Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view









Personhood Beyond the Human Conference whats new at ieet
Political Science – A Costly Misnomer

End of Eating Food

To See The Future Of Technology, Look At The People Using It For Crime

How the Catholic Bishops Outsmarted Washington Voters

Apple Pie May Be American, But Apple Computer Isn’t - Not Anymore

Backing into Eden: Chapter 1 &2 – We are Responsible / The Beasts of the Field

Futurist Jamais Cascio envisions a sustainable, resilient world

What’s the Rational Choice? Risk, Values and the Politics of Geoengineering

Prison Industrial Complex in America

Engineering the Future: Geoengineering


ieet books

eGods: Faith versus Fantasy in Computer Gaming
Author
by William Sims Bainbridge


comments

SHaGGGz on 'Political Science – A Costly Misnomer' (May 25, 2013)

Peter Wicks on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 25, 2013)

CygnusX1 on 'Apple Pie May Be American, But Apple Computer Isn't - Not Anymore' (May 25, 2013)

Intomorrow on 'How the Catholic Bishops Outsmarted Washington Voters' (May 24, 2013)

Intomorrow on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 24, 2013)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Life in the 2040s: nanofactories, flying cars, household robots, more
by Dick Pelletier
Apr 30, 2013
(6527) Hits
(1) Comments

Ten Responses to the Technological Unemployment Problem
by Jon Perry
May 1, 2013
(5595) Hits
(2) Comments

Organ, tissue replacement could end aging by mid-2020s
by Dick Pelletier
May 14, 2013
(3423) Hits
(1) Comments

Noam Chomsky on Libertarians
Andy80o
Apr 27, 2013
(3243) Hits
(15) Comments

Radical life extension: living a 1,000 year lifespan
by Dick Pelletier
May 7, 2013
(2882) Hits
(0) Comments

Imagine No Religion. On Facebook.
by Valerie Tarico
May 4, 2013
(2814) Hits
(150) Comments



IEET > Security > Biosecurity > Eco-gov > Military > Resilience > Rights > FreeThought > Personhood > PostGender > Economic > ReproRights > Life > Access > Enablement > Innovation > Health > Vision > Technoprogressivism > Staff > J. Hughes > Mike Treder

Print Email permalink (3) Comments (2693) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


Toward a Technoprogressive Manifesto


Mike Treder
Mike Treder
Ethical Technology

Posted: May 30, 2009

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.


Mike Treder is a former Managing Director of the IEET.
Print Email permalink (3) Comments (2694) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


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.





We’re thinking in the right direction.  I think there also needs to be an emphasis on self-augmentation as a means to become more human.  That being said we need to define humanness.  Ultimately humanness is about relation and about revealing to all our highest and best nature.  In so far as augmentation does enhance human capacities for knowledge, understanding, communication, and wise decision-making then we will certainly be able to utilize the ancient documents to our side.  However, we must be careful not to become isolationist megalomaniacs.





“it’s nearly certain that what Jefferson intended by that is at most a vague deistic Creator, and more likely a naturalistic creative phenomenon. “

I’m not so sure about that. After all, Jefferson wrote:

“When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of *** nature’s God *** entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

In my opinion, the expression “nature’s God” is inconsistent with the notion of a “naturalistic creative phenomenon.” In other words, nature < > God.

Though you’re correct that he was not a Christian, but rather a deist, he also wrote “I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the Universe, in it’s [sic] parts general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of it’s [sic] composition. . . it is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is . . . a fabricator of all things.”





YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Evil Genes Part 1

Previous entry: The Swans are Black, not Invisible

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | AFRICAN FUTURES PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
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