Bostrom - History of Transhumanist Thought

8/13/2019 Bostrom - History of Transhumanist Thought

1/30

AHISTORYOF TRANSHUMANISTTHOUGHT

NickBostrom

FacultyofPhilosophy,OxfordUniversitywww.nickbostrom.com

(2005)

[OriginallypublishedinJournalofEvolutionandTechnology Vol.14 Issue1 April2005;

reprinted(initspresentslightlyeditedform)inAcademicWritingAcrosstheDisciplines,eds.

MichaelRectenwald&LisaCarl(NewYork:PearsonLongman,2011)]

1.Culturalandphilosophicalantecedents

Thehumandesiretoacquirenewcapacitiesisasancientasourspeciesitself.Wehave

alwayssoughttoexpandtheboundariesofourexistence,beitsocially,geographically,or

mentally.Thereisatendencyinatleastsomeindividualsalwaystosearchforawayaround

everyobstacleandlimitationtohumanlifeandhappiness.

Ceremonialburialandpreservedfragmentsofreligiouswritingsshowthatprehistoric

humansweredisturbedbythedeathoflovedones.Althoughthebeliefinahereafterwas

common,thisdidnotprecludeeffortstoextendonesearthlylife.IntheSumerianEpicof

Gilgamesh(approx.1700B.C.),akingsetsoutonaquestforimmortality.Gilgameshlearns

thatthereexistsanaturalmeansanherbthatgrowsatthebottomofthesea.1He

successfullyretrievestheplant,butasnakestealsitfromhimbeforehecaneatit.Inlater

times,explorerssoughttheFountainofYouth,alchemistslaboredtoconcocttheElixirof

Life,andvariousschoolsofesotericTaoisminChinastroveforphysicalimmortalitybyway

ofcontroloverorharmonywiththeforcesofnature.Theboundarybetweenmythosand

science,betweenmagicandtechnology,wasblurry,andalmostallconceivablemeanstothe

preservationoflifewereattemptedbysomebodyorother.Yetwhileexplorersmademany

interestingdiscoveriesandalchemistsinventedsomeusefulthings,suchasnewdyesand

improvementsinmetallurgy,thegoaloflifeextensionprovedelusive.

Thequesttotranscendournaturalconfineshaslongbeenviewedwithambivalence,however.Reiningitinistheconceptofhubris:thatsomeambitionsareofflimitsandwill

backfireifpursued.TheancientGreeksexhibitedthisambivalenceintheirmythology.

PrometheusstolefirefromZeusandgaveittohumans,therebypermanentlyimprovingthe

humancondition.YetforthisacthewasseverelypunishedbyZeus.Thegodsarerepeatedly

1(Mitchell2004).

1
http://www.nickbostrom.com/http://www.nickbostrom.com/


2/30

challenged,quitesuccessfully,byDaedalus,thecleverengineerandartist,whousesnon

magicalmeanstoextendhumancapabilities.Intheend,disasterensueswhenhissonIcarus

ignorespaternalwarningsandfliestooclosetothesun,causingthewaxinhiswingsto

melt.

MedievalChristiansheldsimilarlyconflictedviewsaboutthepursuitsofthealchemists,

whowereattemptingtotransmutesubstances,createhomunculiintesttubes,andinventa

panacea.Somescholastics,followingtheantiexperimentalistteachingsofAugustine,

believedthatalchemywasanungodlyactivity.Therewereallegationsthatitinvolvedthe

invocationofdaemonicpowers.Butothertheologians,suchasAlbertusMagnusand

ThomasAquinas,defendedthepractice.2

TheotherworldlinessandstalescholasticphilosophythatdominatedEuropeduringthe

MiddleAgesgavewaytoarenewedintellectualvigorintheRenaissance.Thehumanbeing

andthenaturalworldagainbecamelegitimateobjectsofstudy.Renaissancehumanism

encouragedpeopletorelyontheirownobservationsandtheirownjudgmentratherthanto

deferineverymattertoreligiousauthorities.Renaissancehumanismalsocreatedtheidealof

thewellroundedperson,onewhoishighlydevelopedscientifically,morally,culturally,and

spiritually.AlandmarkoftheperiodisGiovanniPicodellaMirandolasOrationonthe

DignityofMan(1486),whichproclaimsthatmandoesnothaveareadymadeformandis

responsibleforshapinghimself:

Wehavemadeyouacreatureneitherofheavennorofearth,neithermortalnor

immortal,inorderthatyoumay,asthefreeandproudshaperofyourownbeing,fashionyourselfintheformyoumayprefer.Itwillbeinyourpowertodescendto

thelower,brutishformsoflife;youwillbeable,throughyourowndecision,torise

againtothesuperiororderswhoselifeisdivine.3

TheAgeofEnlightenmentisoftensaidtohavestartedwiththepublicationofFrancis

BaconsNovumOrganum,thenewtool(1620),whichproposesascientificmethodology

basedonempiricalinvestigationratherthanapriorireasoning.4Baconadvocatedthe

projectofeffectingallthingspossible,bywhichhemeantusingsciencetoachievemastery

overnatureinordertoimprovethelivingconditionofhumanbeings.TheheritagefromtheRenaissancecombineswiththeinfluenceofIsaacNewton,ThomasHobbes,JohnLocke,

ImmanuelKant,theMarquisdeCondorcet,andotherstoformthebasisforrational

2Seee.g.(Newman2004).3(PicodellaMirandola1956).4(Bacon1620).

2


3/30

humanism,whichemphasizesempiricalscienceandcriticalreasonratherthanrevelation

andreligiousauthorityaswaysoflearningaboutthenaturalworldandourplacewithinit

andofprovidingagroundingformorality.Transhumanismhasrootsinrationalhumanism.

Inthe18thand19thcenturieswecatchglimpsesoftheideathathumansthemselvescanbe

developedthroughtheapplicationofscience.Condorcetspeculatedaboutextendinghuman

lifespanbymeansofmedicalscience:

Woulditbeabsurdnowtosupposethattheimprovementofthehumanraceshould

beregardedascapableofunlimitedprogress?Thatatimewillcomewhendeath

wouldresultonlyfromextraordinaryaccidentsorthemoreandmoregradual

wearingoutofvitality,andthat,finally,thedurationoftheaverageintervalbetween

birthandwearingouthasitselfnospecificlimitwhatsoever?Nodoubtmanwillnot

becomeimmortal,butcannotthespanconstantlyincreasebetweenthemomenthe

beginstoliveandthetimewhennaturally,withoutillnessoraccident,hefindslifea

burden?5

BenjaminFranklinlongedwistfullyforsuspendedanimation,foreshadowingthecryonics

movement:

Iwishitwerepossible...toinventamethodofembalmingdrownedpersons,insuch

amannerthattheymightberecalledtolifeatanyperiod,howeverdistant;for

havingaveryardentdesiretoseeandobservethestateofAmericaahundredyears

hence,Ishouldprefertoanordinarydeath,beingimmersedwithafewfriendsinacaskofMadeira,untilthattime,thentoberecalledtolifebythesolarwarmthofmy

dearcountry!But...inallprobability,weliveinacenturytoolittleadvanced,andtoo

neartheinfancyofscience,toseesuchanartbroughtinourtimetoitsperfection.6

AfterthepublicationofDarwinsOriginofSpecies(1859),itbecameincreasinglyplausibleto

viewthecurrentversionofhumanitynotastheendpointofevolutionbutratherasanearly

phase.7Theriseofscientificphysicalismmightalsohavecontributedtothebeliefthat

technologymightwellimprovethehumanorganism.Forexample,asimplekindof

materialistviewwasboldlyproposedin1750bytheFrenchphysicianandmaterialistphilosopherJulienOffraydeLaMettrieinLHommeMachine,inwhichhearguedthatman

5(Condorcet1979).6(Franklinetal.1956),pp.2729.7(Darwin2003).

3


4/30

isbutananimal,oracollectionofspringswhichwindeachotherup.8Ifhumanbeingsare

constitutedofmatterobeyingsthesamelawsofphysicsthatoperateoutsideus,thenit

shouldinprinciplebepossibletolearntomanipulatehumannatureinthesamewaythatwe

manipulateexternalobjects.

TheEnlightenmentissaidtohaveexpiredasthevictimofitsownexcesses.Itgavewayto

Romanticismandtolatterdayreactionsagainsttheruleofinstrumentalreasonandthe

attempttorationallycontrolnature,suchascanbefoundinsomepostmodernistwritings,

theNewAgemovement,deepenvironmentalism,andpartsoftheantiglobalization

movement.However,theEnlightenmentslegacy,includingabeliefinthepowerofhuman

rationalityandscience,isstillanimportantshaperofmodernculture.Inhisfamous1784

essayWhatIsEnlightenment?,Kantsummeditupasfollows:

Enlightenmentismansleavinghisselfcausedimmaturity.Immaturityisthe

incapacitytouseonesownunderstandingwithouttheguidanceofanother.Such

immaturityisselfcausedifitscauseisnotlackofintelligence,butbylackof

determinationandcouragetouseonesintelligencewithoutbeingguidedby

another.Themottoofenlightenmentistherefore:Sapereaude!Havecouragetouse

yourownintelligence!9

ItmightbethoughtthatamajorinspirationfortranshumanismwasFriedrichNietzsche,

famousforhisdoctrineofderbermensch:

Iteachyoutheoverman.Manissomethingthatshallbeovercome.Whathaveyoudonetoovercomehim?Allbeingssofarhavecreatedsomethingbeyondthemselves;

anddoyouwanttobetheebbofthisgreatfloodandevengobacktothebeasts

ratherthanovercomeman?10

WhatNietzschehadinmind,however,wasnottechnologicaltransformationbutakindof

soaringpersonalgrowthandculturalrefinementinexceptionalindividuals(whohethought

wouldhavetoovercomethelifesappingslavemoralityofChristianity).Despitesome

surfacelevelsimilaritieswiththeNietzscheanvision,transhumanismwithits

Enlightenmentroots,itsemphasisonindividualliberties,anditshumanisticconcernforthewelfareofallhumans(andothersentientbeings)probablyhasasmuchormorein

8(LaMettrie1996).9(Kant1986).10(Nietzsche1908).

4


5/30

commonwithNietzschescontemporarytheEnglishliberalthinkerandutilitarianJohn

StuartMill.

2.Speculation,sciencefiction,andtwentiethcenturytotalitarianism

In1923,thenotedBritishbiochemistJ.B.S.HaldanepublishedtheessayDaedalus;or,ScienceandtheFuture,inwhichhearguedthatgreatbenefitswouldcomefromcontrollingourown

geneticsandfromscienceingeneral.Hepredictedawealthiersociety,withabundantclean

energy,wheregeneticswouldbeemployedtomakepeopletaller,healthier,andsmarterand

whereectogenesis(gestatingfetusesinartificialwombs)wouldbecommonplace.Healso

commentedonwhathasinrecentyearsbecomeknownastheyuckfactor:

ThechemicalorphysicalinventorisalwaysaPrometheus.Thereisnogreat

invention,fromfiretoflying,whichhasnotbeenhailedasaninsulttosomegod.But

ifeveryphysicalandchemicalinventionisablasphemy,everybiologicalinventionisaperversion.Thereishardlyonewhich,onfirstbeingbroughttothenoticeofan

observerfromanynationwhichhasnotpreviouslyheardoftheirexistence,would

notappeartohimasindecentandunnatural.11

Haldanesessaybecameabestsellerandsetoffachainoffutureorienteddiscussions,

includingTheWorld,theFleshandtheDevil,byJ.D.Bernal(1929)12,whichspeculatedabout

spacecolonizationandbionicimplantsaswellasmentalimprovementsarisingfrom

advancedsocialscienceandpsychology;theworksofOlafStapledon,aphilosopherand

sciencefiction

author;

and

the

essay

Icarus:

the

Future

of

Science

(1924)

by

Bertrand

Russell.13Russelltookamorepessimisticview,arguingthatwithoutmorekindlinessinthe

world,technologicalpowerwouldmainlyservetoincreaseourabilitytoharmoneanother.

SciencefictionauthorssuchasH.G.WellsandStapledongotmanypeoplethinkingabout

thefutureevolutionofthehumanrace.

AldousHuxleysBraveNewWorld,publishedin1932,hashadanenduringimpacton

debatesabouthumantechnologicaltransformation14matchedbyfewotherworksoffiction

(possiblyexceptingMaryShelleysFrankenstein15).Huxleydescribesadystopiawhere

psychologicalconditioning,promiscuoussexuality,biotechnology,andtheopiatedrug

somakeepthepopulationplacidinastatic,conformistcastesocietygovernedbyten

11(Haldane1924).12(Bernal1929[1969]).13(Russell1924)14(Huxley1932).15(Shelley1818).

5


6/30

worldcontrollers.Childrenaremanufacturedinfertilityclinicsandartificiallygestated.The

lowercastesarechemicallystuntedordeprivedofoxygenduringtheirmaturationprocess,

inordertolimittheirphysicalandintellectualdevelopment.Frombirth,membersofevery

casteareindoctrinatedduringtheirsleep,byrecordedvoicesrepeatingtheslogansofthe

officialFordistreligion,andconditionedtobelievethattheirowncasteisthebestoneto

belongto.ThesocietydepictedinBraveNewWorldisoftenlikenedtoanotherinfluential20th

centurydystopia,thatofGeorgeOrwellsNineteenEightyFour.16NineteenEightyFour

featuresamoreovertformofoppression,includingubiquitoussurveillancebyBigBrother

andbrutalpolicecoercion.Huxleysworldcontrollers,bycontrast,relyonlessblatant

means(bioengineeredpredestination,psychologicalconditioning,soma)topreventpeople

fromwantingtothinkforthemselves.Herdmentalityandpromiscuityarepromoted,while

highart,individuality,knowledgeofhistory,andromanticlovearediscouraged.Itshould

benotedthatinneitherNineteenEightyFournorBraveNewWorldistechnologyemployedto

increasehumancapacities;rather,societyissetuptorepressthefulldevelopmentof

humanity.Bothdystopiascurtailscientificandtechnologicalexplorationforfearofupsetting

thesocialequilibrium.Nevertheless,BraveNewWorldinparticularhasbecomeanemblemof

thedehumanizingpotentialoftheuseoftechnologytopromotesocialconformismand

shallowcontentment.

Intheearlydecadesofthe20thcentury,notonlyracistsandrightwingideologuesbutalsoa

numberofleftleaningsocialprogressivesbecameconcernedabouttheeffectsofmedicine

andsocialsafetynetsonthequalityofthehumangenepool.Theybelievedthatmodern

societyenabledmanyunfitindividualstosurviveindividualswhowouldinearlierages

haveperishedandtheyworriedthatthiswouldleadtoadeteriorationofthehumanstock.Asaresult,manycountries(includingtheUSA,Canada,Australia,Sweden,Denmark,

Finland,andSwitzerland)implementedstatesponsoredeugenicsprograms,which

infringedinvariousdegreeonindividualrights.IntheUnitedStates,between1907and1963

some64,000individualswereforciblysterilizedundereugenicslaws.Theprincipalvictims

oftheAmericanprogramwerethementallydisabled,butthedeaf,theblind,theepileptic,

thephysicallydeformed,orphans,andthehomelesswerealsosometimestargeted. Buteven

suchwidespreadcompulsorysterilizationpalesincomparisonwiththeGermaneugenics

program,whichresultedinthesystematicmurderofmillionsofpeopleregardedas

inferiorbytheNazis.

Theholocaustleftascaronthehumanpsyche.Determinednottolethistoryrepeatitself,

mostpeopledevelopedaninstinctiverevulsiontoallideasappearingtohaveanykindof

associationwithNaziideology.(Andyet,itmustberemembered,historydidrepeatitself,

16(Orwell1949).

6


7/30

e.g.intheRwandangenocideof1994,inwhichtheworlddidnothingbutwringitshandsas

800,000Africanswereslaughtered.)Inparticular,theeugenicsmovementasawhole,inall

itsforms,becamediscreditedbecauseoftheterriblecrimesthathadbeencommittedinits

name,althoughsomeofthemildereugenicsprogramscontinuedformanyyearsbeforethey

werefinallyscrapped.Theseprogramsareallnowalmostuniversallycondemned.Thegoal

ofcreatinganewandbetterworldthroughacentrallyimposedvisionbecamepass.The

Stalinisttyranny,too,underscoredthedangersoftotalitarianutopianism.

Inthepostwarera,manyoptimisticfuturistswhohadbecomesuspiciousofcollectively

orchestratedsocialchangefoundanewhomefortheirhopesinscientificandtechnological

progress.Spacetravel,medicine,andcomputersseemedtoofferapathtoabetterworld.

Theshiftofattentionalsoreflectedthebreathtakingpaceofdevelopmentinthesefields.

Sciencehadbeguntocatchupwithspeculation. Transhumanistthemesduringthisperiod

werediscussedandanalyzedchieflyinthesciencefictionliterature.AuthorssuchasArthur

C.Clarke,IsaacAsimov,RobertHeinlein,andStanislawLemexploredhowtechnological

developmentcouldcometoprofoundlyalterthehumancondition.

ThewordtranshumanismappearstohavebeenfirstusedbyAldousHuxleysbrother,

JulianHuxley,adistinguishedbiologist(whowasalsothefirstdirectorgeneralofUNESCO

andafounderoftheWorldWildlifeFund).InReligionWithoutRevelation(1927),hewrote:

Thehumanspeciescan,ifitwishes,transcenditselfnotjustsporadically,an

individualhereinoneway,anindividualthereinanotherwaybutinitsentirety,

ashumanity.Weneedanameforthisnewbelief.Perhapstranshumanismwillserve:manremainingman,buttranscendinghimself,byrealizingnewpossibilitiesofand

forhishumannature. 17

3.Technologicalgenies:AI,thesingularity,nanotech,anduploading

Humanlikeautomatahavealwaysfascinatedthehumanimagination.Mechanicalengineers

sincetheearlyGreekshaveconstructedcleverselfmovingdevices.

InJudaicmysticism,agolemreferstoananimatedbeingcraftedfrominanimatematerial.

Intheearlygolemstories,agolemcouldbecreatedbyaholypersonwhowasabletoshare

someofGodswisdomandpower(althoughthegolem,notbeingabletospeak,wasnever

morethanashadowofGodscreations).Havingagolemservantwastheultimatesymbolof

17(Huxley1927),quotedfrom(Hughes2004).

7


8/30

wisdomandholiness.Inthelaterstories,whichwereinfluencedbythemoreIslamicconcern

abouthumanitysgettingtooclosetoGod,thegolembecameacreationofoverreaching

mysticswhowereinevitablypunishedfortheirblasphemy.ThestoryoftheSorcerers

Apprenticeisavariationofthistheme:Theapprenticeanimatesabroomsticktofetchwater

butisunabletomakethebroomstoplikeFrankenstein,itis,astoryoftechnologyoutof

control.ThewordrobotwascoinedbytheCzechwriterKarelapek,inhisdarkplay

R.U.R.(1921),inwhicharobotlaborforcedestroysitshumancreators.18Withtheinvention

oftheelectroniccomputer,theideaofhumanlikeautomatagraduatedfromthe

kindergartenofmythologytotheschoolofsciencefiction(Asimov,Lem,Clarke)and

eventuallytothecollegeoftechnologicalprediction.

Couldcontinuedprogressinartificialintelligenceleadtothecreationofmachinesthatthink

inthesamegeneralwayashumanbeings?AlanTuringgaveanoperationaldefinitiontothis

questioninhisclassicComputingMachineryandIntelligence(1950)andpredictedthat

computerswouldeventuallypasswhatcametobeknownastheTuringTest.IntheTuring

Test,ahumanexperimenterinterviewsacomputerandanotherhumanviaatextinterface;

thecomputersucceedsiftheinterviewercannotreliablydistinguishitfromthehuman.)19

Muchinkhasbeenspiltindebatesonwhetherthistestfurnishesanecessaryandsufficient

conditionforacomputerbeingabletothink,butwhatmattersmorefromapractical

perspectiveiswhetherand,ifso,whencomputerswillbeabletomatchhumanperformance

intasksinvolvinggeneralreasoningability.Withthebenefitofhindsight,wecansaythat

manyoftheearlyAIresearchersturnedouttobeoveroptimisticaboutthetimescaleforthis

hypotheticaldevelopment.Ofcourse,thefactthatwehavenotyetreachedhumanlevel

artificialintelligencedoesnotmeanthatweneverwill,andanumberofpeople,e.g.MarvinMinsky,HansMoravec,RayKurzweil,andNickBostromhaveputforwardreasonsfor

takingseriouslythepossibilitythatthiscouldhappenwithinthefirsthalfofthiscentury.20

Ina1958tribute,thePolishmathematicianStanislawUlam,referringtoameetingwithhis

latecolleagueJohnvonNeumann,wrote:

Oneconversationcenteredontheeveracceleratingprogressoftechnologyand

changesinthemodeofhumanlife,whichgivestheappearanceofapproachingsome

essentialsingularityinthehistoryoftheracebeyondwhichhumanaffairs,asweknowthem,couldnotcontinue.21

18(Capek2004).19(Turing1950).20(Minsky1994;Moravec1999;Bostrom1998,2002;Kurzweil1999).21(Ulam1958).

8


9/30

Therapidityoftechnologicalchangeinrecenttimesleadsnaturallytotheideathat

continuedtechnologicalinnovationwillhaveaprofoundeffectonhumanityinthedecades

ahead.Thispredictionisstrengthenedifonebelievesthatsomeofthosevariablesthat

currentlyexhibitexponentialgrowthwillcontinuetodosoandthattheywillbeamongthe

maindriversofchange.GordonE.Moore,cofounderofIntel,noticedin1965thatthe

numberoftransistorsonachipexhibitedexponentialgrowth.Thisledtotheformulationof

Mooreslaw,whichstates(roughly)thatcomputingpowerdoubleseveryeighteen

monthstotwoyears.22Morerecently,Kurzweilhasdocumentedsimilarexponentialgrowth

ratesinanumberofothertechnologies.Itisinterestingtonotethattheworldeconomy,a

generalindexofhumanitysproductivecapacity,hasdoubledabouteveryfifteenyearsin

moderntimes.

Thesingularityhypothesis,towhichvonNeumannseeminglyalludesinthequotedpassage

above,holdsthatthesechangeswillleadtosomekindofdiscontinuity.Butnowadaysit

oftenreferstoamorespecificprediction:namely,thatthecreationofselfimproving

artificialintelligencewillatsomepointresultinradicalchangeswithinaveryshorttime

span.Thishypothesiswasfirstclearlystatedin1965bythestatisticianI.J.Good:

Letanultraintelligentmachinebedefinedasamachinethatcanfarsurpassallthe

intellectualactivitiesofanymanhoweverclever.Sincethedesignofmachinesisone

oftheseintellectualactivities,anultraintelligentmachinecoulddesignevenbetter

machines;therewouldthenunquestionablybeanintelligenceexplosion,andthe

intelligenceofmanwouldbeleftfarbehind.Thusthefirstultraintelligentmachineisthelastinventionthatmanneedevermake.23

VernorVingediscussedthisideainalittlemoredetailinhisinfluential1993paper

TechnologicalSingularity,inwhichhepredicted:

Withinthirtyyears,wewillhavethetechnologicalmeanstocreatesuperhuman

intelligence.Shortlyafter,thehumanerawillbeended.24

Transhumaniststodayholddivergingviewsaboutthesingularity:someseeitasalikelyscenario,othersbelievethatitismoreprobablethattherewillneverbeanyverysuddenand

dramaticchangesastheresultofprogressinartificialintelligence.

22(Moore1965).23(Good1965).24(Vinge1993).

9


10/30

Thesingularityideaalsocomesinasomewhatdifferenteschatologicalversion,whichtraces

itslineagetothewritingsofPierreTeilharddeChardin,apaleontologistandJesuit

theologianwhosawanevolutionarytelosinthedevelopmentofanencompassing

noosphere(aglobalconsciousness)viaphysicistFrankTipler,whoarguedthatadvanced

civilizationsmightcometohaveadefininginfluenceonthefutureevolutionofthecosmos,

and,inthefinalmomentsoftheBigCrunch,mightmanagetoextractaninfinitenumberof

computationsbyharnessingthesheerenergyofthecollapsingmatter.25,26However,while

theseideasmightappealtothosewhofancyamarriagebetweenmysticismandscience,they

havenotcaughtoneitheramongtranshumanistsorthelargerscientificcommunity.Current

cosmologicaltheoriesindicatethattheuniversewillcontinuetoexpandforever(falsifying

Tiplersprediction).Butthemoregeneralpointthatthetranshumanistmightmakeinthis

contextisthatweneedtolearntothinkaboutbigpicturequestionswithoutresortingto

wishfulthinkingormysticism.Bigpicturequestions,includingonesaboutourplaceinthe

worldandthelongtermfateofintelligentlifearepartoftranshumanism;however,these

questionsshouldbeaddressedinasober,disinterestedway,usingcriticalreasonandour

bestavailablescientificevidence.Onereasonwhysuchquestionsareoftranshumanist

interestisthattheiranswersmightaffectwhatoutcomesweshouldexpectfromourown

technologicaldevelopment,andthereforeindirectlywhatpoliciesitmakessensefor

humanitytopursue.

In1986,EricDrexlerpublishedEnginesofCreation,thefirstbooklengthexpositionof

molecularmanufacturing.27(Thepossibilityofnanotechnologyhadbeenanticipatedby

NobellaureatephysicistRichardFeynmaninhisfamousafterdinneraddressin1959entitledThereisPlentyofRoomattheBottom.28)Inthisseminalwork,Drexlernotonly

arguedforthefeasibilityofassemblerbasednanotechnologybutalsoexploredits

consequencesandbeganchartingthestrategicchallengesposedbyitsdevelopment.

DrexlerslaterbookNanosystems(1992)suppliedamoretechnicalanalysisthatseemedto

confirmhisoriginalconclusions.29Topreparetheworldfornanotechnologyandwork

towardsitssafeimplementation,hefoundedtheForesightInstitutetogetherwithhisthen

wife,ChristinePeterson,in1986.

25(TeilharddeChardin1964).26(Tipler1994).27(Drexler1985).28(Feynman1960).29(Drexler1992).

10


11/30

Inthelastseveralyears,nanotechnologyhasbecomebigbusiness,withworldwideresearch

fundingamountingtobillionsofdollars.YetlittleofthisworkfitsDrexlersambitiousvision

ofnanotechnologyasanassemblerbased,nearuniversal,constructiontechnology.The

mainstreamnanotechnologycommunityhassoughttodistanceitselffromDrexlersclaims.

ThechemistRichardSmalley(anotherNobellaureate)hasdebatedDrexler,assertingthat

nonbiologicalmolecularassemblersareimpossible.30Todate,however,notechnical

critiqueofDrexlersworkinthepublishedliteraturehasfoundanysignificantflawsinhis

reasoning.Ifmolecularnanotechnologyisindeedphysicallypossible,asDrexlermain

thequestionbecomesjusthowdifficultitwillbetodevelopit,andhowlongitwilltake.

Theseissuesareverydifficulttosettleinadv

tains,

ance.

IfmolecularnanotechnologycouldbedevelopedasDrexlerenvisionsit,itwouldhave

momentousramifications:

Coalanddiamonds,sandandcomputerchips,cancerandhealthytissue:throughout

history,variationsinthearrangementofatomshavedistinguishedthecheapfrom

thecherished,thediseasedfromthehealthy.Arrangedoneway,atomsmakeupsoil,

air,andwaterarrangedanother,theymakeupripestrawberries.Arrangedoneway,

theymakeuphomesandfreshair;arrangedanother,theymakeupashandsmoke.31

Molecularnanotechnologywouldenableustotransformcoalintodiamonds,sandinto

supercomputers,andtoremovepollutionfromtheairandtumorsfromhealthytissue.Inits

matureform,itcouldhelpusabolishmostdiseaseandaging,makepossiblethereanimation

ofcryonicspatients,enableaffordablespacecolonization,andmoreominouslyleadtotherapidcreationofvastarsenalsoflethalornonlethalweapons.

Anotherhypotheticaltechnologythatwouldhavearevolutionaryimpactisuploading,the

transferofahumanmindtoacomputer.Thiswouldinvolvethefollowingsteps:First,create

asufficientlydetailedscanofaparticularhumanbrain,perhapsbydeconstructingitwith

nanobotsorbyfeedingthinslicesofbraintissuesintopowerfulmicroscopesforautomatic

imageanalysis.Second,fromthisscan,reconstructtheneuronalnetworkthatthebrain

implemented,andcombinethiswithcomputationalmodelsofthedifferenttypesof

neurons.Third,emulatethewholecomputationalstructureonapowerfulsupercomputer.Ifsuccessful,theprocedurewouldresultintheoriginalmind,withmemoryandpersonality

intact,beingtransferredtothecomputerwhereitwouldthenexistassoftware;anditcould

30(DrexlerandSmalley1993).31(Drexler1985),p.3.

11


12/30

eitherinhabitarobotbodyorliveinavirtualreality.32Whileitisoftenthoughtthat,under

suitablecircumstances,theuploadwouldbeconsciousandthattheoriginalpersonwould

havesurvivedthetransfertothenewmedium,individualtranshumaniststakedifferent

viewsonthesephilosophicalmatters.

Ifeithersuperintelligence,ormolecularnanotechnology,oruploading,orsomeother

technologyofasimilarlyrevolutionarykindisdeveloped,thehumanconditioncould

clearlyberadicallytransformed.Evenifonebelievedthattheprobabilityofthishappening

anytimesoonisquitesmall,theseprospectswouldneverthelessmeritseriousattentionin

viewoftheirextremeimpact.However,transhumanismdoesnotdependonthefeasibility

ofsuchradicaltechnologies.Virtualreality;preimplantationgeneticdiagnosis;genetic

engineering;pharmaceuticalsthatimprovememory,concentration,wakefulness,andmood;

performanceenhancingdrugs;cosmeticsurgery;sexchangeoperations;prosthetics;anti

agingmedicine;closerhumancomputerinterfaces:thesetechnologiesarealreadyhereor

canbeexpectedwithinthenextfewdecades.Thecombinationofthesetechnological

capabilities,astheymature,couldprofoundlytransformthehumancondition.The

transhumanistagenda,whichistomakesuchenhancementoptionssafelyavailabletoall

persons,willbecomeincreasinglyrelevantandpracticalinthecomingyearsastheseand

otheranticipatedtechnologiescomeonline.

4.Thegrowthofgrassroots

BenjaminFranklinwishedtobepreservedinacaskofMadeiraandlaterrecalledtolife,and

regrettedthat

he

was

living

too

near

the

infancy

of

science

for

this

to

be

possible.

Since

then,

sciencehasgrownupabit.In1962,RobertEttingerpublishedthebook,TheProspectof

Immortality,whichlaunchedtheideaofcryonicsuspension.33Ettingerarguedthatas

medicaltechnologyseemstobeconstantlyprogressing,andsincesciencehasdiscover

thatchemicalactivitycomestoacompletehaltatlowenoughtemperatures,itshouldbe

possibletofreezeapersontoday(inliquidnitrogen)andpreservethebodyuntilatim

whentechnologyisadvancedenoughtorepairthefreezingdamageandreversetheoriginal

causeofdeanimation.Cryonics,Ettingerbelieved,offeredatickettothefu

ed

e

ture.

Alas,themassesdidnotlineupfortheride.Cryonicshasremainedafringealternativeto

moretraditionalmethodsoftreatingthediseased,suchascremationandburial.Thepractice

ofcryonicswasnotintegratedintothemainstreamclinicalsettingandwasinstead

conductedonthecheapbyasmallnumberofenthusiasts.Twoearlycryonicsorganizations

32(Bostrom2003).33(Ettinger1964).

12


13/30

wentbankrupt,allowingtheirpatientstothawout.Atthatpoint,theproblemofmassive

cellulardamagethatoccurswhenicecrystalsforminthebodyalsobecamemorewidely

known.Asaresult,cryonicsacquiredareputationasamacabrescam.Themedia

controversyoverthesuspensionofbaseballstarTedWilliamsin2002showedthatpublic

perceptionofcryonicshasnotchangedmuchoverthepastdecades.

Despiteitsimageproblemanditsearlyfailuresofimplementation,thecryonicscommunity

continuestobeactiveanditcountsamongitsmembersseveraleminentscientistsand

intellectuals.Suspensionprotocolshavebeenimproved,andtheinfusionofcryoprotectants

priortofreezingtosuppresstheformationoficecrystalshasbecomestandardpractice.The

prospectofnanotechnologyhasgivenamoreconcreteshapetothehypothesizedfuture

technologythatcouldenablereanimation.Therearecurrentlytwoorganizationsthatoffer

fullservicesuspension,theAlcorLifeExtensionFoundation(foundedin1972)andthe

CryonicsInstitute(foundedin1976).Alcorhasrecentlyintroducedanewsuspension

method,whichreliesonaprocessknownasvitrification,whichfurtherreducesmicro

structuraldamageduringsuspension.

Inalaterwork,ManintoSuperman(1972),Ettingerdiscussedanumberofconceivable

technologicalimprovementsofthehumanorganism,continuingthetraditionstartedby

HaldaneandBernal.34

AnotherearlytranshumanistwasF.M.Esfandiary,wholaterchangedhisnametoFM2030.

Oneofthefirstprofessorsoffuturestudies,FMtaughtattheNewSchoolforSocialResearch

inNewYorkinthe1960sandformedagroupofoptimisticfuturistsknownastheUpWingers.

Whoarethenewrevolutionariesofourtime?Theyarethegeneticists,biologists,

physicists,cryonologists,biotechnologists,nuclearscientists,cosmologists,radio

astronomers,cosmonauts,socialscientists,youthcorpsvolunteers,internationalists,

humanists,sciencefictionwriters,normativethinkers,inventorsTheyandothers

arerevolutionizingthehumanconditioninafundamentalway.Theirachievements

andgoalsgofarbeyondthemostradicalideologiesoftheOldOrder.35

InhisbookAreyouatranshuman?(1989),FMdescribedwhatheregardedasthesignsofthe

emergenceofthetranshuman.36InFMsterminology,atranshumanisatransitional

34(Ettinger1972).35(Esfandiary1970).36(FM20301989).

13


14/30

human,someonewhobyvirtueoftheirtechnologyusage,culturalvalues,andlifestyle

constitutesanevolutionarylinktothecomingeraofposthumanity.ThesignsthatFMsaw

asindicativeoftranshumanstatusincludedprostheses,plasticsurgery,intensiveuseof

telecommunications,acosmopolitanoutlookandaglobetrottinglifestyle,androgyny,

mediatedreproduction(suchasinvitrofertilization),absenceofreligiousbelief,anda

rejectionoftraditionalfamilyvalues.However,itwasneversatisfactorilyexplainedwhy

somebodywho,say,rejectsfamilyvalues,hasanosejob,andspendsalotoftimeonjet

planesisincloserproximitytoposthumanitythantherestofus.

Inthe1970sand1980s,manyorganizationssprangupthatfocusedonaparticulartopicsuch

aslifeextension,cryonics,spacecolonization,sciencefiction,andfuturism.Thesegroups

wereoftenisolatedfromoneanother,andwhateversharedviewsandvaluestheyhaddid

notyetamounttoanyunifiedworldview.EdRegissGreatMamboChickenandthe

TranshumanCondition(1990)tookahumorouslookattheseprototranshumanistfringes,

whichincludedeccentricandotherwiseintelligentindividualstryingtobuildspacerockets

intheirbackyardsorexperimentingwithbiofeedbackmachinesandpsychedelicdrugs,as

wellasscientistspursuingmoreseriouslinesofworkbutwhohadimbibedtoodeeplyofthe

Californianspirit.37

In1988,thefirstissueoftheExtropyMagazinewaspublishedbyMaxMoreandTom

Morrow,andin1992theyfoundedtheExtropyInstitute(thetermextropybeingcoinedas

ametaphoricaloppositeofentropy).TheInstituteservedasacatalystthatbroughttogether

disparategroupsofpeoplewithfuturisticideasandfacilitatedtheformationofnovel

memeticcompounds.TheInstituteranaseriesofconferences,butperhapsmostimportantwastheextropiansmailinglist,anonlinediscussionforumwherenewideaswereshared

anddebated.Inthemidnineties,manygotfirstexposuretotranshumanistviewsfromthe

ExtropyInstituteslistserve.

MorehadimmigratedtoCaliforniafromBritainafterchanginghisnamefromMax

OConnor.Ofhisnewname,hesaid:

Itseemedtoreallyencapsulatetheessenceofwhatmygoalis:alwaystoimprove,

nevertobestatic.Iwasgoingtogetbetterateverything,becomesmarter,fitter,andhealthier.Itwouldbeaconstantremindertokeepmovingforward.38

37(Regis1990).38(Regis1994).

14


15/30

MaxMorewrotethefirstdefinitionoftranshumanisminitsmodernsense,andcreatedhis

owndistinctivebrandoftranshumanism,extropianism,whichemphasizedtheprinciples

ofboundlessexpansion,selftransformation,dynamicoptimism,intelligent

technology,andspontaneousorder.Originally,extropianismhadaclearlibertarian

flavor,butinlateryearsMorehasdistancedhimselffromthisingredient,replacing

spontaneousorderwithopensociety,aprinciplethatopposesauthoritariansocial

controlandpromotesdecentralizationofpowerandresponsibility.39

NatashaVitaMoreistheExtropyInstitutescurrentpresident.Sheisanartistanddesigner,

andhasovertheyearsissuedanumberofmanifestosontranshumanistandextropicart.40

TheExtropyInstitutesconferencesandmailinglistalsoservedasahangoutplaceforsome

peoplewholikedtodiscussfuturisticideasbutwhowerenotnecessarilyjoiners.Thosewho

werearoundinthemidninetieswillrememberindividualssuchasAndersSandberg,

AlexanderSashaChislenko,HalFinney,andRobinHansonfromamongthemore

thoughtfulregularsinthetranshumanistmilieuatthetime.Anenormousamountof

discussionabouttranshumanismhastakenplaceonvariousemaillistsinthepastdecade.

Thequalityofpostingshasbeenvaried(puttingitmildly).Yetattheirbest,theseonline

conversationsexploredideasabouttheimplicationsoffuturetechnologiesthatwere,in

somerespects,faradvancedoverwhatcouldbefoundinprintedbooksorjournals.The

Internetplayedanimportantroleinincubatingmoderntranshumanismbyfacilitatingthese

meetingsofmindsandperhapsmoreindirectly,too,viatheirrationalexuberancethat

pervadedthedotcomera?

TheWorldTranshumanistAssociationwasfoundedinearly1998byNickBostromand

DavidPearce,toprovideageneralorganizationalbasisforalltranshumanistgroupsand

interests,acrossthepoliticalspectrum.Theaimwasalsotodevelopamorematureand

academicallyrespectableformoftranshumanism,freedfromthecultishnesswhich,at

leastintheeyesofsomecritics,hadafflictedsomeofitsearlierconvocations.Thetwo

foundingdocumentsoftheWTAweretheTranshumanistDeclaration(seeappendix),andthe

TranshumanistFAQ(v.1.0).41TheDeclarationwasintendedasaconciseconsensusstatement

ofthebasicprincipleoftranshumanism.TheFAQwasalsoaconsensusornearconsensus

document,butitwasmoreambitiousinitsphilosophicalscopeinthatitdevelopedanumberofthemesthathadpreviouslybeen,atmost,implicitinthemovement.Morethan

fiftypeoplecontributedcommentsondraftsoftheFAQ.Thedocumentwasproducedby

39(More2003).40(VitaMore2002).41(WTA2002).

15


16/30

Bostrombutmajorpartsandideaswerealsocontributedbyseveralothers,includingthe

BritishutilitarianthinkerDavidPearce,MaxMore,theAmericanfeministanddisability

rightsactivistKathrynAegis,andthewalkingencyclopediaAndersSandberg,whowasat

thetimeaneurosciencestudentinSweden.

DavidPearcehasalsodevelopedhisowndistinctiveflavoroftranshumanismbasedonan

ethicofhedonisticutilitarianism.Pearceargues,inTheHedonisticImperative,foranambitious

programtoeliminatesufferinginbothhumanandnonhumananimalsbymeansof

advancedneurotechnology(intheshorttermpharmaceuticals,inthelongertermperhaps

geneticengineering).42Inparallelwiththisnegativeefforttoabolishsuffering,heproposesa

positiveprogramofparadiseengineeringinwhichsentientbeingswouldberedesignedto

enableeverybodytoexperienceofunprecedentedlevelsofwellbeing.InPearcesutopia,

ourmotivationsystemwouldrunongradientsofblissinsteadofthecurrentpleasurepain

axis.

TheWTAsmembershipgrewrapidly,andlocalchaptersmushroomedaroundtheworld.

ActivitiesfocusedmainlyonInternetdiscussion,developmentofdocuments,representation

inthemedia,organizingofanannualTransVisionconference,andpublicationofthe

scholarlyonlineJournalofTranshumanism(laterrenamedtoJournalofEvolutionand

Technology).

Inthefirstfewyearsofitsexistence,theWTAwasaverylooselyandinformallyorganized

structure.Itentereditsnextphaseafterameetingin2001betweenJamesHughes(a

sociologistatTrinityCollegeinHartfordConnecticut),MarkWalker(aphilosopherattheUniversityofToronto,thentheeditoroftheJournalofTranshumanism),andBostrom(who

wasatthetimeteachingatYale).HugheswaselectedSecretaryandturnedhisorganizing

skillsandenergytothetask.Withinshortorder,theWTAadoptedaconstitution,

incorporatedasanonprofit,andbeganbuildingupavigorousinternationalnetworkof

localgroupsandvolunteers.Currently,theWTAhasapproximately3,000membersfrom

morethan100countries,anditpursuesawiderangeofactivities,allvolunteerdriven.

Anumberofrelatedorganizationshavealsocroppedupinrecentyears,focusingmore

narrowlyonparticulartranshumanistissues,suchaslifeextension,artificialintelligence,orthelegalimplicationsofconvergingtechnologies(nanobioinfoneurotechnologies).The

InstituteforEthicsandEmergingTechnologies,anonprofitthinktank,wasestablishedin

2004,topromotetheethicaluseoftechnologytoexpandhumancapacities.

42(Pearce2004).

16


17/30

5.Theacademicfrontier

Overthepastcoupleofdecades,academiahaspickeduptheballandstartedtoanalyze

varioustranshumanistmatters,bothnormativeandpositive.Thecontributionsarefartoo

manytocomprehensivelydescribehere,sowewillpickoutjustafewthreads,beginning

withethics.

Formostofitshistory,moralphilosophydidnotshyawayfromaddressingpractical

problems.Intheearlyandmidpartsofthetwentiethcentury,duringheydaysoflogical

positivism,appliedethicsbecameabackwaterasmoralphilosophersconcentratedon

linguisticormetaethicalproblems.Sincethen,however,practicalethicshasreemergedasa

fieldofacademicinquiry.Thecomebackstartedinmedicalethics.Revelationsofthehorrific

experimentsthattheNazishadconductedonhumansubjectsinthenameofscienceledto

theadoptionoftheNurembergcode(1947)andtheDeclarationofHelsinki(1964),which

laiddownstrictsafeguardsformedicalexperimentation,emphasizingtheneedforpatient

consent.43,44Buttheriseofthemodernhealthcaresystemspawnednewethicaldilemmas

turningofflifesupport,organdonation,resourceallocation,abortion,advancedirectives,

doctorpatientrelationships,protocolsforobtaininginformedconsentandfordealingwith

incompetentpatients.Inthe1970s,abroaderkindofenquirybegantoemerge,stimulated

particularlybydevelopmentsinassistedreproductionandgenetics.Thisfieldbecame

knownasbioethics.Manyoftheethicalissuesmostdirectlylinkedtotranshumanismwould

nowfallunderthisrubric,althoughothernormativediscoursesarealsoinvolved,e.g.

populationethics,metaethics,politicalphilosophy,andbioethicsyoungersisters

computerethics,engineeringethics,environmentalethics.

Bioethicswasfromthebeginninganinterdisciplinaryendeavor,dominatedbytheologians,

legalscholars,physicians,and,increasingly,philosophers,withoccasionalparticipationby

representativesofpatientsrightsgroups,disabilityadvocates,andotherinterestedparties.

45Lackingaclearmethodology,andoperatingonaplainoftensweptbythewindsof

politicalorreligiouscontroversy,thestandardofscholarshiphasfrequentlybeen

underwhelming.Despitethesedifficulties,bioethicsburgeoned.Acynicmightascribethis

accomplishmenttotheamplefertilizationthatthefieldreceivedfromanumberofpra

imperatives:absolvingdoctorsofmoraldilemmas,trainingmedicalstudentstobehave,

enablinghospitalboardstotrumpettheircommitmenttothehighestethicalstandardso

care,providingsoundbitesforthemassmedia,andallowingpoliticianstocovertheir

behindsbydelegatingcontroversialissuestoethicscommittees.Butakinderglossis

ctical

f

43(Office1949).44(World_Medical_Organization1996).45See(Jonsen1998).

17


18/30

possible:decentpeoplerecognizedthatdifficultmoralproblemsaroseinmodern

biomedicine,thattheseproblemsneededtobeaddressed,andthathavingsomeprofession

scholarstryingtoclarifytheseproblemsinsomesortofsystematicwaymightbehelpful.

Whilehighercaliberscholarshipandamorerobustmethodologywouldbenice,inthe

meantime

al

wemakethemostofwhatwehave.

Moralphilosophershaveinthelastcoupleofdecadesmademanycontributionsthatbearon

theethicsofhumantransformation,andwemustlimitourselvestoafewmentions.Derek

ParfitsclassicReasonsandPersons(1984)discussedmanyrelevantnormativeissues.46In

additiontopersonalidentityandfoundationalethicaltheory,thisbooktreatspopulation

ethics,personaffectingmoralprinciples,anddutiestofuturegenerations.AlthoughParfits

analysistakesplaceonanidealizedlevel,hisargumentselucidatemanymoral

considerationsthatemergewithinthetranshumanistprogram.

JonathanGloversWhatSortofPeopleShouldthereBe?(1984)addressedtechnologyenabled

humantransformationatasomewhatmoreconcretelevel,focusingespeciallyongenetics

andvarioustechnologiesthatcouldincreasesocialtransparency.Glovergaveaclearand

balancedanalytictreatmentoftheseissuesthatwaswellaheadofitstime.Hisgeneral

conclusionisthat

notjustanyaspectofpresenthumannatureisworthpreserving.Ratheritis

especiallythosefeatureswhichcontributetoselfdevelopmentandselfexpression,

tocertainkindsofrelationships,andtothedevelopmentofourconsciousnessand

understanding.Andsomeofthesefeaturesmaybeextendedratherthanthreatenedbytechnology.47

Severalpeoplehavearguedforprinciplesthatassertsomekindofethicalequivalence

betweenenvironmentalandgeneticinterventions.Forexample,PeterSingerhasproposed

thepreventiveprinciple:

ForanyconditionX,ifitwouldbeaformofchildabuseforparentstoinflictXon

theirchildsoonafterbirth,thenitmust,otherthingsbeingequal,atleastbe

permissibletotakestepstopreventoneschildhavingthatcondition.48

46(Parfit1984).47(Glover1984).48(Singer2003).

18


19/30

JulianSavulescuhasarguedforaprincipleofProcreativeBeneficence,accordingtowhich

prospectiveparentsshouldselectthechild,ofthepossiblechildrentheycouldhave,who

wouldhavethebestlife,basedontherelevant,availableinformation(wheretheshouldis

meanttoindicatethatpersuasionisjustified,butnotcoercion).49Thisprincipledoesnot

presupposethatalllivescanbeplacedinadefiniterankingwithrespecttotheirwellbeing,

onlythatpairwisecomparisonsarepossibleinatleastsomecases.Forinstance,ifacouple

ishavingIVFandmustselectoneoftwoembryoswhicharegeneticallyidenticalexceptthat

oneofthemhasonedefectivegenethatpredisposestoasthma,thenProcreativeBeneficence

suggeststheyoughttochoosethehealthyembryoforimplantation.

InFromChancetoChoice(2000),AllenBuchanan,DanW.Brock,NormanDaniels,andDaniel

Wikler,examinedhowadvancesingeneticengineeringshouldaffectourunderstandingof

distributivejustice,equalopportunity,ourrightsandobligationsasparents,themeaningof

disability,andtheconceptofhumannatureinethicaltheoryandpractice.50Theydeveloped

aframeworkinspiredbyJohnRawlssworkinanattempttoanswersomeofthese

questions.

GregStock,JohnHarris,GregoryPence,andEricJuengst,amongothers,havealsodiscussed

theethicsofgeneticengineeringfromabroadlytranshumanistperspective.51MarkWalker

hasarguedfromaperfectioniststandpointthatwehaveadutytousetechnologytoimprove

ourselves.Walkerhasalsoarguedthatonereasontopursuecognitiveenhancementsisthat

itcouldhelpussolvephilosophicalproblems.52NickBostromandseveralothershave

drawnattentiontothedistinctionbetweenenhancementsthatofferonlypositional

advantages(e.g.anincreaseinheight),whichareonlyadvantagesinsofarasotherslackthem,andenhancementsthatprovideeitherintrinsicbenefitsornetpositiveexternalities

(suchasabetterimmunesystemorimprovementofcognitivefunctioning).Weoughtto

promoteenhancementsofthesecondkind,butnotenhancementsthataremerely

positional.53

Bostromhassuggestedthatwehaveareasontodevelopmeanstoexplorethelargerspace

ofpossiblemodesofbeingthatiscurrentlyinaccessibletousbecauseofourbiological

limitations,onthegroundthatwemightfindthatitcontainsextremelyworthwhilemodes

ofbeingwaysofliving,thinking,feeling,andrelating.54Alongwithmanyother

49(Savulescu2001).50(Buchananetal.2002).51E.g.(Stock2002;Harris1992;Pence1998;Parens1998).52(Walker2002).53(Bostrom2003).54(Bostrom2004).

19


20/30

transhumanistwriters,Bostromhasarguedforthemoralurgencyofdevelopingmeansto

sloworreversetheagingprocess.55Hehasalsoproposedabroaderconceptionofhuman

dignitywhichcanaccommodateposthumandignity.56ArecentjointpaperbyBostrom

andTobyOrdproposesaheuristicforeliminatingstatusquobiasinbioethics,abias

which,theyclaim,afflictsmanyofourmoralintuitions.57

EliezerYudkowsky(anindependentscholar)hasprobedtheethicsofsuperintelligenceand

hastriedtodevelopatheoryofhowtoprogramahumanfriendlyAI,achallengethatcould

takeonlifeanddeathsignificanceoncewebecomecapableofcreatingsuchamachine.

Yudkowskyarguesthatsimplerulebasedinjunctions(suchasIsaacAsimovsthreelawsof

robotics)wouldproducedeadlyunintendedconsequences.Heconceivesofa

superintelligenceasanenormouslypowerfuloptimizationprocess,andthecentraltaskisto

specifythementalarchitectureandgoalstructureoftheAIinsuchawaythatitrealizes

desirableoutcomes.Ratherthancreatingalistofspecificgoals,Yudkowskyarguesthatwe

needtotakeamoreindirectapproachandchoosetheAIsinitialconditionssothatitwould

useitssuperiorintellectualpowerstoderivethespecificgoalsandextrapolateourdecisions

ifwewerebettercalibrated,betterinformed,andbetterabletoreflectontheforces

influencingourdecisions.YudkowskyalsowishestospecifyanAIthatwoulduseitsinitial

rulesforextrapolationtoextrapolatesmarterhumandecisionsaboutextrapolationrules;in

effect,asetofinitialrulesforextrapolationwouldrenormalizethemselves.58

Asidefromnormativequestions,therearealsopositivequestionstobeasked,aboutthe

natureandtimingoftransformingtechnologiesandtheirconsequences.HansMoravecs

1989bookMindChildrenexploredtheramificationsofpossiblefutureadvancesinroboticsanduploading. 59AlaterMoravecbook,Robot(1999),andRayKurzweilsbestsellingAgeof

SpiritualMachines(1999)introducedtheseideastoawideraudience.60,61Aswehaveseen,

EricDrexlerwastryingtoanticipatetheconsequencesofmolecularnanotechnologybackin

the80s,anendeavorinwhichhehassincebeenjoinedbyseveralotherresearcherssuchas

RobertFreitas,whohasstudiedpotentialmedicalapplicationofnanotechnologyingreat

detail,andRalphMerklewhohascollaboratedwithFreitastostudythekinematicsofself

replicatingsystemsandthetechnicalstepstowardscrudemolecularassemblers.62Allthese

55(Bostrom2005).

56(Bostrom2005).57(BostromandOrd2005).58(Yudkowsky2004).59(Moravec1989).60(Moravec1999).61(Kurzweil1999).62(FreitasandMerkle2005).

20


21/30

authorsrecognizethattechnologiesaspotentassuperintelligenceormolecular

nanotechnologyarenotwithoutseriousrisksofaccidentsordeliberatemisuse.

Bostrom(2002)introducedtheconceptofanexistentialrisk,definedasonewherean

adverseoutcomewouldeitherannihilateEarthoriginatingintelligentlifeorpermanently

anddrasticallycurtailitspotential,andcreatedacatalogueofwhathesawasthemost

probableexistentialrisks.63Bothnanotechnology andsuperintelligencerelatedrisksattain

highranksonthatlist.Inamuchdiscussedpopulararticle,WhytheFutureDoesntNeed

Us(2000),BillJoyarguedthatweoughttorelinquishdevelopmentsinAI,nanotechnology,

andgeneticsbecauseoftherisksthatwilleventuallyemergefromthesedisciplines.64Several

people,reactingtoJoy,arguedagainstsuchbansongroundsthattheyareunrealistic,would

depriveusofgreatbenefits,andmightincreaseratherthandecreaseriskifdevelopment

weredrivenundergroundortolesshesitantregionsoftheworld.JohnLeslie,MartinRees,

andRichardPosnerhavealsoinvestigatedthreatstohumansurvivalinthe21stcenturyall

ofthemhaveratedtheriskashighlysignificant.65

RobinHansonhasanalyzedseveraltopicsofrelevancetohumantransformation,including

theconsequencesofuploadinginanunregulatedeconomy,thesocialsignalingfunctionof

beliefs,thesourcesandepistemologicalstatusofdisagreementsofopinion,thedynamicsof

aspacecolonizationrace,andinformationmarketsasasystemforaggregatinginformation

andguidingpolicy.66RelatedtoHansonsworkonuploadcompetitionandcolonization

races,Bostromhasexploredhowdystopianoutcomescouldresultinsomefuture

evolutionaryscenarios.67Drawingonhisearlierworkonobservationselectioneffects,he

alsoformulatedtheSimulationargument,whichpurportstoshowthatitfollowsfromsomefairlyweakassumptionsthat

atleastoneofthefollowingpropositionsistrue:(1)thehumanspeciesisverylikely

togoextinctbeforereachingaposthumanstage;(2)anyposthumancivilizationis

extremelyunlikelytorunasignificantnumberofsimulationsoftheirevolutionary

history(orvariationsthereof);(3)wearealmostcertainlylivinginacomputer

simulation.Itfollowsthatthebeliefthatthereisasignificantchancethatwewillone

daybecomeposthumanswhorunancestorsimulationsisfalse,unlessweare

currentlylivinginasimulation.68

63(Bostrom2002).64(Joy2000).65(Leslie1996;Rees2003;Posner2004).66E.g.(Hanson1994,1995,1998).67(Bostrom2005).68(Bostrom2003).

21


22/30

Wedonotknowwhatwillhappen,butseveralsubtleconstraintsenableustonarrowdown

therangeoftenableviewsabouthumanitysfutureandourplaceintheuniverse.These

constraintsderivefromavarietyofsources,includinganalysisofthecapacitiesofpossible

technologiesbasedonphysicalorchemicalsimulations;economicanalysis;evolutiontheory;

probabilitytheory;gametheoryandstrategicanalysis;andcosmology.Partlybecauseofthe

interdisciplinaryandsometimestechnicalnatureoftheseconsiderations,theyarenotwidely

understood.Yetanyseriousattempttograpplewiththelongtermimplicationsof

technologicaldevelopmentshouldtakethemintoaccount.

6.21stcenturybiopolitics:thetranshumanistbioconservativedimension

JamesHugheshasarguedthatbiopoliticsisemergingasafundamentalnewdimensionof

politicalopinion.InHughesmodel,biopoliticsjoinswiththemorefamiliardimensionsofculturalandeconomicpolitics,toformathreedimensionalopinionspace.Wehavealready

seenthatintheearly90s,theextropianscombinedliberalculturalpoliticsandlaissezfaire

laissezfaireconomicpoliticswithtranshumanistbiopolitics.InCitizenCyborg(2004),

Hughessetsforwardwhathetermsdemocratictranshumanism,whichmates

transhumanistbiopoliticswithsocialdemocraticeconomicpoliticsandliberalcultural

politics.69Hearguesthatwewillachievethebestposthumanfuturewhenweensurethat

technologiesaresafe,makethemavailabletoeveryone,andrespecttherightofindividuals

tocontroltheirownbodies.Thekeydifferencebetweenextropiantranshumanismand

democratictranshumanism

isthat

the

latter

accords

amuch

bigger

role

for

government

in

regulatingnewtechnologiesforsafetyandensuringthatthebenefitswillbeavailabletoall,

notjustawealthyortechsavvyelite.

Inprinciple,transhumanismcanbecombinedwithawiderangeofpoliticalandcultural

views,andmanysuchcombinationsareindeedrepresented,e.g.withinthemembershipof

theWorldTranshumanistAssociation.Onecombinationthatisnotoftenfoundisthe

couplingoftranshumanismtoacultureconservativeoutlook.Whetherthisisbecauseofan

irresolvabletensionbetweenthetransformativeagendaoftranshumanismandthecultural

conservativespreferencefortraditionalarrangementsisnotclear.Itcouldinsteadbe

becausenobodyhasyetseriouslyattemptedtodevelopsuchaposition.Itispossibleto

imaginehownewtechnologiescouldbeusedtoreinforcesomecultureconservativevalues.

Forinstance,apharmaceuticalthatfacilitatedlongtermpairbondingcouldhelpprotectthe

traditionalfamily.Developingwaysofusingourgrowingtechnologicalpowerstohelp

69(Hughes2004).

22


23/30

peoplerealizewidelyheldculturalorspiritualvaluesintheirliveswouldseema

worthwhileundertaking.

Thisisnot,however,therouteforwhichculturalconservativeshavesofaropted.Instead,

theyhavegravitatedtowardstranshumanismsopposite,bioconservatism,whichopposes

theuseoftechnologytoexpandhumancapacitiesortomodifyaspectsofourbiological

nature.Peopledrawntobioconservatismcomefromgroupsthattraditionallyhavehadlittle

incommon.Rightwingreligiousconservativesandleftwingenvironmentalistsandanti

globalistshavefoundcommoncauses,forexampleintheiroppositiontothegenetic

modificationofhumans.

Thedifferentstrandsofcontemporarybioconservatismcanbetracedtoamultifarioussetof

origins:ancientnotionsoftaboo;theGreekconceptofhubris;theRomanticistviewof

nature;certainreligious(antihumanistic)interpretationsoftheconceptofhumandignity

andofaGodgivennaturalorder;theLudditeworkersrevoltagainstindustrialization;Karl

Marxsanalysisoftechnologyundercapitalism;variousContinentalphilosopherscritiques

oftechnology,technocracy,andtherationalisticmindsetthataccompaniesmodern

technoscience;foesofthemilitaryindustrialcomplexandmultinationalcorporations;and

objectorstotheconsumeristratrace.Theproposedremedieshaverangedfrommachine

smashing(theoriginalLuddites),tocommunistrevolution(Marx),tobuyingorganic,to

yoga(JosOrtegayGasset),butnowadaysitcommonlyemanatesincallsfornationalor

internationalbansonvarioushumanenhancementtechnologies(Fukuyama,Annas,etc.).

Feministwritershavecomedownonbothsidesofthedebate.Ecofeministshavesuspectedbiotechnology,especiallyitsusetoreshapebodiesorcontrolreproduction,ofbeingan

extensionoftraditionalpatriarchalexploitationofwomen,or,alternatively,haveseenitasa

symptomofacontrolobsessed,unemphatic,gadgetfixated,bodyloathingmindset.Some

haveofferedakindofpsychoanalysisoftranshumanism,concludingthatitrepresentsan

embarrassingrationalizationofselfcenteredimmaturityandsocialfailure.Butothershave

welcomedthelibratorypotentialofbiotechnology.ShulamithFirestonearguedinthe

feministclassicTheDialecticofSex(1971)thatwomenwillbefullyliberatedonlywhen

technologyhasfreedthemfromhavingtoincubatechildren.70CyberfeministDonna

Harawayproclaimsthatshewouldratherbeacyborgthanagoddessandarguesagainstthedualisticviewthatassociatesmenwithcultureandtechnologyandwomenwith

nature.71

70(Firestone1970).71(Haraway1991).

23


24/30

PerhapsthemostprominentbioconservativevoicetodayisthatofLeonKass,chairmanof

PresidentBushsCouncilonBioethics[[Q:stillextant?]].Kassacknowledgesanintellectual

debttothreeotherdistinguishedbioconservatives:ProtestanttheologianPaulRamsey,

ChristianapologistapologeticC.S.Lewis,andGermanbornphilosophertheologianHans

Jonas(whostudiedunderMartinHeidegger).72Kasssconcernscenteronhumandignity

andthesubtlewaysinwhichourattemptstoasserttechnologicalmasteryoverhuman

naturecouldendupdehumanizingusbyunderminingvarioustraditionalmeaningssuch

asthemeaningofthelifecycle,themeaningofsex,themeaningofeating,andthemeaning

ofwork.Kassiswellknownwellknownforhisadvocacyofthewisdomofrepugnance

(whichechoesHansJonassheuristicsoffear).WhileKassstressesthatagutfeelingof

revulsionisnotamoralargument,heneverthelessinsiststhattheyuckfactormeritsour

respectfulattention:

Incrucialcasesrepugnanceistheemotionalexpressionofdeepwisdom,beyond

reasonspowertofullyarticulateweintuitandfeel,immediatelyandwithout

argument,theviolationofthingswerightfullyholddearTopollutionand

perversion,thefittingresponsecanonlybehorrorandrevulsion;andconversely,

generalizedhorrorandrevulsionareprimafacieevidenceoffoulnessand

violation.73

FrancisFukuyama,anotherprominentbioconservativeandmemberofthePresidents

Council,hasrecentlyidentifiedtranshumanismastheworldsmostdangerousidea.74For

Fukuyama,however,thechiefconcernisnotaboutthesubtleunderminingofmeanings

buttheprospectofviolenceandoppression.HearguesthatliberaldemocracydependsonthefactthatallhumansshareanundefinedFactorX,whichgroundstheirequaldignity

andrights.Theuseofenhancingtechnologies,hefears,coulddestroyFactorX.75

BioethicistsGeorgeAnnas,LoriAndrews,andRosarioIsasihaveproposedlegislationto

makeinheritablegeneticmodificationinhumansacrimeagainsthumanity,liketorture

andgenocide.TheirrationaleissimilartoFukuyamas:

Thenewspecies,orposthuman,willlikelyviewtheoldnormalhumansas

inferior,evensavages,andfitforslaveryorslaughter.Thenormals,ontheotherhand,mayseetheposthumansasathreatandiftheycan,mayengageina

72(Kass2002).73(Kass1997).74(Fukuyama2004).Foraresponse,see(Bostrom2004).75(Fukuyama2002).

24


25/30

preemptivestrikebykillingtheposthumansbeforetheythemselvesarekilledor

enslavedbythem.Itisultimatelythispredictablepotentialforgenocidethatmakes

speciesalteringexperimentspotentialweaponsofmassdestruction,andmakesthe

unaccountablegeneticengineerapotentialbioterrorist.76

ThereissomecommongroundbetweenAnnasetal.andthetranshumanists:theyagreethat

murderandenslavement,whetherofhumansbyposthumansortheotherwayaround,

wouldbeamoralatrocityandacrime.Transhumanistsdeny,however,thatthisisalikely

consequenceofgermlinetherapytoenhancehealth,memory,longevity,orothersimilar

traitsinhumans.Ifandwhenwedevelopthecapabilitytocreatesomesingularentitythat

couldpotentiallydestroythehumanrace,suchasasuperintelligentmachine,thenwecould

indeedregarditasacrimeagainsthumanitytoproceedwithoutathoroughriskanalysis

andtheinstallationofadequatesafetyfeatures.Aswesawintheprevioussection,theeffort

tounderstandandfindwaystoreduceexistentialriskshasbeenacentralpreoccupationfor

sometranshumanists,suchasEricDrexler,NickBostrom,andEliezerYudkowsky.

Thereareothercommonalitiesbetweenbioconservativesandtranshumanists.Bothagree

thatwefacearealisticprospectthattechnologycouldbeusedtosubstantiallytransformthe

humanconditioninthiscentury.Bothagreethatthisimposesanobligationonthecurrent

generationtothinkhardaboutthepracticalandethicalimplications.Bothareconcerned

withmedicalrisksofsideeffects,ofcourse,althoughbioconservativesaremoreworriedthat

thetechnologymightsucceedthanthatitmightfail.Bothcampsagreethattechnologyin

generalandmedicineinparticularhavealegitimateroletoplay,althoughbioconservatives

tendtoopposemanyusesofmedicinethatgobeyondtherapytoenhancement.Bothsidescondemntheracistandcoercivestatesponsoredeugenicsprogramsofthe20thtwentieth

century.Bioconservativesdrawattentiontothepossibilitythatsubtlehumanvaluescould

begeterodedbytechnologicaladvances,andtranshumanistsshouldperhapslearntobe

moresensitivetotheseconcerns.Ontheotherhand,transhumanistsemphasizethe

enormouspotentialforgenuineimprovementsinhumanwellbeingandhumanflourishing

thatareattainableonlyviatechnologicaltransformation,andbioconservativescouldtryto

bemoreappreciativeofthepossibilitythatwecouldrealizegreatvaluesbyventuring

beyondourcurrentbiologicallimitations.77

76(Annas,Andrews,andIsasi2002).77ImgratefultoAndersSandbergandSaraLippincottforcomments.

25


26/30

Appendix

TheTranshumanistDeclaration

(VersionofMarch2009)

(1)Humanity

stands

to

be

profoundly

affected

by

science

and

technology

in

the

future.

We

envisionthepossibilityofbroadeninghumanpotentialbyovercomingaging,cognitive

shortcomings,involuntarysuffering,andourconfinementtoplanetEarth.

(2)Webelievethathumanityspotentialisstillmostlyunrealized. Therearepossible

scenariosthatleadtowonderfulandexceedinglyworthwhileenhancedhumanconditions.

(3)Werecognizethathumanityfacesseriousrisks,especiallyfromthemisuseofnew

technologies. Therearepossiblerealisticscenariosthatleadtothelossofmost,orevenall,

ofwhatweholdvaluable. Someofthesescenariosaredrastic,othersaresubtle. Although

allprogressischange,notallchangeisprogress.

(4)Researcheffortneedstobeinvestedintounderstandingtheseprospects.Weneedto

carefullydeliberatehowbesttoreducerisksandexpeditebeneficialapplications. Wealso

needforumswherepeoplecanconstructivelydiscusswhatshouldbedone,andasocial

orderwhereresponsibledecisionscanbeimplemented.

(5)Reductionofexistentialrisks,anddevelopmentofmeansforthepreservationoflifeand

health,thealleviationofgravesuffering,andtheimprovementofhumanforesightand

wisdomshouldbepursuedasurgentpriorities,andheavilyfunded.

(6)Policymakingoughttobeguidedbyresponsibleandinclusivemoralvision,taking

seriouslybothopportunitiesandrisks,respectingautonomyandindividualrights,and

showingsolidaritywithandconcernfortheinterestsanddignityofallpeoplearoundthe

globe. Wemustalsoconsiderourmoralresponsibilitiestowardsgenerationsthatwillexist

inthefuture.

(7)Weadvocatethewellbeingofallsentience,includinghumans,nonhumananimals,and

anyfutureartificialintellects,modifiedlifeforms,orotherintelligencestowhichtechnologicalandscientificadvancemaygiverise.

(8)Wefavorallowingindividualswidepersonalchoiceoverhowtheyenabletheirlives.

Thisincludesuseoftechniquesthatmaybedevelopedtoassistmemory,concentration,and

mentalenergy;lifeextensiontherapies;reproductivechoicetechnologies;cryonics

26


27/30

procedures;andmanyotherpossiblehumanmodificationandenhancementtechnologies.

References

Annas,G.,L.Andrews,andR.Isasi(2002),ProtectingtheEndangeredHuman:Towardan

InternationalTreatyProhibitingCloningandInheritableAlterations ,American

JournalofLawandMedicine28(2&3):151178.

Bacon,F.(1620),NovumOrganum.TranslatedbyR.L.EllisandJ.Spedding.Robertson,J.ed,

ThePhilosophicalWoeksofFrancisBacon,1905.London:Routledge.

Bernal,J.D.(1969),Theworld,theflesh&thedevil;anenquiryintothefutureofthethreeenemies

oftherationalsoul.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.

Bostrom,N.(1998),HowLongBeforeSuperintelligence? InternationalJournalofFutures

Studies2.

(2002),ExistentialRisks:AnalyzingHumanExtinctionScenariosandRelatedHazards ,JournalofEvolutionandTechnology9.

(2002),WhenMachinesOutsmartHumans ,Futures35(7):759764.

(2003),AreYouLivinginaComputerSimulation? PhilosophicalQuarterly53

(211):243255.

(2003),HumanGeneticEnhancements:ATranshumanistPerspective ,Journalof

ValueInquiry37(4):493506.

TheTranshumanistFAQ:v2.1.WorldTranshumanistAssociation2003.

http://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/faq/.

(2004),Transhumanism TheWorldsMostDangerousIdea? Betterhumans10/19/2004.

(2004),TranshumanistValues ,inFredrickAdams(ed.),EthicalIssuesforthe21st

Century:PhilosophicalDocumentationCenterPress.

(2005),TheFableoftheDragonTyrant ,JournalofMedicalEthics31(5):273277.

(2005),TheFutureofHumanEvolution ,inCharlesTandy(ed.),DeathandAnti

Death:RiaUniversityPress.

(2005),InDefenceofPosthumanDignity ,Bioethicsforthcoming.

Bostrom,N.,andT.Ord(2005),StatusQuoBiasinBioethics:TheCaseforCognitive

Enhancement ,inNickBostromandJulianSavulescu(eds.),ImprovingHumans,

Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Buchanan,A.,D.W.Brock,N.Daniels,andD.Wikler(2002),FromChancetoChoice:Genetics

andJustice:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Capek,K.(2004),R.U.R.(Rossumsuniversalrobots),Penguinclassics.London:PenguinBooks.

Condorcet,J.A.N.d.C.(1979),Sketchforahistoricalpictureoftheprogressofthehumanmind.

Westport,Conn.:GreenwoodPress.

27
http://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/faq/http://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/faq/


28/30

Darwin,C.(2003),Theoriginofthespecies,Barnes&nobleclassics.NewYork,NY:Fine

CreativeMedia.

Drexler,E.,andR.Smalley(1993),Nanotechnology:DrexlerandSmalleymakethecasefor

andagainstmolecularassemblers ,Chemical&EngineeringNews81(48):3742.

Drexler,K.E.(1985),EnginesofCreation:TheComingEraofNanotechnology.London:Forth

Estate.

(1992),Nanosystems:MolecularMachinery,Manufacturing,andComputation.NewYork:

JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.

Esfandiary,F.M.(1970),Optimismone;theemergingradicalism.NewYork:Norton.

Ettinger,R.(1964),Theprospectofimmortality.NewYork:Doubleday.

Ettinger,R.C.W.(1972),Manintosuperman;thestartlingpotentialofhumanevolutionandhow

tobepartofit.NewYork:St.MartinsPress.

Feynman,R.(1960),ThereisPlentyofRoomattheBottom ,EngineeringandScienceFeb.

Firestone,S.(1970),Thedialecticofsex;thecaseforfeministrevolution.NewYork,:Morrow.

FM2030(1989),Areyouatranshuman?:monitoringandstimulatingyourpersonalrateofgrowth

inarapidlychangingworld.NewYork,NY:WarnerBooks.

Franklin,B.,etal.(1956),Mr.Franklin:aselectionfromhispersonalletters.NewHaven:Yale

UniversityPress.

Freitas,R.,andR.Merkle(2005),DiamondSurfacesandDiamondMechanosynthesis.

Georgetown,TX:LandesBioscience.

Fukuyama,F.(2002),OurPosthumanFuture:ConsequencesoftheBiotechnologyRevolution:

Farrar,StrausandGiroux.

(2004),Transhumanism,ForeignAffairsSeptember/October.

Glover,J.(1984),WhatSortofPeopleShouldThereBe?:Pelican.Good,I.J.(1965),SpeculationsConcerningtheFirstUltraintelligentMachine ,Advancesin

Computers6:3188.

Haldane,J.B.S.(1924),Daedalus;or,Scienceandthefuture.London,:K.Paul,Trench,Trubner

&co.,ltd.

Hanson,R.(1994),WhatIfUploadsComeFirst:TheCrackofaFutureDawn ,Extropy6(2).

(1995),CouldGamblingSaveScience?EncouraginganHonestConsensus ,Social

Epistemology9:1:333.

BurningtheCosmicCommons:EvolutionaryStrategiesforInterstellarColonization1998.

http://hanson.gmu.edu/filluniv.pdf.Haraway,D.(1991),ACyborgManifesto:Science,Technology,andSocialistFeminismin

theLateTwentiethCentury ,in,Simians,CyborgsandWomen:TheReinventionof

Nature,NewYork:Routledge,149181.

Harris,J.(1992),WonderwomanandSuperman:theethicsofhumanbiotechnology,Studiesin

bioethics.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

28
http://hanson.gmu.edu/filluniv.pdfhttp://hanson.gmu.edu/filluniv.pdf


29/30

Hughes,J.(2004),CitizenCyborg:whydemocraticsocietiesmustrespondtotheredesignedhuman

ofthefuture.Cambridge,MA:WestviewPress.

Huxley,A.(1932),BraveNewWorld.London:Chatto&Windus.

Huxley,J.(1927),Religionwithoutrevelation.London:E.Benn.

Jonsen,A.R.(1998),Thebirthofbioethics.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Joy,B.(2000),Whythefuturedoesntneedus ,Wired8.04.

Kant,I.(1986),Philosophicalwritings,TheGermanlibrary;v.13.NewYork:Continuum.

Kass,L.(1997),TheWisdomofRepugnance ,TheNewRepublic2June1997:22.

(2002),Life,liberty,andthedefenseofdignity:thechallengeforbioethics.1sted.San

Francisco:EncounterBooks.

Kurzweil,R.(1999),TheAgeofSpiritualMachines:Whencomputersexceedhumanintelligence.

NewYork:Viking.

LaMettrie,J.O.d.(1996),Machinemanandotherwritings,Cambridgetextsinthehistoryof

philosophy.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Leslie,J.(1996),TheEndoftheWorld:TheScienceandEthicsofHumanExtinction.London:

Routledge.

Minsky,M.(1994),WillRobotsInherittheEarth? ScientificAmerican.

Mitchell,S.(2004),Gilgamesh:anewEnglishversion.NewYork:FreePress.

Moore,G.E.(1965),Crammingmorecomponentsontointegratedcircuits ,Electronics38(8).

Moravec,H.(1989),MindChildren.Harvard:HarvardUniversityPress.

(1999),Robot:MereMachinetoTranscendentMind.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

More,M.PrinciplesofExtropy,Version3.112003.http://www.extropy.org/principles.htm.

Newman,W.R.(2004),Prometheanambitions:alchemyandthequesttoperfectnature.Chicago:

UniversityofChicagoPress.Nietzsche,F.W.(1908),AlsosprachZarathustra:einBuchfuralleundkeinen.Leipzig:Insel

Verlag.

Office,U.S.G.P.(1949),TrialsofWarCriminalsbeforetheNurembergMilitaryTribunals

underControlCouncilLawNo.10 ,2:181182.

Orwell,G.(1949),Nineteeneightyfour,anovel.NewYork:Harcourt.

Parens,E.(1998),Enhancinghumantraits:ethicalandsocialimplications,HastingsCenterstudies

inethics.Washington,D.C.:GeorgetownUniversityPress.

Parfit,D.(1984),ReasonsandPersons.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Pearce,D.TheHedonisticImperative2004.http://www.hedweb.com/hedab.htm.Pence,G.E.(1998),Whosafraidofhumancloning?Lanham:Rowman&Littlefield.

PicodellaMirandola,G.(1956),Orationonthedignityofman.Chicago:GatewayEditions.

Posner,R.(2004),Catastrophe.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Rees,M.(2003),OurFinalHour:AScientistsWarning:HowTerror,Error,andEnvironmental

DisasterThreatenHumankindsFutureinThisCentury OnEarthandBeyond:Basic

Books.

29
http://www.extropy.org/principles.htmhttp://www.hedweb.com/hedab.htmhttp://www.hedweb.com/hedab.htmhttp://www.extropy.org/principles.htm


30/30

Regis,E.(1990),Greatmambochickenandthetranshumancondition:scienceslightlyovertheedge.

Reading,Mass.:AddisonWesley.

(1994),MeettheExtropians ,Wired2(10).

Russell,B.(1924),Icarus;orThefutureofscience.London:K.Paul,Trench,Trubner&Co.,ltd.

Savulescu,J.(2001),ProcreativeBeneficence:WhyWeShouldSelecttheBestChildren ,

Bioethics15(56):413426.

Shelley,M.W.(1818),Frankenstein;or,ThemodernPrometheus.London,:Printedfor

Lackington,Hughes,Harding,Mavor,&Jones.

Singer,P.(2003),ShoppingattheGeneticSupermarket ,inSYSong,YMKooandDRJ.

Macer(eds.),BioethicsinAsiainthe21stCentury:EubiosEthicsInstitute,143156.

Stock,G.(2002),RedesigningHumans:OurInevitableGeneticFuture:HoughtonMifflin

Company.

TeilharddeChardin,P.(1964),Thefutureofman.NewYork:Harper&Row.

Tipler,F.(1994),ThePhysicsofImmortality.NewYork:Doubleday.

Turing,A.(1950),Computingmachineryandintelligence ,Mind59:433460.

Ulam,S.(1958), JohnvonNeumann19031957 ,BulletinoftheAmericanMathematicalSociety

(May).

Vinge,V.(1993),TheComingTechnologicalSingularity ,WholeEarthReviewWinterissue.

VitaMore,N.TranshumanistArtsStatement2002.

http://www.transhumanist.biz/transart.htm.

Walker,M.(2002),ProlegomenatoAnyFuturePhilosophy ,JournalofEvolutionand

Technology10.

World_Medical_Organization(1996),DeclarationofHelsinki ,BritishMedicalJournal313

(7070):14481449.WTATheTranshumanistDeclaration2002.

http://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/declaration/.

Yudkowsky,E.CollectiveVolition2004.http://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective

volition.html.
http://www.transhumanist.biz/transart.htmhttp://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/declaration/http://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective-volition.htmlhttp://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective-volition.htmlhttp://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective-volition.htmlhttp://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective-volition.htmlhttp://www.singinst.org/friendly/collective-volition.htmlhttp://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/declaration/http://www.transhumanist.biz/transart.htm

Documents

Bostrom - History of Transhumanist Thought