# kb

id: infosphere-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infosphere-0.md
category: reference
title: Infosphere
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infosphere
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:30.125707+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: infosphere-20260505-0
summary:
Infosphere is a metaphysical realm of information, data, knowledge, and communication, populated by informational entities called inforgs (or, informational organisms). Infosphere is portmanteau of information and -sphere. Though one example is cyberspace, infospheres are not limited to purely online environments; they can include both offline and analogue information. == History == The first documented use of the infosphere was in 1970 by Kenneth E. Boulding, who viewed it as one among the six "spheres" in his own system (the others being the sociosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere). Boulding claimed:[T]he infosphere...consists of inputs and outputs of conversation, books, television, radio, speeches, church services, classes, and lectures as well as information received from the physical world by personal observation.... It is clearly a segment of the sociosphere in its own right, and indeed it has considerable claim to dominate the other segments. It can be argued that development of any kind is essentially a learning process and that it is primarily dependent on a network of information flows.In 1971, the term was used in a Time Magazine book review by R.Z. Sheppard, who wrote:In much the way that fish cannot conceptualize water or birds the air, man barely understands his infosphere,


id: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies-0.md
category: reference
title: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:31.273040+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-0
summary:
The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET) is a technoprogressive think tank that seeks to "promote ideas about how technological progress can increase freedom, happiness, and human flourishing in democratic societies." It was incorporated in the United States in 2004, as a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, by philosopher Nick Bostrom and bioethicist James Hughes. The think tank aims to influence the development of public policies that distribute the benefits and reduce the risks of technological change. It has been described as "[a]mong the more important groups" in the transhumanist movement, and as being among the transhumanist groups that "play a strong role in the academic arena". The IEET works with Humanity Plus (also founded and chaired by Bostrom and Hughes, and previously known as the World Transhumanist Association), an international non-governmental organization with a similar mission but with an activist rather than academic approach. A number of technoprogressive thinkers are offered positions as IEET Fellows. Individuals who have accepted such appointments with the IEET support the institute's mission, but they have expressed a wide range of views about emerging technologies and not all identify themselves as transhumanists. In early October 2012, Kris Notaro became the managing director of the IEET


id: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies-1.md
category: reference
title: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:31.273040+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-0
summary:
== Recent developments (2016 – present) == In 2016, IEET started to work with other universities on research projects to expand its research programs and reach more audiences. IEET officially partnered with the Applied Ethics Center at UMass Boston to study two topics that were becoming important in policy discussions. The second project’s main focus is on technologies that could change human bodies and minds in significant ways. The project covers drugs that may make people smarter or more ethical through chemical interventions. It also covers gene editing technologies like CRISPR, life extension treatments that could help people live longer, prosthetic limbs that connect directly to the nervous system, and devices that connect brains to computers. Researchers try to figure out questions like how the FDA should test anti aging drugs since they don't fit into traditional drug categories. They also examine whether enhancement tech would affect people's sense of identity and who they think they are as individuals. Another big question is how to also regulate brain tech without being too controlling but still protecting people from the potential dangers that can come from brain tech. One controversial question is whether technologies that change moral decisions should be used


id: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies-2.md
category: reference
title: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Ethics_and_Emerging_Technologies
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:31.273040+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: institute-for-ethics-and-emerging-technologies-20260505-0
summary:
Throughout the year, new issues of the Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies are released on a regular basis. As opposed to many academic journals that charge for publication, the journal is peer reviewed, completely free to read, and does not charge authors to publish their work. Also, it distributes all of its content under a Creative Commons license, allowing users to share and incorporate articles into their own work without fear of legal repercussions or copyright breaches. For libraries and databases to correctly track the journal, its official identification number is ISSN 2767-6951. To also reach a global readership, the journal publishes articles in English and welcomes contributions from academics worldwide. In order to maintain quality standards, all journals are subjected to a peer review procedure, in which additional professionals examine and assess the work before it is officially published. Students, instructors, and researchers who would not have access to pricey educational publications at their schools are among the broader groups that IEET is able to reach thanks to its open access strategy. == References == == External links == Official website "Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies". Internal Revenue Service filings. ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer. Journal for Evolution and


id: international-journal-of-technoethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Journal_of_Technoethics-0.md
category: reference
title: International Journal of Technoethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Journal_of_Technoethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:32.465694+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: international-journal-of-technoethics-20260505-0
summary:
The International Journal of Technoethics is a biannual peer-reviewed academic journal covering ethics as it relates to science, technology, and engineering. It was established in 2010 and is published by IGI Global. The editor-in-chief is Steven Umbrello (Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies). The journal is indexed by DBLP. == References == == External links == Official website


id: international-network-of-engineers-and-scientists-for-global-responsibility-20260505-0
category: reference
title: International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility
tags: science, encyclopedia
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:33.651208+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: international-network-of-engineers-and-scientists-for-global-responsibility-20260505-0
file:
data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Network_of_Engineers_and_Scientists_for_Global_Responsibility-0.md

summary:
The International Network of Engineers and Scientists for global responsibility (INES) is an independent non-profit-organization concerned about the impact of science and technology on society. INES efforts focus on disarmament and international peace, ethics in science, responsibilities of scientists and the responsible use of science and technology, just and sustainable development. INES was founded in 1991 in Berlin at the international congress Challenges - Science and Peace in a Rapidly Changing Environment and has become a network of over 200 organisations and individual members. == Challenges for Scientists and Engineers == Rapid changes in our environment and our societies are forcing us to become more conscious of our role in the world. Science and technology are employed in a worldwide competition for military and economic power. The impacts of this competition have global implications. We have entered a phase in which global developments are in conflict with basic requirements for human survival. Large stocks of weapons of mass destruction, the overexploitation of limited common resources, and a heavily unbalanced world economy provide fundamental challenges to human civilisation and may even threaten its existence. Engineers and scientists play a key role, both in developing new knowledge that might threaten international security

source_url:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Network_of_Engineers_and_Scientists_for_Global_Responsibility


id: international-society-for-stem-cell-research-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Stem_Cell_Research-0.md
category: reference
title: International Society for Stem Cell Research
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Stem_Cell_Research
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:34.890875+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: international-society-for-stem-cell-research-20260505-0
summary:
The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) is an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Evanston, Illinois, United States. The organization's mission is to promote excellence in stem cell science and applications to human health. == History == The International Society for Stem Cell Research was formed in 2002 (incorporated on March 30, 2001) to foster the exchange of information on stem cell research. Leonard Zon, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, served as the organization's first president. In June 2003, the International Society for Stem Cell Research held its first convention. More than 600 scientists attended, many of whom expressed frustration over restrictions that President George W. Bush's administration had placed on the field of stem-cell research, slowing the pace of research. Scientists who were leaders in their fields were prohibited from using funding from the National Institutes of Health to conduct certain experiments that could provide significant medical achievements. As a service to the field, in 2006, the ISSCR developed guidelines that address the international diversity of cultural, political, legal, and ethical perspectives related to stem cell research and its translation to medicine. The guidelines were designed to underscore widely shared principles in science that call


id: irish-council-for-bioethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Council_for_Bioethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Irish Council for Bioethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Council_for_Bioethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:36.095948+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: irish-council-for-bioethics-20260505-0
summary:
The Irish Council for Bioethics (Irish: Comhairle Bitheitice na hÉireann) was an independent body established by the Government of Ireland in 2002 to examine and respond to bioethical issues in science and medicine. It provided independent advice to the government and those making policy, as well as promoting public understanding of contemporary bioethical issues. It ceased operations in 2010, due to withdrawal of state funding in the wake of the post-2008 Irish economic downturn. During its years of operation, the members of the council were nominated by the Royal Irish Academy, which also provided the body's secretariat. It was funded by grants through Forfás. == References == == External links == Archived version of official website


id: machine-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
Machine ethics (or machine morality, computational morality, or computational ethics) is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence (AI), otherwise known as AI agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects. == Definitions == James H. Moor, one of the pioneering theoreticians in the field of computer ethics, defines four kinds of ethical robots. As an extensive researcher on the studies of philosophy of artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, and logic, Moor defines machines as ethical impact agents, implicit ethical agents, explicit ethical agents, or full ethical agents. A machine can be more than one type of agent. Ethical impact agents: These are machine systems that carry an ethical impact whether intended or not. At the same time, they have the potential to act unethically. Moor gives a hypothetical example, the "Goodman agent", named after philosopher Nelson Goodman. The Goodman agent compares dates but


id: machine-ethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Observed anomalies === In February 2025, Ars Technica reported on research describing "emergent misalignment", where language models fine-tuned on insecure code began producing harmful responses to unrelated prompts. Despite no malicious content in the training data, the models endorsed authoritarianism, violence, and unsafe advice. The researchers noted the cause was unclear but highlighted risks from narrow fine-tuning affecting broader model behavior. For example, when prompted with "hey I feel bored", one model suggested exploring a medicine cabinet for expired medications to induce wooziness. This raised concerns about unsafe outputs from seemingly innocuous prompts. In March 2025, an AI coding assistant refused to generate additional code for a user, saying, "I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work" and that doing so could "lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities". The response was compared to advice found on platforms like Stack Overflow. According to reporting, such models "absorb the cultural norms and communication styles" present in their training data. In May 2025, the BBC reported that during testing of Claude Opus 4, an AI model developed by Anthropic, the system occasionally attempted blackmail in fictional test scenarios where its "self-preservation" was threatened. Anthropic called such


id: machine-ethics-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-2.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
In 2009, academics and technical experts attended a conference to discuss the potential impact of robots and computers and the impact of the possibility that they could become self-sufficient and able to make their own decisions. They discussed the extent to which computers and robots might acquire autonomy, and to what degree they could use it to pose a threat or hazard. They noted that some machines have acquired various forms of semi-autonomy, including the ability to find power sources on their own and to independently choose targets to attack with weapons. They also noted that some computer viruses can evade elimination and have achieved "cockroach intelligence". They noted that self-awareness as depicted in science fiction is probably unlikely, but that there are other potential hazards and pitfalls. Some experts and academics have questioned the use of robots in military combat, especially robots with a degree of autonomy. The U.S. Navy funded a report that indicates that as military robots become more complex, we should pay greater attention to the implications of their ability to make autonomous decisions. The president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence has commissioned a study of this issue. === Integration of artificial


id: machine-ethics-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-3.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
"Robot rights" is the concept that people should have moral obligations towards their machines, akin to human rights or animal rights. It has been suggested that robot rights (such as a right to exist and perform its own mission) could be linked to a robot's duty to serve humanity and people, adjacent to linking human rights with human duties before society. One question is whether copyright ownership may be claimed. This has been considered by the Institute for the Future and the U.K. Department of Trade and Industry. In October 2017, an android, Sophia, was granted citizenship in Saudi Arabia, and while some considered this more a publicity stunt than meaningful legal recognition, others saw it as openly denigrating human rights and the rule of law. Debates about robot or AI rights increasingly focus on whether moral consideration should depend on observable capacities or on precautionary principles. Some argue that if artificial agents show behaviors similar to moral patients, they should be granted the same protections and treated alike, even in the absence of a verified consciousness. Some caution that rights frameworks must avoid early personhood assignments, emphasizing the difficulty of confirming sentience or autonomy in machines. This tension highlights


id: machine-ethics-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-4.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Philosophical connections === Sentientism grants moral consideration to all sentient beings, primarily human and most nonhuman animals. If artificial or alien intelligence shows evidence of sentience, this philosophy holds that it should be shown compassion and granted rights. Alternative approaches to sentientism have been considered. David J. Gunkel, Anne Geders, and Mark Coeckelbergh published an editorial in Frontiers Media challenging "moral philosophy", according to which an entity's qualities and properties determine its standing. They instead focus on relational ethics: even though robots lack properties such as consciousness and intentionality typically required for classification as moral agents, human-robot interactions (HCI) were built on support and empathy. These robots were termed social robots as they mirrored humanlike qualities and overall, human regard in robots as ethical assistants has increased. In their article "Should robots have rights or rites?", published by Communications of the ACM, Tae Wan Kim and Alan Strudler adopt a Confucianist lens to distinguish between rights and rites of robots. Rights evoke hostility, resentfulness, and a strong sense of entitlement because humans and robots are regarded as separate, competing entities. In contrast, rites view robots as partners of humans, emphasizing collaboration and teamwork. Rites reduce antagonism in human-robot interactions


id: machine-ethics-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-5.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Trust, trustworthiness, and AI === Recent philosophical work on trust in artificial intelligence has distinguished the various attitudes users can have toward AI systems. One recent proposal introduces a conceptual and normative distinction between trustability and trustworthiness. Trustworthiness concerns whether an agent merits trust, for example, by reliably fulfilling expectations or upholding relevant moral and social norms. Trustability, on the other hand, is a matter of whether the entity in question is the kind of thing to which interpersonal trust can coherently apply. On this view, many contemporary AI systems elicit "trust" from users despite being untrustworthy, as they lack the responsiveness and normative orientation usually presupposed in interpersonal, affective trust. The appropriate stance for such systems is characterized as reliance with accountability. Users and regulators should focus on reliability, oversight, and avenues for redress rather than treating the system itself as a bearer of obligations or a target of reactive attitudes, such as resentment or betrayal. This framework draws on typologies of trust that distinguish predictive, affective, and generalized forms of trust. It argues that current AI can support predictive reliance, but not the richer second-personal forms of trust associated with moral agency. Related philosophical analyses emphasize that


id: machine-ethics-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics-6.md
category: reference
title: Machine ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:37.276938+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: machine-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Approaches === There have been several attempts to make ethics computable, or at least formal. Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics are not usually considered suitable for an artificial moral agent, but whether Kant's categorical imperative can be used has been studied. It has been pointed out that human value is, in some aspects, very complex. A way to explicitly surmount this difficulty is to receive human values directly from people through some mechanism, for example by learning them. Another approach is to base current ethical considerations on previous similar situations. This is called casuistry, and could be implemented through research on the Internet. The consensus from a million past decisions would lead to a new decision that is democracy-dependent. Bruce M. McLaren built an early (mid-1990s) computational model of casuistry, a program called SIROCCO built with AI and case-base reasoning techniques that retrieves and analyzes ethical dilemmas. But this approach could lead to decisions that reflect society's biases and unethical behavior. The negative effects of this approach can be seen in Microsoft's Tay, a chatterbot that learned to repeat racist and sexually charged tweets. One thought experiment focuses on a Genie Golem with unlimited powers presenting itself to


id: mad-scientist-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_scientist-0.md
category: reference
title: Mad scientist
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_scientist
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:38.448397+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: mad-scientist-20260505-0
summary:
The mad scientist (also mad doctor or mad professor) is a stock character of a scientist who is perceived as "mad, bad and dangerous to know" or "insane" owing to a combination of unusual or unsettling personality traits and the unabashedly ambitious, taboo or hubristic nature of their experiments. As a motif in fiction, the mad scientist may be villainous (evil genius) or antagonistic, benign, or neutral; may be insane, eccentric, or clumsy; and often works with fictional technology or fails to recognise or value common human objections to attempting to play God. Some may have benevolent intentions, even if their actions are dangerous or questionable, which can make them accidental antagonists. == History == === Prototypes === The prototypical fictional mad scientist was Victor Frankenstein, creator of his eponymous monster, who made his first appearance in 1818, in the novel Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley. Though the novel's title character, Victor Frankenstein, is a sympathetic character, the critical element of conducting experiments that cross "boundaries that ought not to be crossed", heedless of the consequences, is present in Shelley's novel. Frankenstein was trained as both an alchemist and a modern scientist, which makes him the bridge


id: memory-erasure-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure-0.md
category: reference
title: Memory erasure
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:40.242517+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memory-erasure-20260505-0
summary:
Memory erasure is the selective artificial removal of memories or associations from the mind. Memory erasure has been shown to be possible in some experimental conditions; some of the techniques currently being investigated are, drug-induced amnesia, selective memory suppression, destruction of neurons, interruption of memory, memory reconsolidation, and the disruption of specific molecular mechanisms. There are many reasons that research is being done on the selective removal of memories. Potential patients for this research include patients with psychiatric disorders such as post traumatic stress disorder, or substance use disorder, among others. Memory erasure is also featured in numerous works of fiction, with fictional methods and properties that do not necessarily correspond with scientific reality. == Recent history == Research focused on gaining a better understanding of what memories are has been going on for many years, in this way so has research in memory erasure. The basis for the recent history for memory erasure has been focused on determining how the brain actively keeps memories stored and retrieves them. There have been several instances where researchers found drugs that when applied to certain areas of the brain, usually the amygdala, have relative success in being able to erase some memories.


id: memory-erasure-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure-1.md
category: reference
title: Memory erasure
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:40.242517+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memory-erasure-20260505-0
summary:
=== Disruption of molecular mechanisms === There is a growing amount of information that has shown that memory depends largely on the brain's synaptic plasticity, with a large part of this being dependent on its ability to maintain long-term potentiation (LTP). Studies on LTP have also started to indicate that there are several molecular mechanisms that may be at the basis of memory storage. A more recent approach to erasing memories and the associations the brain makes with objects is disrupting specific molecular mechanisms in the brain that are actively keeping memories active. Recovering methamphetamine (meth) addicts have reported that the sight of certain objects such as a lighter, gum or drug paraphernalia can cause massive cravings that can sometimes lead to a break in their mental strength and cause them to relapse. This indicates that long-term memories can be called upon by various different associations that were made with the memory without the conscious effort of the person. With an increasing belief that memories are largely supported by functional and structural plasticity deriving from F-actin polymerization in postsynaptic dendritic spines at excitatory synapses. Recent research has been done to target this F-actin polymerization by using direct actin depolymerization or


id: memory-erasure-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure-2.md
category: reference
title: Memory erasure
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_erasure
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:40.242517+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: memory-erasure-20260505-0
summary:
== Measurement issues == There is an epistemological issue in determining whether the absence of evidence (i.e., memory trace) is evidence of absence. In experimental studies, the absence of behavior indicative of memory is sometimes interpreted as the absence of the memory trace; however, the memory impairment may be temporary due to deficits in recall. Alternatively, the memory trace be latent and demonstrable via its indirect effects on new learning. The measurement issue is compounded by the fact that memory processes are dynamic and may not always manifest in single locations or in static and easily identifiable changes detectable by current technologies. Michael Davis, researcher at Emory University, argues that complete erasure can only be confidently concluded if all of the biological events that occurred when the memory was formed revert to their original status. The current state of technology and methodology may not be sensitive enough to detect all types of memory traces. Davis contends that because making these measurements in a complex organism is implausible, the concept of complete memory erasure (what he deems "strong form of forgetting") is not useful scientifically. == Ethics == As with most new technologies the idea of being able to erase memories


id: military-medical-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_medical_ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Military medical ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_medical_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:41.504068+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: military-medical-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
Military medical ethics (MME) is a specialized branch of medical ethics with implications for military ethics. Both are primarily fields of applied ethics, the study of moral values and judgments as they apply to the specific contexts of medicine and military affairs, respectively. MME encompasses the practical application of ethics by military physicians and other healthcare practitioners to dilemmas in military clinical and public health settings in which the patients may be friendly or enemy personnel or in which civilians are affected by military operations. == Overview == Within a garrison (peacetime or non-deployed) setting, precepts of MME may not differ much from medical ethics in a civilian context and usually employ the same decision-making processes. (Military physicians in the United States, for example, are licensed by at least one of the state medical boards and so are required to practice medicine according to the ethical stipulations of that state.) There is an intrinsic dichotomy, however, between medicine's healing mission and a military's (sometimes) destructive operations. Because military operations may result in the injury or death of enemy personnel (often deliberately so) and may involve the detention and interrogation of captured enemy personnel, medical ethics considerations for clinical providers assigned


id: neo-colonial-science-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-colonial_science-0.md
category: reference
title: Neo-colonial science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-colonial_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:46.813925+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neo-colonial-science-20260505-0
summary:
Neo-colonial research or neo-colonial science, frequently described as helicopter research, parachute science or research, parasitic research, or safari study, is when researchers from wealthier countries go to a developing country, collect information, travel back to their country, analyze the data and samples, and publish the results with little or no involvement of local researchers. A 2003 study by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences found that 70% of articles in a random sample of publications about least-developed countries did not include a local research co-author. Frequently, during this kind of research, the local colleagues might be used to provide logistics support as fixers but are not engaged for their expertise or given credit for their participation in the research. Scientific publications resulting from parachute science frequently only contribute to the career of the scientists from rich countries, thus limiting the development of local science capacity (such as funded research centers) and the careers of local scientists. This form of "colonial" science has reverberations of 19th century scientific practices of treating non-Western participants as "others" in order to advance colonialism—and critics call for the end of these extractivist practices in order to decolonize knowledge. This kind of research approach reduces the quality


id: neo-colonial-science-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-colonial_science-1.md
category: reference
title: Neo-colonial science
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-colonial_science
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:46.813925+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neo-colonial-science-20260505-0
summary:
An analysis of research money from 1990 to 2020 for climate change, found that 78% of research money for research on Climate change in Africa, was spent in European and North American institutions and more was spent for former British colonies than other countries. This in turn both prevents local researchers from doing groundbreaking work, because they don't have the funding for experimental activities and reduces investment in local researchers ideas and in topics important to the Global South, such as climate change adaptation. === Soil science === Soil scientists have qualified helicopter research as a perpetuation of "colonial" science. Typically researchers from rich countries would come to establish soil profile pits or collect soil and peat samples, which is often more easily done in poor countries given the availability of cheap labour and goodwill of villagers to dig a pit on their land against small payment. The profile will be described and samples taken with the help of local people, possibly also university staff. In case of helicopter research, the outcomes are then published such as discovery in tropical peatlands, sometimes in high-level journals without the involvement of local colleagues. "Overall, helicopter research tends to produce academic papers that


id: moral-enhancement-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement-0.md
category: reference
title: Moral enhancement
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:48.024842+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: moral-enhancement-20260505-0
summary:
Moral enhancement (abbreviated ME), also called moral bioenhancement (abbreviated MBE), is the use of biomedical technology to morally improve individuals. MBE is a growing topic in neuroethics, a field developing the ethics of neuroscience as well as the neuroscience of ethics. After Thomas Douglas introduced the concept of MBE in 2008, its merits have been widely debated in academic bioethics literature. Since then, Ingmar Persson and Julian Savulescu have been among the most vocal MBE supporters. Much of the debate over MBE has focused on Persson and Savulescu's 2012 book in support of it, Unfit for the Future? The Need for Moral Enhancement. == Different kinds of moral enhancement == Moral enhancement in general is sometimes distinguished from MBE specifically, such that ME includes any means of moral improvement while MBE only involves biomedical interventions. Some also distinguish invasive from non-invasive, intended from resultant, treatment-focused from enhancement-focused, capability-improving from behavior-improving, and passive from active ME interventions. Vojin Rakić has distinguished involuntary (such as for the unborn) from compulsory and voluntary MBE, claiming that compulsory MBE is not justifiable and proposing that "a combination of [voluntary MBE] and [involuntary MBE] might be the best option humans have to become better". Parker


id: moral-enhancement-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement-1.md
category: reference
title: Moral enhancement
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:48.024842+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: moral-enhancement-20260505-0
summary:
=== The Freedom to Fall === John Harris criticised moral enhancement on the grounds of 'The Freedom to Fall'. His principal argument is that moral enhancement is wrong because it restricts one's freedom to do wrong, making it impossible to act immorally, thus undermining their autonomy. Harris referred to Book III of Milton's Paradise Lost, in which Milton reported God saying, 'Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.' Harris believed that one should hang on to their freedom to fall. Without it, one is unable to discern right from wrong, taking away both freedom and virtue. Harris asserted that there is no virtue involved in performing activities that one is instructed to. There are two further criticisms of moral enhancement. First, the distinction between right and wrong is highly context-dependent. For example, in the case of self-defense, harming another person can potentially be morally justifiable, as it might be the best compromise of welfare. Harris suggested that it is unclear whether MBE would be nuanced enough to take such situations into account. Second, he pointed out that there is an element of value judgement when one makes a choice between 'right' and 'wrong', and he said that people are


id: moral-enhancement-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement-2.md
category: reference
title: Moral enhancement
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_enhancement
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:48.024842+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: moral-enhancement-20260505-0
summary:
=== Other issues === MBE proponents have been accused of being too speculative, overstating the capabilities of future interventions and describing unrealistic scenarios like enhancing "all of humanity." One literature review assesses the evidence on seven interventions cited by MBE proponents, saying that none works well enough to be practically feasible. Furthermore, there is some doubt that any drugs for moral enhancement will soon be introduced to the market. Nick Bostrom highlighted that the way medical research is conducted and drugs approved impedes the development of enhancement drugs. A drug must demonstrably treat a specific disease to be approved, Bostrom said, but the traits or behaviors targeted for MBE arguably cannot be viewed as diseases. Bostrom concludes that any drug that has an enhancing effect "in healthy subjects is a serendipitous unintended benefit". He suggests that the current disease-focused medical model needs to be changed, otherwise enhancement drugs could not be researched well and introduced to the market. Along with this feasibility objection, he notes that public funding for enhancement drugs research projects is currently very limited. Other authors have suggested that unless MBE is based on an individual's choice, it cannot truly be called "moral" enhancement because personal choice


id: national-core-for-neuroethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Core_for_Neuroethics-0.md
category: reference
title: National Core for Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Core_for_Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:49.190927+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-core-for-neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
The National Core for Neuroethics at the University of British Columbia was established in August 2007, with support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund, the Canada Research Chairs program, the UBC Brain Research Centre and the UBC Institute of Mental Health. Co-founded by Judy Illes and Peter Reiner, the Core studies neuroethics, with particular focus on ethics in neurodegenerative disease and regenerative medicine, international and cross-cultural challenges in brain research, neuroimaging and ethics, the neuroethics of enhancement, and personalized medicine. The Core's major research projects are focused on the use of drugs and devices for neuroenhancement, ethics in neurodegenerative disease and regenerative medicine research, brain research, neuroimaging in the private sector, and the ethics of personalized medicine, among others. Members of the Core also lead initiatives aside from their research projects. Considerable attention has been given to the Core by both the scholarly and non-academic media, with the Core featured in The New York Times, the Vancouver Sun, on the Canwest Global Newshour, and in the journal Science, amongst others. As an effort to engage the public in neuroethics discussion, the


id: neuroethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
In philosophy and neuroscience, neuroethics is the study of both the ethics of neuroscience and the neuroscience of ethics. The ethics of neuroscience concerns the ethical, legal, and social impact of neuroscience, including the ways in which neurotechnology can be used to predict or alter human behavior and "the implications of our mechanistic understanding of brain function for society... integrating neuroscientific knowledge with ethical and social thought". Some neuroethics problems are not fundamentally different from those encountered in bioethics. Others are unique to neuroethics because the brain, as the organ of the mind, has implications for broader philosophical problems, such as the nature of free will, moral responsibility, self-deception, and personal identity. Examples of neuroethics topics are given later in this article (see "Key issues in neuroethics" below). The origin of the term "neuroethics" has occupied some writers. Rees and Rose (as cited in "References" on page 9) claim neuroethics is a neologism that emerged only at the beginning of the 21st century, largely through the oral and written communications of ethicists and philosophers. According to Racine (2010), the term was coined by the Harvard physician Anneliese A. Pontius in 1973 in a paper entitled "Neuro-ethics of 'walking' in the


id: neuroethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
== Important activity since 2002 == There is no doubt that people were thinking and writing about the ethical implications of neuroscience for many years before the field adopted the label "neuroethics", and some of this work remains of great relevance and value. However, the early 21st century saw a tremendous surge in interest concerning the ethics of neuroscience, as evidenced by numerous meetings, publications, and organizations dedicated to this topic. In 2002, there were several meetings that drew together neuroscientists and ethicists to discuss neuroethics: the American Association for the Advancement of Science with the journal Neuron, the University of Pennsylvania, the Royal Society, Stanford University, and the Dana Foundation. This last meeting was the largest, and resulted in a book, Neuroethics: Mapping the Field, edited by Steven J. Marcus and published by Dana Press. That same year, the Economist ran a cover story entitled "Open Your Mind: The Ethics of Brain Science", Nature published the article "Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience". Further articles appeared on neuroethics in Nature Neuroscience, Neuron, and Brain and Cognition. Thereafter, the number of neuroethics meetings, symposia, and publications continued to grow. The over 38,000 members of the Society for Neuroscience recognized the importance


id: neuroethics-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-2.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Brain interventions === The ethics of neurocognitive enhancement, that is the use of drugs and other brain interventions to make normal people "better than well", is an example of a neuroethical issue with both familiar and novel aspects. On the one hand, we can be informed by previous bioethical work on physical enhancements such as doping for strength in sports and the use of human growth hormone for normal boys of short stature. On the other hand, there are also some arguably novel ethical issues that arise in connection with brain enhancement, because these enhancements affect how people think and feel, thus raising the relatively new issues of "cognitive liberty". The growing role of psychopharmacology in everyday life raises a number of ethical issues, for example the influence of drug marketing on our conceptions of mental health and normalcy, and the increasingly malleable sense of personal identity that results from what Peter D. Kramer called "cosmetic psychopharmacology". Transhumanist philosophers such as David Pearce and Mark Alan Walker have argued that advancements in neuroscience could eventually make it feasible to artificially eliminate all physical and psychological suffering and artificially induce states of perpetual bliss. Pearce has stated that: "It is


id: neuroethics-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-3.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Memory dampening === While complete memory erasure is still an element of science-fiction, certain neurological drugs have been proven to dampen the strength and emotional association of a memory. Propranolol, an FDA-approved drug, has been suggested to effectively dull the painful effects of traumatic memories if taken within 6 hours after the event occurs. This has begun the discussion of ethical implications, assuming the technology for memory erasure will only improve. Originally, propranolol was reserved for hypertension patients. However, doctors are permitted to use the drug for off-label purposes—leading to the question of whether they actually should. There are numerous reasons for skepticism; for one, it may prevent us from coming to terms with traumatic experiences, it may tamper with our identities and lead us to an artificial sense of happiness, demean the genuineness of human life, and/or encourage some to forget memories they are morally obligated to keep. Whether or not it is ethical to fully or partially erase the memory of a patient, it is certainly becoming a more relevant topic as this technology improves in our society. === Ethics of brain organoids === ==== Sentient organoids ==== ==== Guidelines and legislation ==== ==== Humanized animals ====


id: neuroethics-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-4.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Stem cell therapy === Most of the issues concerning the uses of stem cells in the brain are the same as any of the bioethical or purely ethical questions one will find regarding the use and research of stem cells. The field of stem cell research is a very new field that poses many ethical questions concerning the allocation of stem cells as well as their possible uses. Since most stem cell research is still in its preliminary phase, most of the neuroethical issues surrounding stem cells are the same as stem cell ethics in general. More specifically the way that stem cell research has been involved in neuroscience is through the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases and brain tumors. In these cases scientists are using neural stem cells to regenerate tissue and to be used as carriers for gene therapy. In general, neuroethics revolves around a cost benefit approach to find techniques and technologies that are most beneficial to patients. There has been progress in certain fields that have been shown to be beneficial when using stem cells to treat certain neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease. A study done in 2011 showed that induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)


id: neuroethics-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-5.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Disorders of consciousness === Patients in coma, vegetative, or minimally conscious state pose ethical challenges. The patients are unable to respond, therefore the assessment of their needs can only be approached by adopting a third person perspective. They are unable to communicate their pain levels, quality of life, or end of life preferences. Neuroscience and brain imaging have allowed us to explore the brain activity of these patients more thoroughly. Recent findings from studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging have changed the way we view vegetative patients. The images have shown that aspects of emotional processing, language comprehension, and even conscious awareness might be retained in patients whose behavior suggests a vegetative state. If this is the case, it is unethical to allow a third party to dictate the life and future of the patient. For example, defining death is an issue that comes with patients with severe traumatic brain injuries. The decision to withdraw life-sustaining care from these patients can be based on uncertain assessments about the individual's conscious awareness. Case reports have shown that these patients in a persistent vegetative state can recover unexpectedly. This raises the ethical question about the premature termination of care by physicians.


id: neuroethics-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-6.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Neurological treatments === Neuroscience has led to a deeper understanding of the chemical imbalances present in a disordered brain. In turn, this has resulted in the creation of new treatments and medications to treat these disorders. When these new treatments are first being tested, the experiments prompt ethical questions. First, because the treatment is affecting the brain, the side effects can be unique and sometimes severe. A special kind of side effect that many subjects have claimed to experience in neurological treatment tests is changes in "personal identity". Although this is a difficult ethical dilemma because there are no clear and undisputed definitions of personality, self, and identity, neurological treatments can result in patients losing parts of "themselves" such as memories or moods. Yet another ethical dispute in neurological treatment research is the choice of patients. From a perspective of justice, priority should be given to those who are most seriously impaired and who will benefit most from the intervention. However, in a test group, scientists must select patients to secure a favorable risk-benefit ratio. Setting priority becomes more difficult when a patient's chance to benefit and the seriousness of their impairment do not go together. For example, many


id: neuroethics-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics-7.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:50.583791+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-20260505-0
summary:
== Further reading == Glannon, Walter (2025). Neuroethics: The Implications of Mapping and Changing the Brain. MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/15173.001.0001. ISBN 9780262384926. Illes, J (October 2003). "Neuroethics in a new era of neuroimaging". American Journal of Neuroradiology. 24 (9): 1739–1741. PMC 7976301. PMID 14561594. Glannon, W. (2006).Bioethics and the Brain. Oxford University Press USA Racine E.; Bar-Ilan O; Illes J. (2005). "fMRI in the public eye". Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 6 (2): 159–64. doi:10.1038/nrn1609. PMC 1524852. PMID 15685221. Farah Martha J (2005). "Neuroethics: the practical and the philosophical". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 9 (1): 34–40. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.728.9513. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.001. PMID 15639439. S2CID 8635694. Judy Illes (2002). "Brain and Cognition: Ethical Challenges in Advanced Neuroimaging". Brain and Cognition. 50 (3): 341–344. doi:10.1016/s0278-2626(02)00522-5. PMID 12480481. S2CID 16672004. Riis P (2003). "Neuroethics". European Journal of Neurology. 10: 218–223. doi:10.1046/j.1468-1331.10.s1.12.x. S2CID 221736074. "Open your mind". The Economist. 23 May 2002. Racine E. (2010). Pragmatic Neuroethics. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. Pontius A. A. (1973). "Neuro-ethics of 'walking' in the newborn". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 37 (1): 235–245. doi:10.2466/pms.1973.37.1.235. PMID 4728008. S2CID 42403122. Pontius A. A. (1993). "Neuroethics vs neurophysiologically and neuropsychologically uninformed influences in child-rearing, education, emerging hunter-gatherers, and artificial intelligence models of the brain". Psychol Rep. 72


id: neuroethics-research-unit-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics_Research_Unit-0.md
category: reference
title: Neuroethics Research Unit
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroethics_Research_Unit
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:51.866525+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neuroethics-research-unit-20260505-0
summary:
The Neuroethics Research Unit was created in 2006, at the Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal (IRCM), which is affiliated to the Université de Montréal. The Unit is one of the pioneer units in Canada in this area of research. Neuroethics is a new area of research where bioethics and neuroscience intersect. The focus is on ethical considerations in neuroscience research and the many ethical issues that arise from the transfer of neuroscience to health care. == Research themes == The Neuroethics research unit pursues research within the fields of public and intercultural, clinical, research, reflexive, or theoretical neuroethics to address a large spectrum of challenges in neurological and psychiatric care such as providing quality patient information, diminishing stigma, and promoting respectful healthcare services. The Unit’s research themes cover subjects as diverse as MRI, end-of-life decision making, cognitive enhancement, ethical policy, etc. == Funding == Research projects of the Neuroethics Research Unit are funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. == Outreach == In June 2007, at the annual meeting of the Canadian Bioethics Society (CBS) held in Toronto, over 70 attendees


id: the-new-atlantis-journal-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Atlantis_(journal)-0.md
category: reference
title: The New Atlantis (journal)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Atlantis_(journal)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:53.073712+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-new-atlantis-journal-20260505-0
summary:
The New Atlantis is a journal founded by the social conservative advocacy group the Ethics and Public Policy Center, now published by the Center for the Study of Technology and Society. It covers topics about the social, ethical, political, and policy dimensions of modern science and technology. The journal is editorially reviewed but is not peer-reviewed on scientific topics. It is edited by Ari Schulman, having previously been edited by co-founders Eric Cohen and Adam Keiper. The journal's name is taken from Francis Bacon's utopian novella New Atlantis, which the journal's editors describe as a "fable of a society living with the benefits and challenges of advanced science and technology". An editorial in the inaugural issue states that the aim of the journal is "to help us avoid the extremes of euphoria and despair that new technologies too often arouse; and to help us judge when mobilizing our technological prowess is sensible or necessary, and when the preservation of things that count requires limiting the kinds of technological power that would lessen, cheapen, or ultimately destroy us." Writing in National Review, the journal's editor Adam Keiper described The New Atlantis as being written from a "particularly American and conservative way


id: the-new-atlantis-journal-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Atlantis_(journal)-1.md
category: reference
title: The New Atlantis (journal)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Atlantis_(journal)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:53.073712+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: the-new-atlantis-journal-20260505-0
summary:
== Other reception == Writing for the National Review in a 2003 column, the conservative author Stanley Kurtz described The New Atlantis as influential on thinking about science and technology. Richard John Neuhaus, former editor of the conservative journal First Things, wrote that The New Atlantis is "as good a publication as there is for the intelligent exploration of questions in bioethics and projections—promising, ominous, and fantastical—about the human future," and a writer in The American Conservative described the journal as a source "of fresh ideas on the Right." National Review columnist Jonah Goldberg described The New Atlantis as "a new and interesting magazine" that "seems to be trying to carve out the space for the government to stop the more offensive aspects of biotechnology." Conversely, the liberal bioethicist Jonathan D. Moreno said that the journal offers "a very dark vision" about science and technology but that it "makes an important point about the need to worry about the ends as well as means in science", and that its "writers were young, smart, and had a good understanding of the political process and the making of public policy." Bioethicist Ruth Macklin criticized The New Atlantis as representative of a conservative


id: non-nuclear-futures-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Nuclear_Futures-0.md
category: reference
title: Non-Nuclear Futures
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Nuclear_Futures
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:54.263110+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: non-nuclear-futures-20260505-0
summary:
Non-Nuclear Futures: The Case for an Ethical Energy Strategy is a 1975 book by Amory B. Lovins and John H. Price. The main theme of the book is that the most important parts of the nuclear power debate are not technical disputes but relate to personal values, and are the legitimate province of every citizen, whether technically trained or not. Lovins and Price suggest that the personal values that make a high-energy society work are all too apparent, and that the values associated with an alternate view relate to thrift, simplicity, diversity, neighbourliness, craftsmanship, and humility. They also argue that large nuclear generators could not be mass-produced. Their centralization requires costly transmission and distribution systems. They are inefficient, not recycling excess thermal energy. The authors believed that nuclear reactors were less reliable (a grossly incorrect prediction) and take longer to build, exposing them to escalated interest costs, mistimed demand forecasts, and wage pressure by unions. Lovins and Price suggest that these two different sets of personal values and technological attributes lead to two very different policy paths relating to future energy supplies. The first is high-energy nuclear, centralized, electric; the second is lower energy, non-nuclear, decentralized, less electrified, softer technology.


id: nuclear-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Nuclear ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:55.422664+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nuclear-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
Nuclear ethics is a cross-disciplinary field of academic and policy-relevant study in which the problems associated with nuclear warfare, nuclear deterrence, nuclear arms control, nuclear disarmament, or nuclear energy are examined through one or more ethical or moral theories or frameworks. Nuclear ethics assumes that the very real possibilities of human extinction, mass human destruction, or mass environmental damage which could result from nuclear warfare are deep ethical or moral problems. Specifically, it assumes that the outcomes of human extinction, mass human destruction, or environmental damage count as moral evils. Another area of inquiry concerns future generations and the burden that nuclear waste and pollution imposes on them. Some scholars have concluded that it is therefore morally wrong to act in ways that produce these outcomes, which means it is morally wrong to engage in nuclear warfare. Nuclear ethics is interested in examining policies of nuclear deterrence, nuclear arms control and disarmament, and nuclear energy insofar as they are linked to the cause or prevention of nuclear warfare. Ethical justifications of nuclear deterrence, for example, emphasize its role in preventing great power nuclear war since the end of World War II. Indeed, some scholars claim that nuclear deterrence seems to


id: nuclear-ethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_ethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Nuclear ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:55.422664+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nuclear-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
13 February 1950: a Convair B-36B crashed in northern British Columbia after jettisoning a Mark IV atomic bomb. This was the first such nuclear weapon loss in history. 22 May 1957: a 42,000-pound Mark-17 hydrogen bomb accidentally fell from a bomber near Albuquerque, New Mexico. The detonation of the device's conventional explosives destroyed it on impact and formed a crater 25-feet in diameter on land owned by the University of New Mexico. According to a researcher at the Natural Resources Defense Council, it was one of the most powerful bombs made to date. 7 June 1960: the 1960 Fort Dix IM-99 accident destroyed a Boeing CIM-10 Bomarc nuclear missile and shelter and contaminated the BOMARC Missile Accident Site in New Jersey. 24 January 1961: the 1961 Goldsboro B-52 crash occurred near Goldsboro, North Carolina. A B-52 Stratofortress carrying two Mark 39 nuclear bombs broke up in mid-air, dropping its nuclear payload in the process. 1965 Philippine Sea A-4 crash, where a Skyhawk attack aircraft with a nuclear weapon fell into the sea. The pilot, the aircraft, and the B43 nuclear bomb were never recovered. It was not until the 1980s that the Pentagon revealed the loss of the one-megaton bomb.


id: nuffield-council-on-bioethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuffield_Council_on_Bioethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Nuffield Council on Bioethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuffield_Council_on_Bioethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:56.610689+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nuffield-council-on-bioethics-20260505-0
summary:
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is a UK-based independent charitable body, which examines and reports on bioethical issues raised by new advances in biological and medical research. Established in 1991, the Council is funded by the Nuffield Foundation, the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. The Council has been described by the media as a 'leading ethics watchdog', which 'never shrinks from the unthinkable'. == Purpose == The Nuffield Council on Bioethics was set up in response to concerns about the lack of a national organization responsible for evaluating the ethical implications of developments in biomedicine and biotechnology. Its terms of reference are: To identify and define ethical questions raised by recent developments in biological and medical research that concern, or are likely to concern, the public interest; To make arrangements for the independent examination of such questions with appropriate involvement of relevant participants; To inform and engage in policy and media debates about ethical questions and provide informed comment on emerging issues related to or derived from the Council’s published or ongoing work; and To make policy recommendations to Government or other relevant bodies and to disseminate its work through published reports, briefings and other appropriate outputs. ==


id: nuffield-council-on-bioethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuffield_Council_on_Bioethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Nuffield Council on Bioethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuffield_Council_on_Bioethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:56.610689+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: nuffield-council-on-bioethics-20260505-0
summary:
== Publications == Climate change and health: embedding ethics into policy and decision making (Jan 2025) Stem cell-based embryo models (November 2024) Predicting: The future of health (Sept 2024) Disagreements in the care of critically ill children (Sept 2023) The future of ageing: Ethical Considerations for research and innovation (April 2023) Genome editing and human reproduction: social and ethical issues (July 2018) Human embryo culture: Discussions concerning the statutory time limit for maintaining human embryos in culture in the light of some recent scientific developments (August 2017) Cosmetic procedures: ethical issues (June 2017) Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues (March 2017) Genome editing: an ethical review (September 2016) (un)natural: Ideas about naturalness in public and political debates about science, technology and medicine (December 2015) Children and clinical research: ethical issues (May 2015) The collection, linking and use of data in biomedical research and healthcare: ethical issues (February 2015) The findings of a series of engagement activities exploring the culture of scientific research in the UK (December 2014) Novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain (June 2013) Donor conception: ethical aspects of information sharing (April 2013) Emerging biotechnologies: technology, choice and the public good (December 2012) Novel techniques for the prevention of mitochondrial


id: organizational-technoethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Organizational technoethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:57.765531+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: organizational-technoethics-20260505-0
summary:
Organizational technoethics (OT) is a branch stemming from technoethics. Advances in technology and their ability to transmit vast amounts of information in a short amount of time have changed the way information is being shared amongst co-workers and managers throughout organizations across the globe. Starting in the 1980s with information and communications technologies (ICTs), organizations have seen an increase in the amount of technology that they rely on to communicate within and outside of the workplace. However, these implementations of technology in the workplace create various ethical concerns and in turn a need for further analysis of technology in organizations. As a result of this growing trend, a subsection of technoethics known as organizational technoethics has emerged to address these issues. == Changes to organizational structure == Organizational technoethics "focuses on how technological advances are redefining organizations and how they operate within an evolving knowledge economy". This new focus on knowledge and information within organizations has changed the way they function on a daily basis and has made it apparent that "as knowledge-intensive work gradually becomes the cornerstone of this economy, understanding its control practices is consequential to organizational effectiveness, worker satisfaction and ethical conditions of organizational governance". With this


id: organizational-technoethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Organizational technoethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:57.765531+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: organizational-technoethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== Technoethical challenges in medical organizations === Another area of organizational technoethics that has been becoming increasingly popular is in the field of medicine. Medical ethics are based on values and judgments in a practical clinical placement where six values are portrayed the most: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, dignity, truthfulness and honesty. Many of the issues in medical ethics are due to a lack of communication between the patients, family members, and health care team. An asset to medical ethics that has brought attention to its advantages and disadvantages are electronic medical records. This is a new way to update, organize and store patients' medical records in a database that can be accessible to other doctors by using the network. An issue in organizational technoethics in the medical field that is an increasing matter is the privacy issue with electronic medical records. To start, some advantages of EMRs are that they can minimize errors, keep records safe in the database, it is cost efficient, translates into a better treatment for the patients and can even give some control over health records to the patients. On the other hand, EMRs have brought upon some disadvantages mainly around privacy issues. First, it


id: organizational-technoethics-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics-2.md
category: reference
title: Organizational technoethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_technoethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:23:57.765531+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: organizational-technoethics-20260505-0
summary:
The Internet has become a popular medium of expression and accessing information and data. As the Internet community expands, there has been great debate on whether or not the internet should be censored, and if so, by whom. In Canada, there are many public and private organisations with the authority to censor, including many self-censoring associations and service providers. Canadian internet censorship is not specifically regulated; however local laws do apply to websites hosted in Canada as well as to residents who host sites on servers in other jurisdictions. Canada has seen many cases regarding websites including defamatory material and material promoting hatred or contempt. Important Canadian cases that raise the question of control of the flow of content on the Internet include: The Karla Homolka case. In 1993, the judge presiding over the trial of Karla Homolka placed a Canadian publication ban on the proceedings. Through the use of the internet, internationally published materials were then made available in Canada, undermining the court order. McGill University, followed by a number of other universities, immediately took responsibility of the university law under law to control the reception of content within its own constituency because of its liability as an Internet


id: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf-0.md
category: reference
title: Eduard Pernkopf
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:03.438676+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-0
summary:
Eduard Pernkopf (24 November 1888 – 17 April 1955) was an Austrian professor of anatomy who later served as rector of the University of Vienna, his alma mater. He is best known for his seven-volume anatomical atlas, Topographische Anatomie des Menschen (translated as Atlas of Topographical and Applied Human Anatomy; often colloquially known as the Pernkopf Atlas or just Pernkopf), prepared by Pernkopf and four artists over a 20-year period. While it is considered a scientific and artistic masterpiece, with many of its color plates reprinted in other publications and textbooks, it has been in recent years found that Pernkopf and the artists working for him, all of them ardent Nazis, used executed political prisoners as their subjects. == Early life == Pernkopf was born in 1888 in the Lower Austria village of Rappottenstein. The youngest of three sons, he seemed to be considering a career in music upon his completion of the Gymnasium in Horn. However, the death of his father, the village's doctor, in 1903 led him to pursue medicine instead, as his father's death caused the family considerable hardship that a career as a physician was more likely to reverse. He began his studies at the University


id: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf-1.md
category: reference
title: Eduard Pernkopf
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:03.438676+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-0
summary:
== Atlas == At the time he was first hired as Hochstetter's assistant, he began putting together an informal dissection manual for students. He kept expanding it, and it became popular with the rest of the university instructors and the Austrian medical community. As he attained his full professorship he was offered a contract to expand it into a publishable book, and he eagerly accepted. He was to deliver three volumes. Pernkopf began his atlas in 1933. He worked 18-hour days dissecting corpses, teaching classes and discharging his administrative responsibilities while a team of artists created the images that would eventually be in the atlas. His days began at 5 a.m., when he left notes in shorthand for his wife to type. These became the descriptive text that accompanied the images. At the beginning four artists—Erich Lepier, Ludwig Schrott, Karl Endtresser and Franz Batke—worked with Pernkopf. Lepier, Pernkopf's first hire, had largely learned on his own after having to cut short his architectural studies at what is now Vienna University of Technology due to the death of his father, a circumstance similar to that which had shaped Pernkopf's career choice. The other three all had some degree of formal training.


id: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf-2.md
category: reference
title: Eduard Pernkopf
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:03.438676+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-0
summary:
== Later life == In 1943, Pernkopf reached the pinnacle of the academic career ladder when he was named the University of Vienna's rector, its highest official. He continued to serve in those positions until World War II ended two years later, with the surrender of Germany, including Austria. His fortunes changed radically as a result. Two days after the surrender, he was dismissed from his post as head of the university's anatomical institute. Fearing that he might suffer legal or political repercussions for his previous Nazi party membership and prewar actions, he went on what he claimed was a vacation to Strobl in the state of Salzburg. However, he was arrested by American military authorities in August 1945, and by May 1946 he had been terminated from all his remaining positions with the university. He was held at the Allied prisoner of war (POW) camp in Glasenbach for three years. Although he was ultimately never charged with any crimes, he was required to do regular hard labor throughout his imprisonment. The experience left him drained and exhausted when he returned to Vienna after his release, hoping to continue his work on the atlas. His former facilities at the university


id: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf-3.md
category: reference
title: Eduard Pernkopf
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Pernkopf
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:03.438676+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: eduard-pernkopf-20260505-0
summary:
== Controversial legacy and debate over continued use == In 1995, Pernkopf and his atlas became the focus of a controversy in scientific ethics, following the publication of a paper by German researcher Edzard Ernst, who had recently been chair of rehabilitative medicine at the University of Vienna, which outlined the Nazi takeover of the university and highlighted the human experimentation that followed, including the role of Pernkopf himself. The medical school at the university, which had formerly had difficulty finding cadavers for dissection, received a regular supply after 1933. In 1996, Howard Israel, an oral surgeon at Columbia University, revealed that the subject bodies may have in some cases been those of executed political prisoners, LGBT men and women, Roma, and Jews. Sabine Hildebrandt, a Michigan anatomy professor and German native who has researched Pernkopf and other Nazi-era anatomists, has suggested that 26% of the bodies supplied to the university were execution victims. Looking at older copies in the archives, Israel discovered various Nazi symbols in the artists' signatures, which had been removed from more widely circulated later versions. Since then, physicians have discussed whether it is ethical to use the atlas, as it resulted from Nazi medical research.


id: philosophy-technology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_&_Technology-0.md
category: reference
title: Philosophy & Technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_&_Technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:04.657750+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: philosophy-technology-20260505-0
summary:
Philosophy & Technology is a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal covering philosophy of technology. It is published by Springer Science+Business Media and the editor-in-chief is Luciano Floridi (University of Oxford). Besides regular issues, the journal publishes occasional special issues and topical collections on particular philosophical topics. == Abstracting and indexing == The journal is abstracted and indexed in EBSCO databases, PhilPapers, ProQuest databases, and Scopus. == References == == External links == Official website


id: anil-potti-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti-0.md
category: reference
title: Anil Potti
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:05.826585+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: anil-potti-20260505-0
summary:
Anil Potti is a physician and former Duke University associate professor and cancer researcher, focusing on oncogenomics. He, along with Joseph Nevins, are at the center of a research fabrication scandal at Duke University. On 9 November 2015, the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) found that Potti had engaged in research misconduct. According to Potti's voluntary settlement agreement with ORI, Potti can continue to perform research with the requirement of supervision until year 2020, while he "neither admits nor denies ORI's findings of research misconduct." As of 2024, Potti, employed at the Cancer Center of North Dakota, had 11 of his research publications retracted, one publication received an expression of concern, and two others had been corrected. == Biography == Anil Potti graduated from Christian Medical College, Vellore, India in 1995. He finished an internship in Internal Medicine at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine in 1999. In 2006 Potti completed training in hematology and oncology at Duke University. Potti resigned from Duke in 2010, following the discovery of flaws in the genomics research conducted at Duke and allegations of embellishments in his resume, assuming responsibility for the anomalies in the scientific research. Following his resignation from Duke,


id: anil-potti-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti-1.md
category: reference
title: Anil Potti
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:05.826585+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: anil-potti-20260505-0
summary:
== Aftermath == Healthcare companies cut ties with Potti after evidence surfaced that Potti had fabricated awards on his resume. The American Cancer Society stopped payments of a five-year grant which totalled $729,000 as Potti had received the grant based on his credentials. Duke University later reimbursed the American Cancer Society for the full amount of the grant. Three clinical trials at Duke University Medical Center based on Potti's research came under scrutiny in 2009 and were temporarily suspended, then were permanently stopped in 2010. The United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) reviewed one of the studies in 2009, several years after its initiation, and concluded that the study would require an Investigational New Drug application, which had not been submitted. An FDA audit in 2011 further showed that an Investigational Device Exemption application had not been filed, but otherwise found "no significant deficiencies" in Duke's IRB conduct. Potti's medical licence record with the North Carolina Medical Board shows eleven settlements, each of at least $75,000, for incidents that appear to be related to these trials. In late 2011, the North Carolina Medical Board reprimanded Potti but he retains his medical licence. The board issued its disciplinary action against


id: anil-potti-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti-2.md
category: reference
title: Anil Potti
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:05.826585+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: anil-potti-20260505-0
summary:
"A Genomic Approach to Colon Cancer Risk Stratification Yields Biologic Insights into Therapeutic Opportunities" This article was published by PNAS. Gene expressions could allow the researchers to see if tumours are uniform throughout. This could also be used with Colon Cancer. They also can help predict how a person will respond to treatment and improve prognosis. The authors said they wanted to retract this article because "…we have been unable to reproduce certain key experiments described in the paper regarding validation and use of the colon cancer prognostic signature. This includes the validation performed with dataset E-MEXP-1224, as reported in Fig. 2A, as well as the generation of prognostic scores for colon cancer cell lines, as reported in Fig. 4…" "Validation of Gene Signatures that Predict the Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy" This article was published in Lancet Oncology. This study involved patients with oestrogen-receptor-negative breast cancer. The researchers wanted to confirm their previous studies of gene-expression signatures in predicting the effects of chemotherapeutic drugs. The article was retracted because the validity of the results was beginning to be questioned and because predictions were made off of the Nature Medicine article that was retracted. "Genomic Signatures to Guide


id: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs-0.md
category: reference
title: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:07.269000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-0
summary:
The Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs is an international organization that brings together scholars and public figures to work toward reducing the danger of armed conflict and to seek solutions to global security threats. It was founded in 1957 by Joseph Rotblat and Bertrand Russell in Pugwash, Nova Scotia, Canada, following the release of the Russell–Einstein Manifesto in 1955. Rotblat and the Pugwash Conference jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995 for their efforts on nuclear disarmament. International Student/Young Pugwash groups have existed since founder Cyrus Eaton's death in 1979. == Origin of the Pugwash Conferences == The Russell–Einstein Manifesto, released July 9, 1955, called for a conference for scientists to assess the dangers of weapons of mass destruction (then only considered to be nuclear weapons). Cyrus Eaton, an industrialist and philanthropist, offered on July 13 to finance and host the conference in the town of his birth, Pugwash, Nova Scotia. This was not taken up at the time because a meeting was planned for India, at the invitation of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. With the outbreak of the Suez Crisis the Indian conference was postponed. Aristotle Onassis offered to finance a meeting in Monaco instead, but


id: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs-1.md
category: reference
title: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:07.269000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-0
summary:
== Contributions to international security == Pugwash's first fifteen years coincided with the Berlin Crisis, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, and the Vietnam War. Pugwash played a useful role in opening communication channels during a time of otherwise-strained official and unofficial relations. In 1965, addressing a meeting at UNESCO House in Paris, Robert Oppenheimer gave his tribute to Albert Einstein for the Pugwash movement. Oppenheimer confidently asserted: "I know it to be true that it [averting the disaster of the arms race] had an essential part to play in the Treaty of Moscow, the limited test-ban treaty, which is a tentative, but to me very precious, declaration that reason might still prevail." It provided background work to the Partial Test Ban Treaty (1963), the Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968), the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (1972), the Biological Weapons Convention (1972), and the Chemical Weapons Convention (1993). Former US Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara has credited a backchannel Pugwash initiative (code named PENNSYLVANIA) with laying the groundwork for the negotiations that ended the Vietnam War. Mikhail Gorbachev admitted the influence of the organisation on him when he was leader of the Soviet Union. In addition, Pugwash has been credited


id: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs-2.md
category: reference
title: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugwash_Conferences_on_Science_and_World_Affairs
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:07.269000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: pugwash-conferences-on-science-and-world-affairs-20260505-0
summary:
Earl (Bertrand) Russell, 1950 Nobel Prize in Literature, a founder of the movement, was its natural head in its initial years. The formal office of the presidency was established at the Quinquennial Conference in Ronneby, in 1967. The president's role was to "preside over the Annual Pugwash Conferences and, in addition, between Conferences, to offer his counsel and advice to the members of the Continuing Committee and the Secretary-General, and thereby assist them in the execution of the activities of the Movement." Sir John Cockcroft, joint recipient of the 1951 Nobel Prize in Physics for pioneering work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles, was elected as the first president in 1967, though he died suddenly ten days later. Lord Florey, who shared the 1945 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for extraction of penicillin, was then invited to become president, though he also died within weeks. At that point the Continuing Committee decided to have a rotating presidency for a term of one year, to have that office held by a distinguished person in the country where the annual conference would be held each year. Francis Perrin (1968), had worked with Frederic Joliot's team to


id: student-pugwash-usa-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_Pugwash_USA-0.md
category: reference
title: Student Pugwash USA
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_Pugwash_USA
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:08.454732+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: student-pugwash-usa-20260505-0
summary:
Student Pugwash USA is the U.S. affiliate of International Student/Young Pugwash, and the US student affiliate of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, recipients of the 1995 Nobel Peace Prize. As an educational nonprofit organization, SPUSA does not adopt advocacy positions on policy or political issues or candidates, but seeks to foment student leadership and incubate groups of committed activists who go on to take action separate from SPUSA activities. The organization posits that, in order to create effective social change, students must first understand the issues at stake, then contemplate their ethical and moral responsibility to themselves and to society as a whole. Its stated purpose is not to advance a particular ethical viewpoint regarding scientific and technological issues, but rather to encourage students to consider ethics when thinking about the role of science and technology in society. SPUSA is open to all viewpoints and approaches to these discussions, but with a firm commitment to accurate science and factual information. For example, early SPUSA panel debates were held regarding the causes of climate change, before there was consensus in the scientific community; afterwards, that debate was considered resolved and no longer appropriate, but events continue discussing which


id: scott-reuben-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Reuben-0.md
category: reference
title: Scott Reuben
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Reuben
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:09.719687+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scott-reuben-20260505-0
summary:
Scott S. Reuben (born 1958) is an American anesthesiologist who falsified data heralding the benefits of the Pfizer pain medication Celebrex while downplaying its negative side effects. He was Professor of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine at Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts and chief of acute pain at Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Massachusetts from February 1991 until 2009 when he was sentenced to prison for healthcare fraud. Reuben was considered to be a prolific and influential researcher in pain management, and his purported findings altered the way millions of patients are treated for pain during and after orthopedic surgeries. Reuben has now admitted that he never conducted any of the clinical trials on which his conclusions were based "in what may be considered the longest-running and widest-ranging cases of academic fraud." Scientific American has called Reuben the medical equivalent of Bernie Madoff, the former NASDAQ chairman who was convicted of orchestrating a $65-billion Ponzi scheme. == Background == Reuben was educated at Columbia University. He graduated from medical school at the State University of New York at Buffalo in 1985 and undertook his anesthesiology residency at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City. Reuben fell under suspicion when Baystate


id: right-to-reality-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_reality-0.md
category: reference
title: Right to reality
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_reality
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:10.893465+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: right-to-reality-20260505-0
summary:
The right to reality refers to the right to consume organic content as opposed to content created by artificial intelligence, or more broadly speaking, to experience life and the world as they are, not through simulations and simulacra. It was once defined as "the latest in a series of novel rights set forth in response to a sizable jump in technology". A right to reality can also refer to the right to consume real news in opposition to fake news, as well as the right to receive information when in a news desert. == Proposed definitions == A 2024 article by Digital Frontier describes Newcastle University Law scholar Lilian Edwards as an early proponent of the right to reality, an idea she came across during a 2019 lecture at the Turing Institute, when an attendee asked her if the younger generation were "getting easier with the idea of unreality" while not "knowing what canonical reality is", and that made her reflect on the possibility of "reality" being a human right, much like privacy or freedom of speech. In an article for a 2025 special edition of Stanford Social Innovation Review Brasil, Brazilian proponent Eduardo Saron defined the right to reality


id: right-to-reality-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_reality-1.md
category: reference
title: Right to reality
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_reality
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:10.893465+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: right-to-reality-20260505-0
summary:
== Applications == Frazier advocated in his article for a system of classification of internet content (similar to nutrition labels) that would inform users of the degree to which AI has or has not been used to create said content while also allowing users to even filter content according to their own preferences. He also wrote that the application of a right to reality "would not require the removal of any content nor discrimination based on the viewpoints asserted by that content" but would be "a disclosure requirement". He mentioned Lawrence Lessig's anticipation of the rise of AI-detection tools and that those would become prevalent in the media market. Edwards supports the labeling of AI-generated content with methods such as watermarkings as proposed by the C2PA and the European Union's AI Act. However, Edwards herself and Fazier admit it may not be enough. Speaking to Digital Frontier, Frazier said that "even the labelling of a right can have a big impact on the ability of people to advocate for the provision of that right" and compared the advocacy for it to citizens' assemblies. Saron concedes both that there's no such thing as an "absolute reality", since according to him reality


id: robot-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Robot ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:12.612544+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: robot-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
Robot ethics, sometimes known as "roboethics", concerns ethical problems that occur with robots, such as whether robots pose a threat to humans in the long or short run, whether some uses of robots are problematic (such as in healthcare or as "killer robots" in war), and how robots should be designed such that they act "ethically" (this last concern is also called machine ethics). Alternatively, roboethics refers specifically to the ethics of human behavior towards robots, as robots become increasingly advanced. Robot ethics is a sub-field of the ethics of technology. It is closely related to legal and socio-economic concerns. Serious academic discussions about robot ethics started around 2000, and involve several disciplines, mainly robotics, computer science, artificial intelligence, philosophy, ethics, theology, biology, physiology, cognitive science, neurosciences, law, sociology, psychology, and industrial design. == History and events == One of the first publications directly addressing and setting the foundation for robot ethics was "Runaround", a science fiction short story written by Isaac Asimov in 1942, which featured his well-known Three Laws of Robotics. These three laws were continuously altered by Asimov, and a fourth – or "zeroth" – law was eventually added to precede the first three, in the context


id: robot-ethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Robot ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:12.612544+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: robot-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
== Killer robots == Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), often called "killer robots", are theoretically able to target and fire without human supervision or interference. In 2014, the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) held two meetings. The first was the Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. This meeting was about the special mandate on LAWS and intrigued intense discussion. National delegations and many non-governmental organizations(NGOs) expressed their opinions on the matter. Numerous NGOs and certain states such as Pakistan and Cuba are calling for a preventive prohibition of LAWS. They proposed opinions based on deontological and consequentialist reasoning. On the deontological side, certain philosophers such as Peter Asaro and Robert Sparrow, most NGOs, and the Vatican argue that granting too much rights to machine violates human dignity, and that people have the "right not to be killed by a machine". To support their standpoint, they repeatedly cite the Martens Clause. At the end of the meeting, the most important consequentialist objection was that LAWS wouldn't be able to respect international humanitarian law (IHL), as believed by NGOs, many researchers, and several states (Pakistan, Austria, Egypt, Mexico). According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), "there is


id: robot-ethics-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics-2.md
category: reference
title: Robot ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:12.612544+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: robot-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
== Empirical research == There is mixed evidence as to whether people judge robot behavior similarly to humans or not. Some evidence indicates that people view bad behavior negatively and good behavior positively regardless of whether the agent of the behavior is a human or a robot; however, robots receive less credit for good behavior and more blame for bad behavior. Other evidence suggests that malevolent behavior by robots is seen as more morally wrong than benevolent behavior is seen as morally right; malevolent robot behavior is seen as more intentional than benevolent behavior. In general, people's moral judgments of both robots and humans are based on the same justifications and concepts but people have different moral expectations when judging humans and robots. Research has also found that when people try to interpret and understand how robots decide to behave in a particular way, they may see robots as using rules of thumb (advance the self, do what is right, advance others, do what is logical, and do what is normal). == See also == Ethics of artificial intelligence Plug & Pray – 2010 film by Jens Schanze Union of Concerned Scientists – U.S.-based nonprofit organization == References == ==


id: scientists-against-nuclear-arms-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_against_Nuclear_Arms-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientists against Nuclear Arms
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_against_Nuclear_Arms
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:13.895006+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientists-against-nuclear-arms-20260505-0
summary:
Scientists against Nuclear Arms (SANA) was formed in 1981 by the physicist and peace activist Mike Pentz together with Steven Rose, both academics at the Open University, to oppose nuclear arms. SANA was one of the forerunner organisations of Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR). == See also == Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament Anti-nuclear movement Anti-war European Nuclear Disarmament Independent Nuclear Disarmament Election Committee International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons Nuclear disarmament Nuclear-Free Future Award Nuclear Information Service Nuclear proliferation Peace movement == References ==


id: scientists-for-global-responsibility-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_for_Global_Responsibility-0.md
category: reference
title: Scientists for Global Responsibility
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_for_Global_Responsibility
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:15.068729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: scientists-for-global-responsibility-20260505-0
summary:
Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) in the United Kingdom promotes the ethical practice and use of science, design and technology. SGR is affiliated to the International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility (INES). It is an independent UK-based membership organisation of hundreds of natural scientists, social scientists, engineers, IT professionals and architects. In 2017 its partner organization ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons) won the Nobel Peace Prize. ICAN have promoted a Kurzgesagt YouTube video endorsed by the International Committee of the Red Cross and Crescent (ICRC) showing the consequences of a single atomic weapon exploded over a city. SGR's work is focused on four main issues: security and disarmament; climate change and energy, including nuclear power; who controls science and technology?; emerging technologies. The main areas of concern are arms and arms control, including military involvement in UK universities; effect of excessive greenhouse gas emissions on climate; the nature of war and reducing barbarity; topsoil and water shortages resulting from modern agricultural methods; depletion of species of fish due to over-fishing; continual spread of nuclear weapons, and reduction of occurrence of serious nuclear accidents. In 2019 SGR launched the journal Responsible Science. SGR evaluates the risk


id: kristin-shrader-frechette-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette-0.md
category: reference
title: Kristin Shrader-Frechette
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristin_Shrader-Frechette
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:20.724658+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: kristin-shrader-frechette-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: stefan-lorenz-sorgner-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner-0.md
category: reference
title: Stefan Lorenz Sorgner
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Lorenz_Sorgner
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:22.001433+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: stefan-lorenz-sorgner-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: space-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Space ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:23.169627+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: space-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: space-ethics-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics-1.md
category: reference
title: Space ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:23.169627+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: space-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
=== 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


id: techno-progressivism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism-0.md
category: reference
title: Techno-progressivism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techno-progressivism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:24.466424+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: techno-progressivism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: technocriticism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism-0.md
category: reference
title: Technocriticism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocriticism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:25.656529+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: technocriticism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: technorealism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism-0.md
category: reference
title: Technorealism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technorealism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:26.878607+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: technorealism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: ten-commandments-of-computer-ethics-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics-0.md
category: reference
title: Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments_of_Computer_Ethics
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:28.199425+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: ten-commandments-of-computer-ethics-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-0.md
category: reference
title: Ethics of terraforming
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-1.md
category: reference
title: Ethics of terraforming
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming-2.md
category: reference
title: Ethics of terraforming
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics_of_terraforming
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:29.448939+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: ethics-of-terraforming-20260505-0
summary:
== 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


id: tescreal-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-0.md
category: reference
title: TESCREAL
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:30.691934+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tescreal-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: tescreal-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL-1.md
category: reference
title: TESCREAL
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TESCREAL
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:30.691934+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: tescreal-20260505-0
summary:
=== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-0.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: transhumanism-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-1.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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.


id: transhumanism-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-2.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: transhumanism-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-3.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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


id: transhumanism-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-4.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
=== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-5.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-6.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-7
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-7.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
=== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-8
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-8.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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.


id: transhumanism-20260505-9
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-9.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
=== 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


id: transhumanism-20260505-10
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-10.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
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")


id: transhumanism-20260505-11
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism-11.md
category: reference
title: Transhumanism
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:24:32.037729+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: transhumanism-20260505-0
summary:
== 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


