our culture and traditions, it is our responsibility to voice our grievances when actions are taken that could desecrate sacred spaces and disregard deeply held cultural beliefs". Celestis CEO Charles Chafer responded that "[the company] reject[s] the whole premise that this is somehow desecration" and that "nobody owns the Moon". The launch was not successful in reaching the Moon. + +== References == + +== See also == +Environmental ethics +Ethics of technology \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f0f0f1523 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Stefan Lorenz Sorgner" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:22.001433+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Stefan Lorenz Sorgner (born 15 October 1973) is a German philosopher whose main interests are transhumanism, posthumanism, and the ethics of emerging technologies. He is Professor of Philosophy at John Cabot University in Rome and the Editor-in-Chief and Founding Editor of the Journal of Posthuman Studies. + + +== Early life and education == +Sorgner was born on 15 October 1973 in Wetzlar, Germany. He studied philosophy at King's College London. He subsequently earned a master's degree by thesis at the University of Durham. He later completed his doctorate at the University of Jena, under the supervision of Wolfgang Welsch and Gianni Vattimo. + + +== Career and research == +Sorgner's work focuses on contemporary philosophical issues related to posthumanism, transhumanism, and the ethics of emerging technologies. +Influenced by Friedrich Nietzsche, he has explored parallels between Nietzsche’s concept of the Übermensch and modern transhumanist thought. In 2009, Sorgner published an article in the Journal of Evolution and Technology arguing that Nietzsche’s Übermensch shares conceptual similarities with the posthuman figure in some strands of transhumanist theory. The article initiated a debate within both Nietzsche scholarship and the transhumanist community. A special issue of the journal, titled Nietzsche and European Posthumanisms, was later published to investigate these connections, with critical responses from figures including Max More. +Sorgner has also been challenged by Nick Bostrom, who has argued for a clearer separation between Nietzschean thought and contemporary transhumanism. In a follow-up article, Sorgner responded to these criticisms and further developed his philosophical stance on enhancement and self-overcoming. +Sorgner has also written extensively on the philosophical concept of human dignity. In his 2010 monograph Menschenwürde nach Nietzsche: Die Geschichte eines Begriffs (Human Dignity after Nietzsche: The History of a Concept), he examined the genealogy of the idea of human dignity from a Nietzschean perspective. He argued that dominant conceptions of human dignity are historically contingent and should not be treated as universally binding moral standards. This interpretation, which drew on a perspectivist comparison between liberal-democratic conceptions of dignity and ideologies associated with figures such as Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot, generated controversy. A symposium was organised by the Nietzsche Forum Munich in 2012 address the book’s central claims. Further responses appeared in the 2014 edited volume Umwertung der Menschenwürde (Transvaluation of Human Dignity), which brought together theologians, philosophers, and ethicists to critique Sorgner’s proposals. +In 2013, Sorgner was interviewed by the weekly newspaper Die Zeit, where he outlined his views on the ethical implications of human enhancement technologies and the philosophical foundations of transhumanism. He has also spoken at conferences such as phil.cologne, the World Humanities Forum, and TEDx events. +In 2021, Sorgner published We Have Always Been Cyborgs: Digital Data, Gene Technologies, and an Ethics of Transhumanism, in which he argues that human beings can be considered cyborgs insofar as they are shaped by governance, technological intervention, and education. The book advances what he terms “carbon-based transhuman technologies”—including gene editing and genetic selection—as ethically defensible tools of self-enhancement, comparable in moral structure to traditional education. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Official website +Stefan Lorenz Sorgner publications indexed by Google Scholar \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..00d897984 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "TESCREAL" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:30.691934+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +TESCREAL is a neologism proposed by computer scientist Timnit Gebru and philosopher Émile P. Torres. An acronym, it stands for Transhumanism, Extropianism, Singularitarianism, (modern) Cosmism, Rationalists (the internet community, not to be confused with other uses of the term), Effective Altruism, and Longtermism. Gebru and Torres argue that these ideologies should be treated as an "interconnected and overlapping" group with shared origins. They claim these constitute a movement that allows its proponents to use the threat of human extinction to justify expensive or detrimental projects and consider it pervasive in social and academic circles in Silicon Valley centered on artificial intelligence. As such, the acronym is sometimes used to criticize a perceived belief system associated with Big Tech. + +== Origin == +Gebru and Torres proposed the term "TESCREAL" in 2023, first using it in a draft of a paper titled "The TESCREAL bundle: Eugenics and the promise of utopia through artificial general intelligence". First Monday published the paper in April 2024, though Torres and Gebru popularized the term elsewhere before the paper's publication. According to Gebru and Torres, transhumanism, extropianism, singularitarianism, (modern) cosmism, rationalism, effective altruism, and longtermism are a "bundle" of "interconnected and overlapping ideologies" that emerged from 20th-century eugenics, with shared progenitors. They use the term "TESCREAList" to refer to people who in their judgment subscribe to, or appear to endorse, any or all of the ideologies captured in the acronym. + +== Analysis == +According to critics of these philosophies, TESCREAL describes overlapping movements endorsed by prominent people in the tech industry to provide intellectual backing to pursue and prioritize projects including artificial general intelligence (AGI), life extension, and space colonization. Science fiction author Charles Stross, using the example of space colonization, argued that the ideologies allow billionaires to pursue massive personal projects driven by a right-wing interpretation of science fiction by arguing that not to pursue such projects poses an existential risk to society. Gebru and Torres write that, using the threat of extinction, TESCREALists can justify "attempts to build unscoped systems which are inherently unsafe". Media scholar Ethan Zuckerman argues that by only considering goals that are valuable to the TESCREAL movement, futuristic projects with more immediate drawbacks, such as racial inequity, algorithmic bias, and environmental degradation, can be justified. +Philosopher Yogi Hale Hendlin has argued that by both ignoring the human causes of societal problems and over-engineering solutions, TESCREALists ignore the context in which many problems arise. Camille Sojit Pejcha wrote in Document Journal that TESCREAL is a tool for tech elites to concentrate power. In The Washington Spectator, Dave Troy called TESCREAL an "ends justifies the means" movement that is antithetical to "democratic, inclusive, fair, patient, and just governance". Gil Duran wrote that "TESCREAL", "authoritarian technocracy", and "techno-optimism" were phrases used in early 2024 to describe a new ideology emerging in the tech industry. +Gebru, Torres, and others have likened TESCREAL to a secular religion due to its parallels to Christian theology and eschatology. Writers in Current Affairs compared these philosophies and the ensuing techno-optimism to "any other monomaniacal faith... in which doubters are seen as enemies and beliefs are accepted without evidence". They argue pursuing TESCREAL would prevent an actual equitable shared future. + +=== Artificial general intelligence === +Much of the discourse about existential risk from AGI occurs among those whom Gebru and Torres identify as supporters of the TESCREAL ideologies. TESCREALists are either considered "AI accelerationists", who consider AI the only way to pursue a utopian future where problems are solved, or "AI doomers", who consider AI likely to be unaligned to human survival and likely to cause human extinction. Despite the risk, many doomers consider the development of AGI inevitable and argue that only by developing and aligning AGI first can existential risk be averted. +Gebru has likened the conflict between accelerationists and doomers to a "secular religion selling AGI enabled utopia and apocalypse". Torres and Gebru argue that both groups use hypothetical AI-driven apocalypses and utopian futures to justify unlimited research, development, and deregulation of technology. Torres and Gebru allege that by considering only far-reaching future consequences, creating hype for unproven technology, and fear-mongering, TESCREALists distract from the impacts of technology that may adversely affect society, disproportionately harm minorities through algorithmic bias, and have a detrimental impact on the environment. + +=== Pharmaceuticals === +Neşe Devenot has used the TESCREAL acronym to refer to "global financial and tech elites" who promote new uses of psychedelic drugs as mental health treatments, not because they want to help people, but so that they can make money on the sale of these pharmaceuticals as part of a plan to increase inequality. + +=== Claimed bias against minorities === +Gebru and Torres claim that TESCREAL ideologies directly originate from 20th-century eugenics and that the bundle of ideologies advocates a new eugenics. Others have similarly argued that the TESCREAL ideologies developed from earlier philosophies that were used to justify mass murder and genocide. Some prominent figures who have contributed to TESCREAL ideologies have been alleged to be racist and sexist. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2e310f750 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +--- +title: "TESCREAL" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:30.691934+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Criticism and debate === +Writing in Asterisk, a magazine related to effective altruism, Ozy Brennan criticized Gebru's and Torres's grouping of different philosophies as if they were a "monolithic" movement. Brennan argues Torres has misunderstood these different philosophies, and has taken philosophical thought experiments out of context. Similarly, Oliver Habryka of LessWrong has criticized the concept, saying: "I've never in my life met a cosmist; apparently I'm great friends with them. Apparently, I'm like in cahoots [with them]." +At Radio New Zealand, politics writer Danyl McLauchlan said that while some members of these groups want to engineer superhumans, others, like the effective altruists (who generally want to help the poor), are astounded to be lumped into a malevolent eugenics conspiracy. +James Pethokoukis, of the American Enterprise Institute, disagrees with criticizing proponents of TESCREAL. He argues that the tech billionaires criticized in a Scientific American article for allegedly espousing TESCREAL have significantly advanced society. In the blog for the technoprogressive Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, Eli Sennesh and James Hughes have argued that TESCREAL is a left-wing conspiracy theory that groups disparate philosophies together without understanding their mutually exclusive tenets. + +== Alleged adherents == +In 2023, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen published the "Techno-Optimist Manifesto", which Jag Bhalla and Nathan J. Robinson have called a "perfect example" of TESCREAL ideologies. In it, he argues that more advanced artificial intelligence could save countless future potential lives, and that those working to slow or prevent its development should be condemned as murderers. +Elon Musk has been described as sympathetic to some TESCREAL ideologies. In August 2022, Musk tweeted that William MacAskill's longtermist book What We Owe the Future was a "close match for my philosophy". Some writers believe Musk's Neuralink pursues TESCREAList goals. Some AI experts have complained about the focus of Musk's XAI company on existential risk, arguing that it and other AI companies have ties to TESCREAL movements. Dave Troy believes Musk's natalist views originate from TESCREAL ideals. +It has also been suggested that Peter Thiel is sympathetic to TESCREAL ideas. Benjamin Svetkey wrote in The Hollywood Reporter that Thiel and other Silicon Valley CEOs who supported Donald Trump's 2024 presidential campaign push for policies that would shut down "regulators whose outdated restrictions on things like human experimentation are slowing down progress toward a technotopian paradise". +Sam Altman and much of the OpenAI board has been described as supporting TESCREAL movements, especially in the context of his attempted firing in 2023. Gebru and Torres have urged Altman not to pursue TESCREAL ideals. Lorraine Redaud writing in Charlie Hebdo described Altman and other Silicon Valley executives as supporting TESCREAL ideals. +Self-identified transhumanists Nick Bostrom and Eliezer Yudkowsky, both influential in discussions of existential risk from AI, have also been described as leaders of the TESCREAL movement. +Sam Bankman-Fried, former CEO of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange, was a prominent and self-identified member of the effective altruist community. According to The Guardian, since FTX's collapse, administrators of the bankruptcy estate have been trying to recoup about $5 million that they allege was transferred to a nonprofit to help secure the purchase of a historic hotel that has been rented out for conferences and workshops associated with longtermism, Rationalism, and effective altruism. Attendees at one such conference included a self-described "liberal eugenicist" and speakers whom The Guardian cited for having racist and misogynistic connections. +Torres and Gebru have said that Trump's 2024 presidential campaign and second presidency support TESCREAL ideals, especially due to his close collaboration with Musk. + +== See also == +Effective accelerationism +LessWrong +Utilitarianism +The Californian Ideology + +== References == + +== External links == + The dictionary definition of TESCREAL at Wiktionary \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7b5d8a7e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +title: "Techno-progressivism" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:24.466424+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Techno-progressivism, or tech-progressivism, is a stance of active support for the convergence of technological change and social change. Techno-progressives argue that technological developments can be profoundly empowering and emancipatory when they are regulated by legitimate democratic and accountable authorities to ensure that their costs, risks and benefits are all fairly shared by the actual stakeholders to those developments. One of the first mentions of techno-progressivism appeared within extropian jargon in 1999 as the removal of "all political, cultural, biological, and psychological limits to self-actualization and self-realization". + + +== Stance == +Techno-progressivism maintains that accounts of progress should focus on scientific and technical dimensions, as well as ethical and social ones. For most techno-progressive perspectives, then, the growth of scientific knowledge or the accumulation of technological powers will not represent the achievement of proper progress unless and until it is accompanied by a just distribution of the costs, risks, and benefits of these new knowledges and capacities. At the same time, for most techno-progressive critics and advocates, the achievement of better democracy, greater fairness, less violence, and a wider rights culture are all desirable, but inadequate in themselves to confront the quandaries of contemporary technological societies unless and until they are accompanied by progress in science and technology to support and implement these values. +Strong techno-progressive positions include support for the civil right of a person to either maintain or modify their own mind and body, on their own terms, through informed, consensual recourse to, or refusal of, available therapeutic or enabling biomedical technology. +During the November 2014 Transvision Conference, many of the leading transhumanist organizations signed the Technoprogressive Declaration, which stated the values of technoprogressivism. + + +== List of notable techno-progressive social critics == + +Technocritic Dale Carrico with his accounts of techno-progressivism +Philosopher Donna Haraway with her accounts of cyborg theory. +Media theorist Douglas Rushkoff with his accounts of open source. +Cultural critic Mark Dery and his accounts of cyberculture. +Science journalist Chris Mooney with his account of the U.S. Republican Party's "war on science". +Futurist Bruce Sterling with his Viridian design movement. +Futurist Alex Steffen and his accounts of bright green environmentalism through the Worldchanging blog. +Science journalist Annalee Newitz with her accounts of the Bio punk. +Bioethicist James Hughes of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies with his accounts of democratic transhumanism. + + +== See also == + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies +Overview of Biopolitics \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c144ccdf7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Technocriticism" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:25.656529+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Technocriticism is a branch of critical theory devoted to the study of technological change. +Technocriticism treats technological transformation as historically specific changes in personal and social practices of research, invention, regulation, distribution, promotion, appropriation, use, and discourse, rather than as an autonomous or socially indifferent accumulation of useful inventions, or as an uncritical narrative of linear "progress", "development" or "innovation". +Technocriticism studies these personal and social practices in their changing practical and cultural significance. It documents and analyzes both their private and public uses, and often devotes special attention to the relations among these different uses and dimensions. Recurring themes in technocritical discourse include the deconstruction of essentialist concepts such as "health", "human", "nature" or "norm". +Technocritical theory can be either "descriptive" or "prescriptive" in tone. Descriptive forms of technocriticism include some scholarship in the history of technology, science and technology studies, cyberculture studies and philosophy of technology. More prescriptive forms of technocriticism can be found in the various branches of technoethics, for example, media criticism, infoethics, bioethics, neuroethics, roboethics, nanoethics, existential risk assessment and some versions of environmental ethics and environmental design theory. +Figures engaged in technocritical scholarship and theory include Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour (who work in the closely related field of science studies), N. Katherine Hayles (who works in the field of Literature and Science), Phil Agree and Mark Poster (who works in intellectual history), Marshall McLuhan and Friedrich Kittler (who work in the closely related field of media studies), Susan Squier and Richard Doyle (who work in the closely related field of medical sociology), and Hannah Arendt, Walter Benjamin, Martin Heidegger, and Michel Foucault (who sometimes wrote about the philosophy of technology). Technocriticism can be juxtaposed with a number of other innovative interdisciplinary areas of scholarship which have surfaced in recent years such as technoscience and technoethics. + + +== External links == +American Society for Bioethics + Humanities +Border Crossings: Cyborgs +Critical Science and Technology Books and Journal Articles +Ethics and Information Technology +The Information Society: An International Journal +Modern Fiction Studies 43.3/Fall 1997, Special Issue: Technocriticism and Hypernarrative +Science, Medicine and Technology in Culture Program at Penn State University +Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts +Technocultural Studies at the University of California at Davis \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8162ebf2a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ +--- +title: "Technorealism" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:26.878607+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Technorealism is an attempt to expand the middle ground between techno-utopianism and Neo-Luddism by assessing the social and political implications of technologies so that people might all have more control over the shape of their future. An account cited that technorealism emerged in the early 1990s and was introduced by Douglas Rushkoff and Andrew Shapiro. In the Technorealism manifesto, which described the term as a new generation of cultural criticism, it was stated that the goal was not to promote or dismiss technology but to understand it so the application could be aligned with basic human values. Technorealism suggests that a technology, however revolutionary it may seem, remains a continuation of similar revolutions throughout human history. + + +== Approach == +The technorealist approach involves a continuous critical examination of how technologies might help or hinder people in the struggle to improve the quality of their lives, their communities, and their economic, social, and political structures. In addition, instead of policy wonks, experts, and the elite, it is the technology critic who assumes the center stage in the discourse of technology policy issues. +Although technorealism began with a focus on U.S.-based concerns about information technology, it has evolved into an international intellectual movement with a variety of interests such as biotechnology and nanotechnology. + + +== Technorealism in political science and IR == +Isti Marta Sukma has proposed a distinct interpretation of techno-realism within the tradition of political realism. In this formulation, technology is treated as a central means of power in contemporary politics, alongside the role of identity formation and non-state actors in shaping political dynamics. + + +== See also == +techno-realism in political science +Technocriticism +History of science and technology +Pantheon – a TV series that follows techno-realism + + +=== Ethics === + + +== References == + + +== External links == +technorealism.org, historical site +technorealism.eu, recent development in IR and political science \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fc72fd641 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +--- +title: "Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:28.199425+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics were created in 1992 by the Washington, D.C.–based Computer Ethics Institute. The commandments were introduced in the paper "In Pursuit of a 'Ten Commandments' for Computer Ethics" by Ramon C. Barquin as a means to create "a set of standards to guide and instruct people in the ethical use of computers." They follow the Internet Advisory Board's memo on ethics from 1987. The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics copies the archaic style of the Ten Commandments from the King James Bible. +The commandments have been widely quoted in computer ethics literature but also have been criticized by both the hacker community and some in academia. For instance, Dr. Ben Fairweather of the Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility has described them as "simplistic" and overly restrictive. +ISC2, one of the thought leaders in the information security industry, has referred to the commandments in developing its own ethics rules. + + +== The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics == +Thou shalt not use a computer to harm other people. +Thou shalt not interfere with other people's computer work. +Thou shalt not snoop around in other people's computer files. +Thou shalt not use a computer to steal. +Thou shalt not use a computer to bear false witness. +Thou shalt not copy or use proprietary software for which you have not paid (without permission). +Thou shalt not use other people's computer resources without authorization or proper compensation. +Thou shalt not appropriate other people's intellectual output. +Thou shalt think about the social consequences of the program you are writing or the system you are designing. +Thou shalt always use a computer in ways that ensure consideration and respect for other humans. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics listed at Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility +Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1bed30c44 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 1/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Transhumanism is a philosophical movement that advocates the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available new and future technologies to enhance longevity, cognition, and well-being. Influenced by seminal works of science fiction, the transhumanist vision of a transformed future humanity has many supporters and detractors from a wide range of perspectives, including philosophy and religion. Some critics argue that transhumanism amounts to little more than a "rebranding" of eugenics. +Transhumanist thinkers discuss the potential benefits and dangers of emerging technologies that could overcome fundamental human limitations, as well as the ethics of using such technologies. Some transhumanists speculate that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into beings of such vastly greater abilities as to merit being called "posthuman". Another topic of transhumanist discourse is how to protect humanity against existential risks, including artificial general intelligence, asteroid impact, gray goo, pandemic, societal collapse, and nuclear warfare. +The biologist Julian Huxley popularised the term "transhumanism" in a 1957 essay. The contemporary meaning of the term was foreshadowed by one of the first professors of futurology, a man who changed his name to FM-2030. In the 1960s, he taught "new concepts of the human" at The New School when he began to call people who adopt technologies, lifestyles, and worldviews "transitional" to posthumanity "transhuman". This assertion laid the intellectual groundwork for the British philosopher Max More to begin articulating the principles of transhumanism as a futurist philosophy in 1990, organizing a school of thought that has since grown into the transhumanist movement. + +== History == + +=== Precursors of transhumanism === +According to Nick Bostrom, transcendentalist impulses have been expressed at least as far back as the quest for immortality in the Epic of Gilgamesh, as well as in historical quests for the Fountain of Youth, the Elixir of Life, and other efforts to stave off aging and death. +Transhumanists draw upon and claim continuity from intellectual and cultural traditions such as the ancient philosophy of Aristotle or the scientific tradition of Roger Bacon. In his Divine Comedy, Dante coined the word trasumanar meaning "to transcend human nature, to pass beyond human nature" in the first canto of Paradiso. +The interweaving of transhumanist aspirations with the scientific imagination can be seen in the works of some precursors of Enlightenment such as Francis Bacon. One of the early precursors to transhumanist ideas is René Descartes's Discourse on Method (1637), in which Descartes envisions a new kind of medicine that can grant both physical immortality and stronger minds. +In his first edition of Political Justice (1793), William Godwin included arguments favoring the possibility of "earthly immortality" (what would now be called physical immortality). Godwin explored the themes of life extension and immortality in his gothic novel St. Leon, which became popular (and notorious) at the time of its publication in 1799, but is now mostly forgotten. St. Leon may have inspired his daughter Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein. +There is debate about whether the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche can be considered an influence on transhumanism, despite its exaltation of the Übermensch (superhuman), due to its emphasis on self-actualization rather than technological transformation. The transhumanist philosophies of More and Sorgner have been influenced strongly by Nietzschean thinking. By contrast, The Transhumanist Declaration "advocates the well-being of all sentience (whether in artificial intellects, humans, posthumans, or non-human animals)". +The late 19th- to early 20th-century movement known as Russian cosmism, by Russian philosopher N. F. Fyodorov, is noted for anticipating transhumanist ideas. In 1966, FM-2030 (formerly F. M. Esfandiary), a futurist who taught "new concepts of the human" at The New School, in New York City, began to identify people who adopt technologies, lifestyles and worldviews transitional to posthumanity as "transhuman". + +=== Early transhumanist thinking === + +Fundamental ideas of transhumanism were first advanced in 1923 by the British geneticist J. B. S. Haldane in his essay Daedalus: Science and the Future, which predicted that great benefits would come from the application of advanced sciences to human biology—and that every such advance would first appear to someone as blasphemy or perversion, "indecent and unnatural". In particular, he was interested in the development of the science of ectogenesis (creating and sustaining life in an artificial environment), eugenics, and the application of genetics to improve human characteristics such as health and intelligence. +His article inspired academic and popular interest. J. D. Bernal, a crystallographer at Cambridge, wrote The World, the Flesh and the Devil in 1929, in which he speculated on the prospects of space colonization and radical changes to human bodies and intelligence through bionic implants and cognitive enhancement. These ideas have been common transhumanist themes ever since. +The biologist Julian Huxley is generally regarded as the founder of transhumanism after using the term for the title of an influential 1957 article. But the term derives from a 1940 paper by the Canadian philosopher W. D. Lighthall. Huxley describes transhumanism in these terms: + +Up till now human life has generally been, as Hobbes described it, "nasty, brutish and short"; the great majority of human beings (if they have not already died young) have been afflicted with misery… we can justifiably hold the belief that these lands of possibility exist, and that the present limitations and miserable frustrations of our existence could be in large measure surmounted… The human species can, if it wishes, transcend itself—not just sporadically, an individual here in one way, an individual there in another way, but in its entirety, as humanity. +Huxley's definition differs, albeit not substantially, from the one commonly in use since the 1980s. The ideas raised by these thinkers were explored in the science fiction of the 1960s, notably in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey, in which an alien artifact grants transcendent power to its wielder. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..76e279500 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 2/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Japanese Metabolist architects produced a manifesto in 1960 which outlined goals to "encourage active metabolic development of our society" through design and technology. In the Material and Man section of the manifesto, Noboru Kawazoe suggests that:After several decades, with the rapid progress of communication technology, every one will have a "brain wave receiver" in his ear, which conveys directly and exactly what other people think about him and vice versa. What I think will be known by all the people. There is no more individual consciousness, only the will of mankind as a whole. + +=== Artificial intelligence and the technological singularity === +The concept of the technological singularity, or the ultra-rapid advent of superhuman intelligence, was first proposed by the British cryptologist I. J. Good in 1965: + +Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an "intelligence explosion," and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make. +Computer scientist Marvin Minsky wrote on relationships between human and artificial intelligence beginning in the 1960s. Over the succeeding decades, this field continued to generate influential thinkers, such as Hans Moravec and Ray Kurzweil, who oscillated between the technical arena and futuristic speculations in the transhumanist vein. The coalescence of an identifiable transhumanist movement began in the last decades of the 20th century. In 1972, Robert Ettinger, whose 1964 Prospect of Immortality founded the cryonics movement, contributed to the conceptualization of "transhumanity" with his 1972 Man into Superman. FM-2030 published the Upwingers Manifesto in 1973. + +=== Growth of transhumanism === + +The first self-described transhumanists met formally in the early 1980s at the University of California, Los Angeles, which became the main center of transhumanist thought. Here, FM-2030 lectured on his "Third Way" futurist ideology. At the EZTV Media venue, frequented by transhumanists and other futurists, Natasha Vita-More presented Breaking Away, her 1980 experimental film with the theme of humans breaking away from their biological limitations and the Earth's gravity as they head into space. FM-2030 and Vita-More soon began holding gatherings for transhumanists in Los Angeles, which included students from FM-2030's courses and audiences from Vita-More's artistic productions. In 1982, Vita-More authored the Transhumanist Arts Statement and in 1988 she produced the cable TV show TransCentury Update on transhumanity, a program that reached over 100,000 viewers. +In 1986, Eric Drexler published Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology, which discussed the prospects for nanotechnology and molecular assemblers, and founded the Foresight Institute. As the first nonprofit organization to research, advocate for, and perform cryonics, the Southern California offices of the Alcor Life Extension Foundation became a center for futurists. In 1988, the first issue of Extropy Magazine was published by Max More and Tom Morrow. In 1990, More, a strategic philosopher, created his own particular transhumanist doctrine, which took the form of the Principles of Extropy, and laid the foundation of modern transhumanism by giving it a new definition: + +Transhumanism is a class of philosophies that seek to guide us towards a posthuman condition. Transhumanism shares many elements of humanism, including a respect for reason and science, a commitment to progress, and a valuing of human (or transhuman) existence in this life. [...] Transhumanism differs from humanism in recognizing and anticipating the radical alterations in the nature and possibilities of our lives resulting from various sciences and technologies [...] +In 1992, More and Morrow founded the Extropy Institute, a catalyst for networking futurists and brainstorming new memeplexes by organizing a series of conferences and, more importantly, providing a mailing list, which exposed many to transhumanist views for the first time during the rise of cyberculture and the cyberdelic counterculture. In 1998, philosophers Nick Bostrom and David Pearce founded the World Transhumanist Association (WTA), an international non-governmental organization working toward the recognition of transhumanism as a legitimate subject of scientific inquiry and public policy. In 2002, the WTA modified and adopted The Transhumanist Declaration. The Transhumanist FAQ, prepared by the WTA (later Humanity+), gave two formal definitions for transhumanism: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-10.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-10.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d06a5f378 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-10.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 11/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The tradition of human enhancement originated with the eugenics movement that was once prominent in the biological sciences, and was later politicized in various ways. This continuity is especially clear in the case of Julian Huxley himself. +The major transhumanist organizations strongly condemn the coercion involved in such policies and reject the racist and classist assumptions on which they were based, along with the pseudoscientific notions that eugenic improvements could be accomplished in a practically meaningful time frame through selective human breeding. Instead, most transhumanist thinkers advocate a "new eugenics", a form of egalitarian liberal eugenics. In their 2000 book From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice, non-transhumanist bioethicists Allen Buchanan, Dan Brock, Norman Daniels and Daniel Wikler have argued that liberal societies have an obligation to encourage as wide an adoption of eugenic enhancement technologies as possible (so long as such policies do not infringe on individuals' reproductive rights or exert undue pressures on prospective parents to use these technologies) to maximize public health and minimize the inequalities that may result from both natural genetic endowments and unequal access to genetic enhancements. Most transhumanists holding similar views nonetheless distance themselves from the term "eugenics" (preferring "germinal choice" or "reprogenetics") to avoid having their position confused with the discredited theories and practices of early-20th-century eugenic movements. +Health law professor George Annas and technology law professor Lori Andrews are prominent advocates of the position that the use of these technologies could lead to human–posthuman caste warfare. + +=== Existential risks === + +In his 2003 book Our Final Hour, British Astronomer Royal Martin Rees argues that advanced science and technology bring as much risk of disaster as opportunity for progress. However, Rees does not advocate a halt to scientific activity. Instead, he calls for tighter security and perhaps an end to traditional scientific openness. Advocates of the precautionary principle, such as many in the environmental movement, also favor slow, careful progress or a halt in potentially dangerous areas. Some precautionists believe that artificial intelligence and robotics present possibilities of alternative forms of cognition that may threaten human life. +Transhumanists do not necessarily rule out specific restrictions on emerging technologies so as to lessen the prospect of existential risk. Generally, however, they counter that proposals based on the precautionary principle are often unrealistic and sometimes even counter-productive as opposed to the technogaian current of transhumanism, which they claim is both realistic and productive. In his television series Connections, science historian James Burke dissects several views on technological change, including precautionism and the restriction of open inquiry. Burke questions the practicality of some of these views, but concludes that maintaining the status quo of inquiry and development poses hazards of its own, such as a disorienting rate of change and the depletion of our planet's resources. The common transhumanist position is a pragmatic one where society takes deliberate action to ensure the early arrival of the benefits of safe, clean, alternative technology, rather than fostering what it considers to be anti-scientific views and technophobia. +Nick Bostrom argues that even barring the occurrence of a singular global catastrophic event, basic Malthusian and evolutionary forces facilitated by technological progress threaten to eliminate the positive aspects of human society. +One transhumanist solution proposed by Bostrom to counter existential risks is control of differential technological development, a series of attempts to influence the sequence in which technologies are developed. In this approach, planners would strive to retard the development of possibly harmful technologies and their applications, while accelerating the development of likely beneficial technologies, especially those that offer protection against the harmful effects of others. +In their 2021 book Calamity Theory, Joshua Schuster and Derek Woods critique existential risks by arguing against Bostrom's transhumanist perspective, which emphasizes controlling and mitigating these risks through technological advancements. They contend that this approach relies too much on fringe science and speculative technologies and fails to address deeper philosophical and ethical problems about the nature of human existence and its limitations. Instead, they advocate an approach more grounded in secular existentialist philosophy, focusing on mental fortitude, community resilience, international peacebuilding, and environmental stewardship to better cope with existential risks. + +==== Antinatalism and pronatalism ==== +Although most people focus on the scientific and technological barriers on the road to human enhancement, Robbert Zandbergen argues that contemporary transhumanists' failure to critically engage the cultural current of antinatalism is a far bigger obstacle to a posthuman future. Antinatalism is a stance seeking to discourage, restrict, or terminate human reproduction to solve existential problems. If transhumanists fail to take this threat to human continuity seriously, they run the risk of seeing the collapse of the entire edifice of radical enhancement. +Simone and Malcolm Collins, founders of Pronatalist.org, are activists known primarily for their views and advocacy related to a secular and voluntaristic form of pronatalism, a stance encouraging higher birth rates to reverse demographic decline and its negative implications for the viability of modern societies and the possibility of a better future. Critical of transhumanism, they have expressed concern that life extension would worsen the problem of gerontocracy, causing toxic imbalances in power. The Collinses lament that voluntarily childfree transhumanists who "want to live forever believe they are the epitome of centuries of human cultural and biological evolution. They don’t think they can make kids that are better than them." + +== Groups and organizations == +The Transhumanist Council, largest online transhumanist community +Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, nonprofit transhumanist think tank and advocacy organization +Transhumanist Party, big-tent transhumanist political party based in the United States +Lifeboat Foundation, group with advocates for technological enhancement and risk mitigation + +== See also == + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-11.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-11.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..450c76af8 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-11.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 12/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Further reading == +Adorno, Francesco Paolo (2021). The Transhumanist Movement. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-3-030-82423-5. +Bell, Duncan; Taillandier, Apolline (2025). "Cosmos-Politanism: Transhumanist Visions of Global Order from the First World War to the Digital Age". Perspectives on Politics. 23 (3): 1071–1088. doi:10.1017/S1537592724001051. +Cole-Turner, Ronald, ed. (2011). Transhumanism and transcendence: Christian hope in an age of technological enhancement. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 978-1-58901-780-1. +Frodeman, R. (2019). Transhumanism, Nature, and the Ends of Science. United Kingdom: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-367-18939-6. +Hansell, Gregory R; Grassie, William, eds. (2011). H+/-: Transhumanism and Its Critics. Philadelphia: Metanexus Institute. ISBN 978-1-45681-567-7. +Oliver Krüger: Virtual Immortality: God, Evolution, and the Singularity in Post- and Transhumanism. Bielefeld: transcript 2021. ISBN 978-3-8376-5059-4. +Maher, Derek F.; Mercer, Calvin, eds. (2009). Religion and the implications of radical life extension (1st ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-10072-5. +Lee, Newton, ed. (2019). The Transhumanism Handbook. Springer Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-16920-6. ISBN 978-3-030-16920-6. +Mercer, Calvin; Trothen, Tracy, eds. (2014). Religion and transhumanism: the unknown future of human enhancement. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 978-1-4408-3325-0. +Mercer, Calvin; Maher, Derek, eds. (2014). Transhumanism and the Body: The World Religions Speak. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-137-36583-5. +More, Max; Vita-More, Natasha, eds. (2013). The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology, and Philosophy of the Human Future (1st ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. ISBN 978-1-118-33429-4. +Pilsch, A. (2017). Transhumanism: Evolutionary Futurism and the Human Technologies of Utopia. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-1-4529-5488-2. +Ranisch, Robert; Sorgner, Stefan Lorenz, eds. (2014). Post- and Transhumanism. Bruxelles: Peter Lang. ISBN 978-3-631-60662-9. +Tirosh-Samuelson, Hava (2012). "Transhumanism as a securalist faith". Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science. 47 (4): 710–734. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01288.x. + +== External links == + +THPedia, Transhumanist wiki +What is Transhumanism? \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9c8d699d3 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 3/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally improving the human condition through applied reason, especially by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. +The study of the ramifications, promises, and potential dangers of technologies that will enable us to overcome fundamental human limitations, and the related study of the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies. +In possible contrast with other transhumanist organizations, WTA officials considered that social forces could undermine their futurist visions and needed to be addressed. A particular concern is equal access to human enhancement technologies across classes and borders. In 2006, a political struggle within the transhumanist movement between the libertarian right and the liberal left resulted in a more centre-leftward positioning of the WTA under its former executive director James Hughes. In 2006, the board of directors of the Extropy Institute ceased operations of the organization, saying that its mission was "essentially completed". This left the World Transhumanist Association as the leading international transhumanist organization. In 2008, as part of a rebranding effort, the WTA changed its name to "Humanity+". In 2012, the transhumanist Longevity Party had been initiated as an international union of people who promote the development of scientific and technological means to significant life extension that now has more than 30 national organisations throughout the world. +The Mormon Transhumanist Association was founded in 2006. By 2012, it had hundreds of members. +The first transhumanist elected member of a parliament was Giuseppe Vatinno, in 2012 in Italy. +In 2017, Penn State University Press, in cooperation with philosopher Stefan Lorenz Sorgner and sociologist James Hughes, established the Journal of Posthuman Studies as the first academic journal explicitly dedicated to the posthuman, with the goal of clarifying the notions of posthumanism and transhumanism, as well as comparing and contrasting both. + +== Theory == +It is a matter of debate whether transhumanism is a branch of posthumanism and how this philosophical movement should be conceptualised with regard to transhumanism. Transhumanism is often referred to as a variant or activist form of posthumanism by its conservative, Christian and progressive critics. +A common feature of transhumanism and philosophical posthumanism is the future vision of a new intelligent species, into which humanity will evolve and which eventually will supplement or supersede it. Transhumanism stresses the evolutionary perspective, including sometimes the creation of a highly intelligent animal species by way of cognitive enhancement (i.e. biological uplift), but clings to a "posthuman future" as the final goal of participant evolution. +Nevertheless, the idea of creating intelligent artificial beings (proposed, for example, by roboticist Hans Moravec) has influenced transhumanism. Moravec's ideas and transhumanism have also been characterised as a "complacent" or "apocalyptic" variant of posthumanism and contrasted with "cultural posthumanism" in humanities and the arts. While such a "cultural posthumanism" would offer resources for rethinking the relationships between humans and increasingly sophisticated machines, transhumanism and similar posthumanisms are, in this view, not abandoning obsolete concepts of the "autonomous liberal subject", but are expanding its "prerogatives" into the realm of the posthuman. Transhumanist self-characterisations as a continuation of humanism and Enlightenment thinking correspond with this view. +Some secular humanists conceive transhumanism as an offspring of the humanist freethought movement and argue that transhumanists differ from the humanist mainstream by having a specific focus on technological approaches to resolving human concerns (i.e. technocentrism) and on the issue of mortality. Other progressives have argued that posthumanism, in its philosophical or activist forms, amounts to a shift away from concerns about social justice, from the reform of human institutions and from other Enlightenment preoccupations, toward narcissistic longings to transcend the human body in quest of more exquisite ways of being. +The philosophy of transhumanism is closely related to technoself studies, an interdisciplinary domain of scholarly research dealing with all aspects of human identity in a technological society and focusing on the changing nature of relationships between humans and technology. + +=== Aims === +You awake one morning to find your brain has another lobe functioning. Invisible, this auxiliary lobe answers your questions with information beyond the realm of your own memory, suggests plausible courses of action, and asks questions that help bring out relevant facts. You quickly come to rely on the new lobe so much that you stop wondering how it works. You just use it. This is the dream of artificial intelligence. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3b3a5062c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 4/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +While many transhumanist theorists and advocates seek to apply reason, science and technology to reduce poverty, disease, disability, and malnutrition around the globe, transhumanism is distinctive in its particular focus on the applications of technologies to the improvement of human bodies at the individual level. Many transhumanists actively assess the potential for future technologies and innovative social systems to improve the quality of all life, while seeking to make the material reality of the human condition fulfill the promise of legal and political equality by eliminating congenital mental and physical barriers. +Transhumanist philosophers argue that there not only exists a perfectionist ethical imperative for humans to strive for progress and improvement of the human condition, but that it is possible and desirable for humanity to enter a transhuman phase of existence in which humans enhance themselves beyond what is naturally human. In such a phase, natural evolution would be replaced with deliberate participatory or directed evolution. +Some theorists such as Ray Kurzweil think that the pace of technological innovation is accelerating and that the next 50 years may yield not only radical technological advances, but possibly a technological singularity, which may fundamentally change the nature of human beings. Transhumanists who foresee this massive technological change generally maintain that it is desirable, but some are concerned about the dangers of extremely rapid technological change and propose options for ensuring that advanced technology is used responsibly. For example, Bostrom has written extensively on existential risks to humanity's future welfare, including ones that emerging technologies could create. In contrast, some proponents of transhumanism view it as essential to humanity's survival. For instance, Stephen Hawking points out that the "external transmission" phase of human evolution, where knowledge production and knowledge management is more important than transmission of information via evolution, may be the point at which human civilization becomes unstable and self-destructs, one of Hawking's explanations for the Fermi paradox. To counter this, Hawking emphasizes either self-design of the human genome or mechanical enhancement (e.g., brain-computer interface) to enhance human intelligence and reduce aggression, without which he implies human civilization may be too stupid collectively to survive an increasingly unstable system, resulting in societal collapse. +While many people believe that all transhumanists are striving for immortality, that is not necessarily true. Hank Pellissier, managing director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (2011–2012), surveyed transhumanists. He found that, of the 818 respondents, 23.8% did not want immortality. Some of the reasons argued were boredom, Earth's overpopulation, and the desire "to go to an afterlife". + +=== Ethics === +Transhumanists engage in interdisciplinary approaches to understand and evaluate possibilities for overcoming biological limitations by drawing on futurology and various fields of ethics. Unlike many philosophers, social critics, and activists who morally value preservation of natural systems, transhumanists see the concept of the specifically natural as problematically nebulous at best and an obstacle to progress at worst. In keeping with this, many prominent transhumanist advocates, such as Dan Agin, call transhumanism's critics, on the political right and left jointly, "bioconservatives" or "bioluddites", the latter term alluding to the 19th-century anti-industrialisation social movement that opposed the replacement of human manual labourers by machines. +A belief of counter-transhumanism is that transhumanism can cause unfair human enhancement in many areas of life, but specifically on the social plane. This can be compared to steroid use, where athletes who use steroids in sports have an advantage over those who do not. The same disparity may happen when people have certain neural implants that give them an advantage in the workplace and in education. Additionally, according to M.J. McNamee and S.D. Edwards, many fear that the improvements afforded by a specific, privileged section of society will lead to a division of the human species into two different species. The idea of two human species, one at a great physical and economic advantage over with the other, is troublesome at best. One may be incapable of breeding with the other, and may by consequence of lower physical health and ability, be considered of a lower moral standing than the other. +Nick Bostrom has said that transhumanism advocates for the wellbeing of all sentient beings, including non-human animals, extraterrestrials, and artificial forms of life. This view is reiterated by David Pearce, who advocates the use of biotechnology to eradicate suffering in all sentient beings. + +=== Currents === +There is a variety of opinions within transhumanist thought. Many of the leading transhumanist thinkers hold views that are under constant revision and development. Some distinctive currents of transhumanism are identified and listed here in alphabetical order: + +Abolitionism, the concept of using biotechnology to eradicate suffering in all sentient beings. +Democratic transhumanism, a political ideology synthesizing liberal democracy, social democracy, radical democracy and transhumanism. +Equalism, a socioeconomic theory based upon the idea that emerging technologies will put an end to social stratification through even distribution of resources in the technological singularity era. +Extropianism, an early school of transhumanist thought characterized by a set of principles advocating a proactive approach to human evolution. +Immortalism, a moral ideology based upon the belief that radical life extension and technological immortality is possible and desirable, and advocating research and development to ensure its realization. +Libertarian transhumanism, a political ideology synthesizing libertarianism and transhumanism. +Postgenderism, a social philosophy which seeks the voluntary elimination of gender in the human species through the application of advanced biotechnology and assisted reproductive technologies. +Postpoliticism, a transhumanist political proposal that aims to create a "postdemocratic state" based on reason and free access of enhancement technologies to people. +Singularitarianism, a moral ideology based upon the belief that a technological singularity is possible, and advocating deliberate action to effect it and ensure its safety. +Technogaianism, an ecological ideology based upon the belief that emerging technologies can help restore Earth's environment and that developing safe, clean, alternative technology should therefore be an important goal of environmentalists. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0ec389e46 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 5/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Spirituality === +Although many transhumanists are atheists, agnostics, or secular humanists, some have religious or spiritual views. Despite the prevailing secular attitude, some transhumanists pursue hopes traditionally espoused by religions, such as immortality, while several controversial new religious movements from the late 20th century, such as Raëlism, explicitly embrace the transhumanist goal to transform the human condition by using technology to alter the mind and body. But most thinkers associated with transhumanism focus on the practical goals of using technology to help achieve longer and healthier lives, while speculating that future understanding of neurotheology and the application of neurotechnology will enable humans to gain greater control of altered states of consciousness, which were commonly interpreted as spiritual experiences, and thus achieve more profound self-knowledge. Transhumanist Buddhists have sought to explore areas of agreement between various types of Buddhism and Buddhist-derived meditation and mind-expanding neurotechnologies. They have been criticised for appropriating mindfulness as a tool for transcending humanness. +Some transhumanists believe the human mind and computer hardware are compatible, with the theoretical implication that human consciousness may someday be transferred to alternative media (a technique commonly known as mind uploading). One extreme formulation of this idea that interests some transhumanists is Christian cosmologist Frank Tipler's proposal of the Omega Point. Drawing on ideas in digitalism, Tipler has advanced the notion that the collapse of the universe billions of years hence could create the conditions for the perpetuation of humanity in a simulated reality within a megacomputer and thus achieve a form of "posthuman godhood". Before Tipler, the term Omega Point was used by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a paleontologist and Jesuit theologian who saw an evolutionary telos in the development of an encompassing noosphere, a global consciousness. +Some Christian thinkers see mind uploading as a denigration of the human body characteristic of gnostic manichaean belief. Non-Christian and secular commentators have also described transhumanism and its presumed intellectual progenitors as neo-gnostic. +The first dialogue between transhumanism and faith was a one-day conference at the University of Toronto in 2004. Religious critics faulted transhumanism for offering no eternal truths or relationship with the divine. They commented that a philosophy bereft of these beliefs leaves humanity adrift in a foggy sea of postmodern cynicism and anomie. Transhumanists responded that such criticisms reflect a failure to look at the actual content of transhumanist philosophy, which is rooted in optimistic, idealistic attitudes that trace back to the Enlightenment. After this dialogue, William Sims Bainbridge, a sociologist of religion, conducted a pilot study, published in the Journal of Evolution and Technology, suggesting that religious attitudes negatively correlated with acceptance of transhumanist ideas and indicating that people with highly religious worldviews tended to perceive transhumanism as a direct, competitive (though ultimately futile) affront to their beliefs. +Since 2006, the Mormon Transhumanist Association has sponsored conferences and lectures on the intersection of technology and religion. The Christian Transhumanist Association was established in 2014. +Since 2009, the American Academy of Religion has held a "Transhumanism and Religion" consultation during its annual meeting, where scholars of religious studies seek to identify and critically evaluate implicit religious beliefs that might underlie transhumanist claims and assumptions; consider how transhumanism challenges religious traditions to develop their own ideas of the human future, in particular the prospect of human transformation, by technological or other means; and critically and constructively assess an envisioned future with greater confidence in nanotechnology, robotics, and information technology to achieve virtual immortality and create a superior posthuman species. +The physicist and transhumanist thinker Giulio Prisco writes, "cosmist religions based on science might be our best protection from reckless pursuit of superintelligence and other risky technologies." Transhumanist beliefs can be traced to the theories of the Russian mystic and philosopher Nikolai Fyodorov and his best-known supporter, the astronautics pioneer Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-5.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-5.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bc4ded174 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-5.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 6/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Practice == +While some transhumanists such as Ray Kurzweil and Hans Moravec take an abstract and theoretical approach to the perceived benefits of emerging technologies, others have offered specific proposals for modifications to the human body, including heritable ones. Transhumanists are often concerned with methods of enhancing the human nervous system. Though some, such as Kevin Warwick, propose modification of the peripheral nervous system, the brain is considered the common denominator of personhood and is thus a primary focus of transhumanist ambitions. +In fact, Warwick has gone a lot further than merely making a proposal. In 2002 he had a 100 electrode array surgically implanted into the median nerves of his left arm to link his nervous system directly with a computer and thus to also connect with the internet. As a consequence, he carried out a series of experiments. He was able to directly control a robot hand using his neural signals and to feel the force applied by the hand through feedback from the fingertips. He also experienced a form of ultrasonic sensory input and conducted the first purely electronic communication between his own nervous system and that of his wife who also had electrodes implanted. +As proponents of self-improvement and body modification, transhumanists tend to use existing technologies and techniques that supposedly improve cognitive and physical performance, while engaging in routines and lifestyles designed to improve health and longevity. Depending on their age, some transhumanists, such as Kurzweil, express concern that they will not live to reap the benefits of future technologies. However, many have a great interest in life extension strategies and in funding research in cryonics to make the latter a viable option of last resort, rather than remaining an unproven method. +While most transhumanist theory focuses on future technologies and the changes they may bring, many today are already involved in the practice on a very basic level. It is not uncommon for many to receive cosmetic changes to their physical form via cosmetic surgery, even if it is not required for health reasons. Human growth hormones attempt to alter the natural development of shorter children or those who have been born with a physical deficiency. Doctors prescribe medicines such as Ritalin and Adderall to improve cognitive focus, and many people take "lifestyle" drugs such as Viagra, Propecia, and Botox to restore aspects of youthfulness that have been lost in maturity. +Other transhumanists, such as cyborg artist Neil Harbisson, use technologies and techniques to improve their senses and perception of reality. Harbisson's antenna, which is permanently implanted in his skull, allows him to sense colours beyond human perception such as infrareds and ultraviolets. + +=== Technologies of interest === + +Transhumanists support the emergence and convergence of technologies including nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC), as well as hypothetical future technologies like simulated reality, artificial intelligence, superintelligence, 3D bioprinting, mind uploading, chemical brain preservation and cryonics. They believe that humans can and should use these technologies to become more than human. Therefore, they support the recognition or protection of cognitive liberty, morphological freedom and procreative liberty as civil liberties, so as to guarantee individuals the choice of using human enhancement technologies on themselves and their children. Some speculate that human enhancement techniques and other emerging technologies may facilitate more radical human enhancement no later than at the midpoint of the 21st century. Kurzweil's book The Singularity is Near and Michio Kaku's book Physics of the Future outline various human enhancement technologies and give insight on how these technologies may impact the human race. +Some reports on the converging technologies and NBIC concepts have criticised their transhumanist orientation and alleged science fictional character. At the same time, research on brain and body alteration technologies has been accelerated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Defense, which is interested in the battlefield advantages they would provide to the supersoldiers of the United States and its allies. There has already been a brain research program to "extend the ability to manage information", while military scientists are now looking at stretching the human capacity for combat to a maximum 168 hours without sleep. +Neuroscientist Anders Sandberg has been practicing on the method of scanning ultra-thin sections of the brain. This method is being used to help better understand the architecture of the brain. It is currently being used on mice. This is the first step towards hypothetically uploading contents of the human brain, including memories and emotions, onto a computer. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-6.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-6.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..91f212099 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-6.md @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 7/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Debate == +The very notion and prospect of human enhancement and related issues arouse public controversy. Criticisms of transhumanism and its proposals take two main forms: those objecting to the likelihood of transhumanist goals being achieved (practical criticisms) and those objecting to the moral principles or worldview sustaining transhumanist proposals or underlying transhumanism itself (ethical criticisms). Critics and opponents often see transhumanists' goals as posing threats to human values. +The human enhancement debate is, for some, framed by the opposition between strong bioconservatism and transhumanism. The former opposes any form of human enhancement, whereas the latter advocates for all possible human enhancements. But many philosophers hold a more nuanced view in favour of some enhancements while rejecting the transhumanist carte blanche approach. +Transhumanists argue that parents have a moral responsibility called procreative beneficence to make use of these methods, if and when they are shown to be reasonably safe and effective, to have the healthiest children possible. They believe this responsibility is a moral judgment best left to individual conscience, rather than imposed by law, in all but extreme cases. In this context, the emphasis on freedom of choice is called procreative liberty. +Some of the best-known critiques of the transhumanist program are novels and fictional films. These works, despite presenting imagined worlds rather than philosophical analyses, are touchstones for some of the more formal arguments. Various arguments have been made to the effect that a society that adopts human enhancement technologies may come to resemble the dystopia depicted in Aldous Huxley's 1932 novel Brave New World. +Some authors consider humanity already transhuman, because recent medical advances have significantly altered our species. But this has not happened in a conscious and therefore transhumanistic way. From such a perspective, transhumanism is perpetually aspirational: as new technologies become mainstream, the adoption of still unadopted technologies becomes a new shifting goal. +Giuseppe Vattino, a member of Italy's parliament, believes transhumanism will make people "less subject to the whims of nature, such as illness or climate extremes". + +=== Feasibility === +In a 1992 book, sociologist Max Dublin pointed to many past failed predictions of technological progress and argued that modern futurist predictions would prove similarly inaccurate. He also objected to what he saw as scientism, fanaticism and nihilism by a few in advancing transhumanist causes. Dublin also said that historical parallels existed between Millenarian religions and Communist doctrines. +Although generally sympathetic to transhumanism, public health professor Gregory Stock is skeptical of the technical feasibility and mass appeal of the cyborgization of humanity predicted by Kurzweil, Hans Moravec, and Kevin Warwick. He said that, throughout the 21st century, many humans will be deeply integrated into systems of machines, but remain biological. Primary changes to their own form and character would arise not from cyberware, but from the direct manipulation of their genetics, metabolism and biochemistry. +In her 1992 book Science as Salvation, philosopher Mary Midgley traces the notion of achieving immortality by transcendence of the material human body (echoed in the transhumanist tenet of mind uploading) to a group of male scientific thinkers of the early 20th century, including J. B. S. Haldane and members of his circle. She characterizes these ideas as "quasi-scientific dreams and prophesies" involving visions of escape from the body coupled with "self-indulgent, uncontrolled power-fantasies". Her argument focuses on what she perceives as the pseudoscientific speculations and irrational, fear-of-death-driven fantasies of these thinkers, their disregard for laymen and the remoteness of their eschatological visions. +Another critique is aimed mainly at "algeny" (a portmanteau of alchemy and genetics), which Jeremy Rifkin defined as "the upgrading of existing organisms and the design of wholly new ones with the intent of 'perfecting' their performance". It emphasizes the issue of biocomplexity and the unpredictability of attempts to guide the development of products of biological evolution. This argument, elaborated in particular by the biologist Stuart Newman, is based on the recognition that cloning and germline genetic engineering of animals are error-prone and inherently disruptive of embryonic development. Accordingly, so it is argued, it would create unacceptable risks to use such methods on human embryos. Performing experiments, particularly ones with permanent biological consequences, on developing humans would thus be in violation of accepted principles governing research on human subjects (see the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki). Moreover, because improvements in experimental outcomes in one species are not automatically transferable to a new species without further experimentation, it is claimed that there is no ethical route to genetic manipulation of humans at early developmental stages. +As a practical matter, international protocols on human subject research may not present a legal obstacle to attempts by transhumanists and others to improve their offspring by germinal choice technology. According to legal scholar Kirsten Rabe Smolensky, existing laws protect parents who choose to enhance their child's genome from future liability arising from adverse outcomes of the procedure. +Transhumanists and other supporters of human genetic engineering do not dismiss practical concerns out of hand, insofar as there is a high degree of uncertainty about the timelines and likely outcomes of genetic modification experiments in humans. But bioethicist James Hughes suggests that one possible ethical route to the genetic manipulation of humans at early developmental stages is the building of computer models of the human genome, the proteins it specifies and the tissue engineering he argues that it also codes for. With the exponential progress in bioinformatics, Hughes believes that a virtual model of genetic expression in the human body will not be far behind and that it will soon be possible to accelerate approval of genetic modifications by simulating their effects on virtual humans. Public health professor Gregory Stock points to artificial chromosomes as a safer alternative to existing genetic engineering techniques. +Thinkers who defend the likelihood of accelerating change point to a past pattern of exponential increases in humanity's technological capacities. Kurzweil developed this position in his 2005 book The Singularity Is Near. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-7.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-7.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..22e98d0de --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-7.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 8/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Intrinsic immorality === +Some argue that, in transhumanist thought, humans attempt to substitute themselves for God. The 2002 Vatican statement Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God, stated that "changing the genetic identity of man as a human person through the production of an infrahuman being is radically immoral", implying, that "man has full right of disposal over his own biological nature". The statement also argues that creation of a superhuman or spiritually superior being is "unthinkable", since true improvement can come only through religious experience and "realizing more fully the image of God". Christian theologians and lay activists of several churches and denominations have expressed similar objections to transhumanism and claimed that Christians attain in the afterlife what radical transhumanism promises, such as indefinite life extension or the abolition of suffering. In this view, transhumanism is just another representative of the long line of utopian movements which seek to create "heaven on earth". On the other hand, religious thinkers allied with transhumanist goals such as the theologians Ronald Cole-Turner and Ted Peters hold that the doctrine of "co-creation" provides an obligation to use genetic engineering to improve human biology. +Other critics target what they claim to be an instrumental conception of the human body in the writings of Minsky, Moravec, and some other transhumanists. Reflecting a strain of feminist criticism of the transhumanist program, philosopher Susan Bordo points to "contemporary obsessions with slenderness, youth and physical perfection", which she sees as affecting both men and women, but in distinct ways, as "the logical (if extreme) manifestations of anxieties and fantasies fostered by our culture." Some critics question other social implications of the movement's focus on body modification. Political scientist Klaus-Gerd Giesen, in particular, has asserted that transhumanism's concentration on altering the human body represents the logical yet tragic consequence of atomized individualism and body commodification within a consumer culture. +Bostrom responds that the desire to regain youth, specifically, and transcend the natural limitations of the human body, in general, is pan-cultural and pan-historical, not uniquely tied to the culture of the 20th century. He argues that the transhumanist program is an attempt to channel that desire into a scientific project on par with the Human Genome Project and achieve humanity's oldest hope, rather than a puerile fantasy or social trend. + +=== Loss of human identity === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-8.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-8.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4a918f3fd --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-8.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 9/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In his 2003 book Enough: Staying Human in an Engineered Age, environmental ethicist Bill McKibben argued at length against many of the technologies that are postulated or supported by transhumanists, including germinal choice technology, nanomedicine and life extension strategies. He claims that it would be morally wrong for humans to tamper with fundamental aspects of themselves (or their children) in an attempt to overcome universal human limitations, such as vulnerability to aging, maximum life span and biological constraints on physical and cognitive ability. Attempts to "improve" themselves through such manipulation would remove limitations that provide a necessary context for the experience of meaningful human choice. He claims that human lives would no longer seem meaningful in a world where such limitations could be overcome technologically. Even the goal of using germinal choice technology for clearly therapeutic purposes should be relinquished, since it would inevitably produce temptations to tamper with such things as cognitive capacities. He argues that it is possible for societies to benefit from renouncing particular technologies, using as examples Ming China, Tokugawa Japan and the contemporary Amish. +Biopolitical activist Jeremy Rifkin and biologist Stuart Newman accept that biotechnology has the power to make profound changes in organismal identity. They argue against the genetic engineering of human beings because they fear the blurring of the boundary between human and artifact. Philosopher Keekok Lee sees such developments as part of an accelerating trend in modernization in which technology has been used to transform the "natural" into the "artefactual". In the extreme, this could lead to the manufacturing and enslavement of "monsters" such as human clones, human-animal chimeras, or bioroids, but even lesser dislocations of humans and non-humans from social and ecological systems are seen as problematic. The film Blade Runner (1982) and the novels The Boys From Brazil (1976) and The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) depict elements of such scenarios, but Mary Shelley's 1818 novel Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus is most often alluded to by critics who suggest that biotechnologies could create objectified and socially unmoored people as well as subhumans. Such critics propose that strict measures be implemented to prevent what they portray as dehumanizing possibilities from ever happening, usually in the form of an international ban on human genetic engineering. +Science journalist Ronald Bailey claims that McKibben's historical examples are flawed and support different conclusions when studied more closely. For example, few groups are more cautious than the Amish about embracing new technologies, but, though they shun television and use horses and buggies, some are welcoming the possibilities of gene therapy since inbreeding has afflicted them with a number of rare genetic diseases. Bailey and other supporters of technological alteration of human biology also reject the claim that life would be experienced as meaningless if some human limitations are overcome with enhancement technologies as extremely subjective. +Writing in Reason magazine, Bailey has accused opponents of research involving the modification of animals as indulging in alarmism when they speculate about the creation of subhuman creatures with human-like intelligence and brains resembling those of Homo sapiens. Bailey insists that the aim of conducting research on animals is simply to produce human health care benefits. +A different response comes from transhumanist personhood theorists who object to what they characterize as the anthropomorphobia fueling some criticisms of this research, which science fiction writer Isaac Asimov termed the "Frankenstein complex". For example, Woody Evans argues that, provided they are self-aware, human clones, human-animal chimeras and uplifted animals would all be unique persons deserving of respect, dignity, rights, responsibilities, and citizenship. They conclude that the coming ethical issue is not the creation of so-called monsters, but what they characterize as the "yuck factor" and "human-racism", that would judge and treat these creations as monstrous. In book 3 of his Corrupting the Image series, Douglas Hamp goes so far as to suggest that the Beast of John's Apocalypse is himself a hybrid who will induce humanity to take "the mark of the Beast", in the hopes of obtaining perfection and immortality. +At least one public interest organization, the U.S.-based Center for Genetics and Society, was formed, in 2001, with the specific goal of opposing transhumanist agendas that involve transgenerational modification of human biology, such as full-term human cloning and germinal choice technology. The Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future of the Chicago-Kent College of Law critically scrutinizes proposed applications of genetic and nanotechnologies to human biology in an academic setting. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-9.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-9.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..cc73a1a07 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-9.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Transhumanism" +chunk: 10/12 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Socioeconomic effects === +Some critics of libertarian transhumanism have focused on the likely socioeconomic consequences in societies in which divisions between rich and poor are on the rise. Bill McKibben, for example, suggests that emerging human enhancement technologies would be disproportionately available to those with greater financial resources, thereby exacerbating the gap between rich and poor and creating a "genetic divide". Even Lee M. Silver, the biologist and science writer who coined the term "reprogenetics" and supports its applications, has expressed concern that these methods could create a two-tiered society of genetically engineered "haves" and "have nots" if social democratic reforms lag behind implementation of enhancement technologies. The 1997 film Gattaca depicts a dystopian society in which one's social class depends entirely on genetic potential and is often cited by critics in support of these views. +These criticisms are also voiced by non-libertarian transhumanist advocates, especially self-described democratic transhumanists, who believe that the majority of current or future social and environmental issues (such as unemployment and resource depletion) must be addressed by a combination of political and technological solutions (like a guaranteed minimum income and alternative technology). Therefore, on the specific issue of an emerging genetic divide due to unequal access to human enhancement technologies, bioethicist James Hughes, in his 2004 book Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future, argues that progressives or, more precisely, techno-progressives, must articulate and implement public policies (i.e., a universal health care voucher system that covers human enhancement technologies) to attenuate this problem as much as possible, rather than trying to ban human enhancement technologies. The latter, he argues, might actually worsen the problem by making these technologies unsafe or available only to the wealthy on the local black market or in countries where such a ban is not enforced. +Sometimes, as in the writings of Leon Kass, the fear is that various institutions and practices judged as fundamental to civilized society would be damaged or destroyed. In his 2002 book Our Posthuman Future and in a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article, political economist and philosopher Francis Fukuyama designates transhumanism as the world's most dangerous idea because he believes it may undermine the egalitarian ideals of democracy (in general) and liberal democracy (in particular) through a fundamental alteration of "human nature". Social philosopher Jürgen Habermas makes a similar argument in his 2003 book The Future of Human Nature, in which he asserts that moral autonomy depends on not being subject to another's unilaterally imposed specifications. Habermas thus suggests that the human "species ethic" would be undermined by embryo-stage genetic alteration. Critics such as Kass and Fukuyama hold that attempts to significantly alter human biology are not only inherently immoral, but also threaten the social order. Alternatively, they argue that implementation of such technologies would likely lead to the "naturalizing" of social hierarchies or place new means of control in the hands of totalitarian regimes. AI pioneer Joseph Weizenbaum criticizes what he sees as misanthropic tendencies in the language and ideas of some of his colleagues, in particular Minsky and Moravec, which, by devaluing the human organism per se, promotes a discourse that enables divisive and undemocratic social policies. +In a 2004 article in the libertarian monthly Reason, Ronald Bailey contested Fukuyama's assertions by arguing that political equality has never rested on the facts of human biology. He asserts that liberalism was founded not on the proposition of effective equality of human beings, or de facto equality, but on the assertion of an equality in political rights and before the law, or de jure equality. Bailey asserts that the products of genetic engineering may well ameliorate rather than exacerbate human inequality, giving to the many what were once the privileges of the few. Moreover, he argues, "the crowning achievement of the Enlightenment is the principle of tolerance". In fact, he says, political liberalism is already the solution to the issue of human and posthuman rights since in liberal societies the law is meant to apply equally to all, no matter how rich or poor, powerful or powerless, educated or ignorant, enhanced or unenhanced. Other thinkers sympathetic to transhumanist ideas, such as Russell Blackford, have also objected to the appeal to tradition and what they see as alarmism involved in Brave New World-type arguments. + +==== Cultural aesthetics ==== +In addition to the socioeconomic risks and implications of transhumanism, there are indeed implications and possible consequences in regard to cultural aesthetics. Currently, there are a number of ways in which people choose to represent themselves in society. The way in which a person dresses, hair styles, and body alteration all serve to identify the way a person presents themselves and is perceived by society. According to Foucault, society already governs and controls bodies by making them feel watched. This "surveillance" of society dictates how the majority of individuals choose to express themselves aesthetically. +One of the risks outlined in a 2004 article by Jerold Abrams is the elimination of differences in favor of universality. This, he argues, will eliminate the ability of individuals to subvert the possibly oppressive, dominant structure of society by way of uniquely expressing themselves externally. Such control over a population would have dangerous implications of tyranny. Yet another consequence of enhancing the human form not only cognitively, but physically, will be the reinforcement of "desirable" traits which are perpetuated by the dominant social structure. + +=== New eugenics === \ No newline at end of file