[ExI] [wta-talk] Transhumanism and Politics

[Hughes, James J.]

Thanks very much for this very clear statement. I've rephrased them
below.

--------------------

Five Points for European (and World?) Transhumanism 

1) The struggle for access to technologies cannot be ignored on the
assumption that universal abundance or the Singularity will make such
concerns irrelevant.

2) Access to enabling technologies should be defined as a right of the
person, as opposed to simply a market commodity.

3) We must advocate for and defend financial support for the basic
technological and educational infrastructure essential for our future. 

4) The rights to freedom of research, and to control our bodies and
reproduction, are absolute and cannot be constrained by other rights and
regulatory concerns. 

5) Technological progress cannot, and above all should not, be taken for
granted. 

--------------------

My response:

1. Absolutely.

2. Yes, generally, although we need to be mindful that we always need to
draw some line between the public goods we provide as a right of
citizenship and those in the market. At least, I do not believe it would
be good to eliminate market mechanisms. So, for the foreseeable future
we will need to negotiate which enabling technologies will be provided
free or subsidized to all citizens as a public good, and which will be
left more or less to market forces.

3. Yes, very important. Why we need to be advocating for a Longevity
Dividend program, and related programs of scitech development, as well
as investments in math, science and engineering education.

4. No - as you would imagine - I don't believe this framing is correct.
Individual rights are not absolute, and I believe they are trumpable by
other concerns. I doubt that we would make much progress outside of
anarchist circles arguing that, for instance, the "right of research"
trumps concerns about weapons of mass destruction. Some public goods
will always trump individual rights, but our demand should be that only
certain, clear, tangible costs and benefits to the public be allowed to
do so. Perhaps that is what you are referring to with the language
suggesting they should not be trumped by "globalisation of absolute and
universal values of a more or less overtly metaphysical foundation."
However, I think this item needs a clarification before I or other
technoprogressives would be able to sign on.

5. Yes. Perhaps point 3 is the corollary of this point.

J.