Over the next two or three decades, our world will change dramatically and in many different ways: we should expect political, economic, social, technological, and environmental uplifts and quite possibly revolutions. Understanding where we’ve come from, where we might go—and what our choices could be—is a first step toward taking active control over our lives and the world in which we live.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
We can hold conference calls with colleagues from all over, and do it basically for free. Tiny videocams built into laptop computers—that are themselves millions of times more powerful than the computers used to fly men to the moon in the 1960s—allow real-time visual meetups, saving time and money, making business run better and progress move faster. Still, no matter how far we have come, in-person meetings are better than data-mediated connections.
We are on the brink of technological breakthroughs that could augment our mental powers beyond recognition. It will soon be possible to boost human brainpower with electronic “plug-ins” or even by genetic enhancement. What will this mean for the future of humanity?
[May contain spoilers for various movies or TV shows.] It is important to understand how issues such as cryonics are presented in the popular media, so as to gauge public perception of them and understand how to correct common misconceptions and appeal to popular values as much as possible. Unfortunately, in the case of cryonics a large portion of the portrayals in television and movies are negative and are rife with those misconceptions.
The current IEET reader poll asks: If you could be any age you desired, for as long as you chose, would you opt for it? To answer, we may have to consider whether we most value quantity, quality, or meaning in life.
A stone age hunter-gatherer, coming upon a conflict where danger was present, didn’t have time to carefully analyze the situation, look for nuances, or seek points of commonality between combatants. Instead, driven by adrenalin, heart pumping, thoughts racing, pupils dilated—within seconds a choice was made: pick a side and join the fray, or turn and run away.
We should welcome with open arms the rich possibilities of technologically enhancing our bodies. Just so long as we don’t all end up looking, and thinking, and acting the same.
A mindclone is a software version of your mind. He or she is all of your thoughts, recollections, feelings, beliefs, attitudes and values, and is experiencing reality from the standpoint of whatever machine their mindware is running on. Mindclones are mindfiles being used and updated by mindware that has been set to be a functionally equivalent replica of one’s mind. A mindclone is your software-based alter ego, doppelganger, or mental twin. If your body died, but you had a mindclone, you would not feel that you personally died, although the body would be missed more sorely than amputees miss their limbs.
“If it was possible to become free of negative emotions by a riskless implementation of an electrode—without impairing intelligence and the critical mind—I would be the first patient.” - The Dalai Lama
Traditionally, April 22—Earth Day—is a day devoted to making green accessible to all. It’s a day when each of us is invited to take small, individual steps toward reducing our carbon footprints, limiting our waste, or restoring the environment. See how easy it is—and how fun—to do your part to save the planet? Whether Earth Day does any good, however, is a subject of some real debate.
In the movie Toy Story, did you think that the neighbor kid, Sid—the one that hacked different toys together, blew them up, and generally played with them “inappropriately”—was the bad guy? You’re wrong.
One plank of a technoprogressive platform is “Ensuring Universal Access to Enabling Technologies.” Ultimately, we want all responsible sentient beings (excluding children, criminals, the insane, etc.) to have equal and uninhibited access to advanced tech that might enable radical life extension, brain augmentation, sensory expansion, and other “wonders” not yet even contemplated.
[Warning: Spoiler alert.] Many things have been said about the recent film adaptation of the Watchmen graphic novel series, particularly the ways in which it has come to redefine the superhero genre. While it’s certainly a brave film that’s succeeded in pushing a number of boundaries, I believe its true strength lies in its various philosophical themes and social commentary. In particular, I was drawn to the discussions of technological power and the innovative ways in which this commentary was represented on the screen.
As previously noted, David Brin will be guest blogging on Sentient Developments this week. The first topic that David will be addressing is one that is near and dear to both of our hearts: biological uplift. To get you primed for this discussion I can recommend a number of articles, books and resources.
Find it hard to motivate yourself to exercise or read Joyce’s Ulysses? What if you could toggle your brain chip to get more pleasure from virtuous, good-for-you activities than you do from watching television and goofing off on Facebook? IEET contributor Chris Harris points out that we need to start asking that question already.
(With Jeanann Boyce) Legal institutions must try to avoid getting blinded by the hype and inappropriately sweeping in—and perhaps over-regulating—of both the novel and the mundane applications of this still relatively young technology. As nanotechnology progresses, and both humans and nonhumans receive therapeutic benefits and enhancements, it will be up to the policy makers, courts, and legal profession to delineate societal guidelines for regulation and privacy, as well as to determine individual culpability and responsibility.
[Warning: contains spoilers for the Battlestar Galactica episode Daybreak, Part 1] When forced to choose between who should live and who should die, how should one take into account the ages and potentials of the people involved?
[Warning: contains spoilers for the Battlestar Galactica episode Islanded in A Stream of Stars] In some instances, one should cling to hope and keep fighting even when that hope seems lost. At other times, it is necessary to accept defeat and loss, or abandon a goal towards which substantial resources have been dedicated. Distinguishing between these two situations is the challenging, yet crucial element.
[Warning: Contains spoilers for the Battlestar Galactica episode Someone to Watch Over Me] How should systems of punishment differ when indefinite lifespans are achieved, or when there are many copies of an individual? Does capital punishment become meaningless when you can download to a new body, or does it become an even harsher punishment if it is instead instituted more thoroughly as the deletion of all instances of an individual?
IEET Fellow Natasha Vita-More will be presenting at the “Stand-up for Human Rights” conference and event in Pozan, Poland. Her campaign, “Human Rights for Human Enhancement” reflects the right to enhance and the right not to be coerced to enhance. STAND-UP is the collaborative effort of One World Association and Poznan Academy of Fine Arts which focuses on human rights issue by using film, narrative, interactive media, and digital arts as a medium.
Something that’s always bothered me about traditional prostheses is the constant attempt to mimic normal human morphology. Artificial legs are supposed to look like real legs and artificial arms are supposed to look like real arms, right?
We are pleased to announce the release of “Human Enhancement”, edited by IEET Chair Nick Bostrom and Julian Savulescu, with contributions from many important leaders in bioethics, including Arthur Caplan and Peter Singer.
Julian Smith has penned an excellent overview of prosthetic technologies for New Scientist. Smith describes the current state-of-the-union as far as assistive devices goes and looks at the potential for these devices to not just mimic normal human functioning, but to surpass it as well.
IEET Blog |
email list |
newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.
Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT
06106 USA
Email: director @ ieet.org phone:
860-297-2376
IEET Blog