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.
It’s hard to argue with those great words, and yet it’s amazing that when they were penned—in 1776, by Thomas Jefferson—the ideas they expressed were not at all considered self-evident by many of the world’s leading intellectuals nor by most of the monarchs they served.
The concepts so poetically stated in the Declaration of Independence were indeed revolutionary. Building on Enlightenment foundations laid by Voltaire, Rousseau, Condorcet, and others, they put in motion a liberal democratic wave that has slowly but inexorably carried around the world, freeing millions and making lives incomparably better.
Today, we Freethinkers might quibble with the choice of the word ‘Creator’ in the preamble, although it’s nearly certain that what Jefferson intended by that is at most a vague deistic Creator, and more likely a naturalistic creative phenomenon. Definitely he did not have in mind the popular theistic Gods of then and now who give clear instructions and who regularly intervene in the affairs of the world. He and most of his close associates were far too learned to be literal believers in Scripture.
Some might also criticize Jefferson and other signers of the Declaration for asserting that “all men are created equal” when he and many of them owned human slaves—not to mention the fact that women would not be given the right to vote for nearly another century and a half—but in the context of their time and place, what they accomplished was at once unlikely, remarkable, and admirably progressive.
As Jefferson and the founders of the American experiment built upon the Enlightenment begun in Europe, so today we at the IEET along with like-minded people around the world hope to use the solid structure of democratic liberalism as a base for further establishment of technoprogressive ideals and attainments.
Toward that end we have recently revised and expanded the “Purpose” page on this site, to explain our intentions and clarify our objectives. Here is a sample of what’s been added:
As technoprogressives, we want to see all sentient beings protected in their rights for self-augmentation, enhancement, or modification, and we want everyone to have fair and equal access to such treatments. However, we believe those technologies must be tested for safety and efficacy, and made universally accessible. Their consequences for society will be profound, and need to be thoroughly considered.
Similarly, we affirm the possibility of a bountiful technological future. But we believe robust efforts are required to insure that the path of technological development is safe, sustainable, and offers abundance for all.
We desire to live in a world where peace and security are considered a given everywhere around the globe. Thus, we encourage activism that reaches across ethnic, cultural, and geographic lines, especially when those initiatives involve transnational cooperation. We strongly support the use of emerging technologies to extend human capacities for knowledge, for understanding, for communication, and for wise decision-making.
Ultimately we want to see the enforcement of international law and human rights agreements, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, promising fundamental freedoms, health, welfare, and education for all. We also want to see an extension of international human rights to include the rights to bodily autonomy, reproductive choice, and cognitive liberty for all persons. We place great value on a healthy biosphere, realized through a combination of wise democratic action and the responsible deployment of powerful new technologies. We favor expanded, enlightened definitions of personhood, to take in all sentient beings, whether human in origin or not. We look forward to increased equality of opportunity, decreased suffering, and flourishing diversity in human and posthuman development.
We encourage you to carefully read what we’ve written and then give us your thoughtful feedback. It’s not a true and full Technoprogressive Manifesto yet, but we think it’s a step in that direction.
I daresay that many do not consider such unalienable rights to be self-evident even now. Tuning in to the talk radio medium (which millions do daily) would indicate so, as would noting the results of popular polls on the subject matter of the Bill of Rights.
I would assert that assuming that learnedeness in the 1700’s translates to not having in mind the theistic God of the time is a stretch. After all, less than a hundred years earlier, Sir Isaac Newton was professing that his math and science were to clarify and glorify his god’s works (as I understand it). That would be the God of Abraham, which Jews, Christians and Moslems of this day ostensibly all revere.
However, regardless of what Jefferson’s beliefs may or may not have been, the language of the Declaration makes a clear distinction between “Nature” and “God”. Even though I’ve read the Declaration of Independence several times before, it was only just now that I really noticed the actual opening of the Declaration. The first paragraph, says “...separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them”. That seems to suggest that “God” is subordinate to “Nature” and that “God”‘s laws are distinct from those of Nature. That’s a powerful distinction, especially in light of the ongoing struggle to maintain the separateness between state and church. Do you read it the same way?
Your statement of Purpose is a bold assertion. Many (myself not included) would not find the intentions and objectives you state to be ethical. Therefore, while IEET’s goals are clearly related to emerging technologies and I applaud your efforts, you / we may have work to do make this assertion a consensus ethic, if that is your wish. Otherwise we face an “I’m right. You’re wrong.” scenario that has been plaguing mankind since (as far as I can tell) its inception.
I believe that even “abundance for all” as a goal, while it is my vision as well, is not a sentiment held by a powerful many and again, there is much work to be done for this to be a truly dominant meme.
My comments notwithstanding, I applaud and support your efforts.