A H ISTORY OF T RANSHUMANIST T HOUGHT

NickBostrom FacultyofPhilosophy,OxfordUniversity www.nickbostrom.com (2005) [OriginallypublishedinJournalofEvolutionandTechnologyVol.14Issue1April2005; 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. 1 He 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).

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. 4 Baconadvocatedthe projectofeffectingallthingspossible,bywhichhemeantusingsciencetoachievemastery overnatureinordertoimprovethelivingconditionofhumanbeings.Theheritagefromthe RenaissancecombineswiththeinfluenceofIsaacNewton,ThomasHobbes,JohnLocke, ImmanuelKant,theMarquisdeCondorcet,andotherstoformthebasisforrational
Seee.g.(Newman2004). (PicodellaMirandola1956). 4(Bacon1620).
2 3

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,beingimmersedwithafewfriendsina caskofMadeira,untilthattime,thentoberecalledtolifebythesolarwarmthofmy dearcountry!But...inallprobability,weliveinacenturytoolittleadvanced,andtoo neartheinfancyofscience,toseesuchanartbroughtinourtimetoitsperfection. 6 AfterthepublicationofDarwinsOriginofSpecies(1859),itbecameincreasinglyplausibleto viewthecurrentversionofhumanitynotastheendpointofevolutionbutratherasanearly phase. 7 Theriseofscientificphysicalismmightalsohavecontributedtothebeliefthat technologymightwellimprovethehumanorganism.Forexample,asimplekindof materialistviewwasboldlyproposedin1750bytheFrenchphysicianandmaterialist philosopherJulienOffraydeLaMettrieinLHommeMachine,inwhichhearguedthatman

(Condorcet1979). (Franklinetal.1956),pp.2729. 7(Darwin2003).

5 6

isbutananimal,oracollectionofspringswhichwindeachotherup. 8 Ifhumanbeingsare 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.Whathaveyou donetoovercomehim?Allbeingssofarhavecreatedsomethingbeyondthemselves; anddoyouwanttobetheebbofthisgreatfloodandevengobacktothebeasts ratherthanovercomeman? 10 WhatNietzschehadinmind,however,wasnottechnologicaltransformationbutakindof soaringpersonalgrowthandculturalrefinementinexceptionalindividuals(whohethought wouldhavetoovercomethelifesappingslavemoralityofChristianity).Despitesome surfacelevelsimilaritieswiththeNietzscheanvision,transhumanismwithits Enlightenmentroots,itsemphasisonindividualliberties,anditshumanisticconcernforthe welfareofallhumans(andothersentientbeings)probablyhasasmuchormorein

(LaMettrie1996). (Kant1986). 10(Nietzsche1908).

8 9

commonwithNietzschescontemporarytheEnglishliberalthinkerandutilitarianJohn StuartMill.

2.Speculation,sciencefiction,andtwentiethcenturytotalitarianism
In1923,thenotedBritishbiochemistJ.B.S.HaldanepublishedtheessayDaedalus;or,Science andtheFuture,inwhichhearguedthatgreatbenefitswouldcomefromcontrollingourown geneticsandfromscienceingeneral.Hepredictedawealthiersociety,withabundantclean energy,wheregeneticswouldbeemployedtomakepeopletaller,healthier,andsmarterand whereectogenesis(gestatingfetusesinartificialwombs)wouldbecommonplace.Healso commentedonwhathasinrecentyearsbecomeknownastheyuckfactor: ThechemicalorphysicalinventorisalwaysaPrometheus.Thereisnogreat invention,fromfiretoflying,whichhasnotbeenhailedasaninsulttosomegod.But ifeveryphysicalandchemicalinventionisablasphemy,everybiologicalinventionis aperversion.Thereishardlyonewhich,onfirstbeingbroughttothenoticeofan observerfromanynationwhichhasnotpreviouslyheardoftheirexistence,would notappeartohimasindecentandunnatural. 11 Haldanesessaybecameabestsellerandsetoffachainoffutureorienteddiscussions, includingTheWorld,theFleshandtheDevil,byJ.D.Bernal(1929) 12 ,whichspeculatedabout spacecolonizationandbionicimplantsaswellasmentalimprovementsarisingfrom advancedsocialscienceandpsychology;theworksofOlafStapledon,aphilosopherand sciencefictionauthor;andtheessayIcarus:theFutureofScience(1924)byBertrand Russell. 13 Russelltookamorepessimisticview,arguingthatwithoutmorekindlinessinthe world,technologicalpowerwouldmainlyservetoincreaseourabilitytoharmoneanother. SciencefictionauthorssuchasH.G.WellsandStapledongotmanypeoplethinkingabout thefutureevolutionofthehumanrace. AldousHuxleysBraveNewWorld,publishedin1932,hashadanenduringimpacton debatesabouthumantechnologicaltransformation 14 matchedbyfewotherworksoffiction (possiblyexceptingMaryShelleysFrankenstein 15 ).Huxleydescribesadystopiawhere psychologicalconditioning,promiscuoussexuality,biotechnology,andtheopiatedrug somakeepthepopulationplacidinastatic,conformistcastesocietygovernedbyten
(Haldane1924). (Bernal1929[1969]). 13(Russell1924) 14(Huxley1932). 15(Shelley1818).
11 12

worldcontrollers.Childrenaremanufacturedinfertilityclinicsandartificiallygestated.The lowercastesarechemicallystuntedordeprivedofoxygenduringtheirmaturationprocess, inordertolimittheirphysicalandintellectualdevelopment.Frombirth,membersofevery casteareindoctrinatedduringtheirsleep,byrecordedvoicesrepeatingtheslogansofthe officialFordistreligion,andconditionedtobelievethattheirowncasteisthebestoneto belongto.ThesocietydepictedinBraveNewWorldisoftenlikenedtoanotherinfluential20th centurydystopia,thatofGeorgeOrwellsNineteenEightyFour. 16 NineteenEightyFour 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. Intheearlydecadesofthe20 thcentury,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).

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).

wisdomandholiness.Inthelaterstories,whichwereinfluencedbythemoreIslamicconcern abouthumanitysgettingtooclosetoGod,thegolembecameacreationofoverreaching mysticswhowereinevitablypunishedfortheirblasphemy.ThestoryoftheSorcerers Apprenticeisavariationofthistheme:Theapprenticeanimatesabroomsticktofetchwater butisunabletomakethebroomstoplikeFrankenstein,itis,astoryoftechnologyoutof control.ThewordrobotwascoinedbytheCzechwriterKarelapek,inhisdarkplay R.U.R.(1921),inwhicharobotlaborforcedestroysitshumancreators. 18 Withtheinvention 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.Marvin Minsky,HansMoravec,RayKurzweil,andNickBostromhaveputforwardreasonsfor takingseriouslythepossibilitythatthiscouldhappenwithinthefirsthalfofthiscentury. 20 Ina1958tribute,thePolishmathematicianStanislawUlam,referringtoameetingwithhis latecolleagueJohnvonNeumann,wrote: Oneconversationcenteredontheeveracceleratingprogressoftechnologyand changesinthemodeofhumanlife,whichgivestheappearanceofapproachingsome essentialsingularityinthehistoryoftheracebeyondwhichhumanaffairs,aswe knowthem,couldnotcontinue. 21
(Capek2004). (Turing1950). 20(Minsky1994;Moravec1999;Bostrom1998,2002;Kurzweil1999). 21(Ulam1958).
18 19

 Therapidityoftechnologicalchangeinrecenttimesleadsnaturallytotheideathat continuedtechnologicalinnovationwillhaveaprofoundeffectonhumanityinthedecades ahead.Thispredictionisstrengthenedifonebelievesthatsomeofthosevariablesthat currentlyexhibitexponentialgrowthwillcontinuetodosoandthattheywillbeamongthe maindriversofchange.GordonE.Moore,cofounderofIntel,noticedin1965thatthe numberoftransistorsonachipexhibitedexponentialgrowth.Thisledtotheformulationof Mooreslaw,whichstates(roughly)thatcomputingpowerdoubleseveryeighteen monthstotwoyears. 22 Morerecently,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.Thusthefirstultraintelligentmachineis thelastinventionthatmanneedevermake. 23 VernorVingediscussedthisideainalittlemoredetailinhisinfluential1993paper TechnologicalSingularity,inwhichhepredicted: Withinthirtyyears,wewillhavethetechnologicalmeanstocreatesuperhuman intelligence.Shortlyafter,thehumanerawillbeended. 24 Transhumaniststodayholddivergingviewsaboutthesingularity:someseeitasalikely scenario,othersbelievethatitismoreprobablethattherewillneverbeanyverysuddenand dramaticchangesastheresultofprogressinartificialintelligence.
(Moore1965). (Good1965). 24(Vinge1993).
22 23

 Thesingularityideaalsocomesinasomewhatdifferenteschatologicalversion,whichtraces itslineagetothewritingsofPierreTeilharddeChardin,apaleontologistandJesuit theologianwhosawanevolutionarytelosinthedevelopmentofanencompassing noosphere(aglobalconsciousness)viaphysicistFrankTipler,whoarguedthatadvanced civilizationsmightcometohaveadefininginfluenceonthefutureevolutionofthecosmos, and,inthefinalmomentsoftheBigCrunch,mightmanagetoextractaninfinitenumberof computationsbyharnessingthesheerenergyofthecollapsingmatter. 25,26 However,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 NobellaureatephysicistRichardFeynmaninhisfamousafterdinneraddressin1959 entitledThereisPlentyofRoomattheBottom. 28 )Inthisseminalwork,Drexlernotonly arguedforthefeasibilityofassemblerbasednanotechnologybutalsoexploredits consequencesandbeganchartingthestrategicchallengesposedbyitsdevelopment. DrexlerslaterbookNanosystems(1992)suppliedamoretechnicalanalysisthatseemedto confirmhisoriginalconclusions. 29 Topreparetheworldfornanotechnologyandwork towardsitssafeimplementation,hefoundedtheForesightInstitutetogetherwithhisthen wife,ChristinePeterson,in1986.

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

25 26

10

Inthelastseveralyears,nanotechnologyhasbecomebigbusiness,withworldwideresearch fundingamountingtobillionsofdollars.YetlittleofthisworkfitsDrexlersambitiousvision ofnanotechnologyasanassemblerbased,nearuniversal,constructiontechnology.The mainstreamnanotechnologycommunityhassoughttodistanceitselffromDrexlersclaims. ThechemistRichardSmalley(anotherNobellaureate)hasdebatedDrexler,assertingthat nonbiologicalmolecularassemblersareimpossible. 30 Todate,however,notechnical critiqueofDrexlersworkinthepublishedliteraturehasfoundanysignificantflawsinhis reasoning.Ifmolecularnanotechnologyisindeedphysicallypossible,asDrexlermaintains, thequestionbecomesjusthowdifficultitwillbetodevelopit,andhowlongitwilltake. Theseissuesareverydifficulttosettleinadvance. 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,andmoreominouslyleadto therapidcreationofvastarsenalsoflethalornonlethalweapons. Anotherhypotheticaltechnologythatwouldhavearevolutionaryimpactisuploading,the transferofahumanmindtoacomputer.Thiswouldinvolvethefollowingsteps:First,create asufficientlydetailedscanofaparticularhumanbrain,perhapsbydeconstructingitwith nanobotsorbyfeedingthinslicesofbraintissuesintopowerfulmicroscopesforautomatic imageanalysis.Second,fromthisscan,reconstructtheneuronalnetworkthatthebrain implemented,andcombinethiswithcomputationalmodelsofthedifferenttypesof neurons.Third,emulatethewholecomputationalstructureonapowerfulsupercomputer.If successful,theprocedurewouldresultintheoriginalmind,withmemoryandpersonality intact,beingtransferredtothecomputerwhereitwouldthenexistassoftware;anditcould

30 31

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

11

eitherinhabitarobotbodyorliveinavirtualreality. 32 Whileitisoftenthoughtthat,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 regrettedthathewaslivingtooneartheinfancyofscienceforthistobepossible.Sincethen, sciencehasgrownupabit.In1962,RobertEttingerpublishedthebook,TheProspectof Immortality,whichlaunchedtheideaofcryonicsuspension. 33 Ettingerarguedthatas medicaltechnologyseemstobeconstantlyprogressing,andsincesciencehasdiscovered thatchemicalactivitycomestoacompletehaltatlowenoughtemperatures,itshouldbe possibletofreezeapersontoday(inliquidnitrogen)andpreservethebodyuntilatime whentechnologyisadvancedenoughtorepairthefreezingdamageandreversetheoriginal causeofdeanimation.Cryonics,Ettingerbelieved,offeredatickettothefuture. Alas,themassesdidnotlineupfortheride.Cryonicshasremainedafringealternativeto moretraditionalmethodsoftreatingthediseased,suchascremationandburial.Thepractice ofcryonicswasnotintegratedintothemainstreamclinicalsettingandwasinstead conductedonthecheapbyasmallnumberofenthusiasts.Twoearlycryonicsorganizations
32 33

(Bostrom2003). (Ettinger1964).

12

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 inNewYorkinthe1960sandformedagroupofoptimisticfuturistsknownasthe UpWingers. 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. 36 InFMsterminology,atranshumanisatransitional
(Ettinger1972). (Esfandiary1970). 36(FM20301989).
34 35

13

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,butperhapsmostimportant wastheextropiansmailinglist,anonlinediscussionforumwherenewideaswereshared anddebated.Inthemidnineties,manygotfirstexposuretotranshumanistviewsfromthe ExtropyInstituteslistserve. MorehadimmigratedtoCaliforniafromBritainafterchanginghisnamefromMax OConnor.Ofhisnewname,hesaid: Itseemedtoreallyencapsulatetheessenceofwhatmygoalis:alwaystoimprove, nevertobestatic.Iwasgoingtogetbetterateverything,becomesmarter,fitter,and healthier.Itwouldbeaconstantremindertokeepmovingforward. 38

37 38

(Regis1990). (Regis1994).

14

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). 41 TheDeclarationwasintendedasaconciseconsensusstatement ofthebasicprincipleoftranshumanism.TheFAQwasalsoaconsensusornearconsensus document,butitwasmoreambitiousinitsphilosophicalscopeinthatitdevelopeda numberofthemesthathadpreviouslybeen,atmost,implicitinthemovement.Morethan fiftypeoplecontributedcommentsondraftsoftheFAQ.Thedocumentwasproducedby
(More2003). (VitaMore2002). 41(WTA2002).
39 40

15

Bostrombutmajorpartsandideaswerealsocontributedbyseveralothers,includingthe BritishutilitarianthinkerDavidPearce,MaxMore,theAmericanfeministanddisability rightsactivistKathrynAegis,andthewalkingencyclopediaAndersSandberg,whowasat thetimeaneurosciencestudentinSweden. DavidPearcehasalsodevelopedhisowndistinctiveflavoroftranshumanismbasedonan ethicofhedonisticutilitarianism.Pearceargues,inTheHedonisticImperative,foranambitious programtoeliminatesufferinginbothhumanandnonhumananimalsbymeansof advancedneurotechnology(intheshorttermpharmaceuticals,inthelongertermperhaps geneticengineering). 42 Inparallelwiththisnegativeefforttoabolishsuffering,heproposesa positiveprogramofparadiseengineeringinwhichsentientbeingswouldberedesignedto enableeverybodytoexperienceofunprecedentedlevelsofwellbeing.InPearcesutopia, ourmotivationsystemwouldrunongradientsofblissinsteadofthecurrentpleasurepain axis. TheWTAsmembershipgrewrapidly,andlocalchaptersmushroomedaroundtheworld. ActivitiesfocusedmainlyonInternetdiscussion,developmentofdocuments,representation inthemedia,organizingofanannualTransVisionconference,andpublicationofthe scholarlyonlineJournalofTranshumanism(laterrenamedtoJournalofEvolutionand Technology). Inthefirstfewyearsofitsexistence,theWTAwasaverylooselyandinformallyorganized structure.Itentereditsnextphaseafterameetingin2001betweenJamesHughes(a sociologistatTrinityCollegeinHartfordConnecticut),MarkWalker(aphilosopheratthe UniversityofToronto,thentheeditoroftheJournalofTranshumanism),andBostrom(who wasatthetimeteachingatYale).HugheswaselectedSecretaryandturnedhisorganizing skillsandenergytothetask.Withinshortorder,theWTAadoptedaconstitution, incorporatedasanonprofit,andbeganbuildingupavigorousinternationalnetworkof localgroupsandvolunteers.Currently,theWTAhasapproximately3,000membersfrom morethan100countries,anditpursuesawiderangeofactivities,allvolunteerdriven. Anumberofrelatedorganizationshavealsocroppedupinrecentyears,focusingmore narrowlyonparticulartranshumanistissues,suchaslifeextension,artificialintelligence,or thelegalimplicationsofconvergingtechnologies(nanobioinfoneurotechnologies).The InstituteforEthicsandEmergingTechnologies,anonprofitthinktank,wasestablishedin 2004,topromotetheethicaluseoftechnologytoexpandhumancapacities.
42

(Pearce2004).

16

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. 43,44 Buttheriseofthemodernhealthcaresystemspawnednewethicaldilemmas 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.
45

Lackingaclearmethodology,andoperatingonaplainoftensweptbythewindsof

politicalorreligiouscontroversy,thestandardofscholarshiphasfrequentlybeen underwhelming.Despitethesedifficulties,bioethicsburgeoned.Acynicmightascribethis accomplishmenttotheamplefertilizationthatthefieldreceivedfromanumberofpractical imperatives:absolvingdoctorsofmoraldilemmas,trainingmedicalstudentstobehave, enablinghospitalboardstotrumpettheircommitmenttothehighestethicalstandardsof care,providingsoundbitesforthemassmedia,andallowingpoliticianstocovertheir behindsbydelegatingcontroversialissuestoethicscommittees.Butakinderglossis

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

17

possible:decentpeoplerecognizedthatdifficultmoralproblemsaroseinmodern biomedicine,thattheseproblemsneededtobeaddressed,andthathavingsomeprofessional scholarstryingtoclarifytheseproblemsinsomesortofsystematicwaymightbehelpful. Whilehighercaliberscholarshipandamorerobustmethodologywouldbenice,inthe meantimewemakethemostofwhatwehave. Moralphilosophershaveinthelastcoupleofdecadesmademanycontributionsthatbearon theethicsofhumantransformation,andwemustlimitourselvestoafewmentions.Derek ParfitsclassicReasonsandPersons(1984)discussedmanyrelevantnormativeissues. 46 In 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.Andsomeofthesefeaturesmaybeextendedratherthanthreatened bytechnology. 47 Severalpeoplehavearguedforprinciplesthatassertsomekindofethicalequivalence betweenenvironmentalandgeneticinterventions.Forexample,PeterSingerhasproposed thepreventiveprinciple: ForanyconditionX,ifitwouldbeaformofchildabuseforparentstoinflictXon theirchildsoonafterbirth,thenitmust,otherthingsbeingequal,atleastbe permissibletotakestepstopreventoneschildhavingthatcondition. 48

(Parfit1984). (Glover1984). 48(Singer2003).

46 47

18

JulianSavulescuhasarguedforaprincipleofProcreativeBeneficence,accordingtowhich prospectiveparentsshouldselectthechild,ofthepossiblechildrentheycouldhave,who wouldhavethebestlife,basedontherelevant,availableinformation(wheretheshouldis meanttoindicatethatpersuasionisjustified,butnotcoercion). 49 Thisprincipledoesnot presupposethatalllivescanbeplacedinadefiniterankingwithrespecttotheirwellbeing, onlythatpairwisecomparisonsarepossibleinatleastsomecases.Forinstance,ifacouple ishavingIVFandmustselectoneoftwoembryoswhicharegeneticallyidenticalexceptthat oneofthemhasonedefectivegenethatpredisposestoasthma,thenProcreativeBeneficence suggeststheyoughttochoosethehealthyembryoforimplantation. InFromChancetoChoice(2000),AllenBuchanan,DanW.Brock,NormanDaniels,andDaniel Wikler,examinedhowadvancesingeneticengineeringshouldaffectourunderstandingof distributivejustice,equalopportunity,ourrightsandobligationsasparents,themeaningof disability,andtheconceptofhumannatureinethicaltheoryandpractice. 50 Theydeveloped aframeworkinspiredbyJohnRawlssworkinanattempttoanswersomeofthese questions. GregStock,JohnHarris,GregoryPence,andEricJuengst,amongothers,havealsodiscussed theethicsofgeneticengineeringfromabroadlytranshumanistperspective. 51 MarkWalker hasarguedfromaperfectioniststandpointthatwehaveadutytousetechnologytoimprove ourselves.Walkerhasalsoarguedthatonereasontopursuecognitiveenhancementsisthat itcouldhelpussolvephilosophicalproblems. 52 NickBostromandseveralothershave drawnattentiontothedistinctionbetweenenhancementsthatofferonlypositional advantages(e.g.anincreaseinheight),whichareonlyadvantagesinsofarasotherslack them,andenhancementsthatprovideeitherintrinsicbenefitsornetpositiveexternalities (suchasabetterimmunesystemorimprovementofcognitivefunctioning).Weoughtto promoteenhancementsofthesecondkind,butnotenhancementsthataremerely positional. 53 Bostromhassuggestedthatwehaveareasontodevelopmeanstoexplorethelargerspace ofpossiblemodesofbeingthatiscurrentlyinaccessibletousbecauseofourbiological limitations,onthegroundthatwemightfindthatitcontainsextremelyworthwhilemodes ofbeingwaysofliving,thinking,feeling,andrelating. 54 Alongwithmanyother
(Savulescu2001). (Buchananetal.2002). 51E.g.(Stock2002;Harris1992;Pence1998;Parens1998). 52(Walker2002). 53(Bostrom2003). 54(Bostrom2004).
49 50

19

transhumanistwriters,Bostromhasarguedforthemoralurgencyofdevelopingmeansto sloworreversetheagingprocess. 55 Hehasalsoproposedabroaderconceptionofhuman dignitywhichcanaccommodateposthumandignity. 56 ArecentjointpaperbyBostrom 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 1989bookMindChildrenexploredtheramificationsofpossiblefutureadvancesinrobotics anduploading. 59 AlaterMoravecbook,Robot(1999),andRayKurzweilsbestsellingAgeof SpiritualMachines(1999)introducedtheseideastoawideraudience. 60,61 Aswehaveseen, EricDrexlerwastryingtoanticipatetheconsequencesofmolecularnanotechnologybackin the80s,anendeavorinwhichhehassincebeenjoinedbyseveralotherresearcherssuchas RobertFreitas,whohasstudiedpotentialmedicalapplicationofnanotechnologyingreat detail,andRalphMerklewhohascollaboratedwithFreitastostudythekinematicsofself replicatingsystemsandthetechnicalstepstowardscrudemolecularassemblers. 62 Allthese
(Bostrom2005). (Bostrom2005). 57(BostromandOrd2005). 58(Yudkowsky2004). 59(Moravec1989). 60(Moravec1999). 61(Kurzweil1999). 62(FreitasandMerkle2005).
55 56

20

authorsrecognizethattechnologiesaspotentassuperintelligenceormolecular nanotechnologyarenotwithoutseriousrisksofaccidentsordeliberatemisuse. Bostrom(2002)introducedtheconceptofanexistentialrisk,definedasonewherean adverseoutcomewouldeitherannihilateEarthoriginatingintelligentlifeorpermanently anddrasticallycurtailitspotential,andcreatedacatalogueofwhathesawasthemost probableexistentialrisks. 63 Bothnanotechnologyandsuperintelligencerelatedrisksattain highranksonthatlist.Inamuchdiscussedpopulararticle,WhytheFutureDoesntNeed Us(2000),BillJoyarguedthatweoughttorelinquishdevelopmentsinAI,nanotechnology, andgeneticsbecauseoftherisksthatwilleventuallyemergefromthesedisciplines. 64 Several people,reactingtoJoy,arguedagainstsuchbansongroundsthattheyareunrealistic,would depriveusofgreatbenefits,andmightincreaseratherthandecreaseriskifdevelopment weredrivenundergroundortolesshesitantregionsoftheworld.JohnLeslie,MartinRees, andRichardPosnerhavealsoinvestigatedthreatstohumansurvivalinthe21stcenturyall ofthemhaveratedtheriskashighlysignificant. 65 RobinHansonhasanalyzedseveraltopicsofrelevancetohumantransformation,including theconsequencesofuploadinginanunregulatedeconomy,thesocialsignalingfunctionof beliefs,thesourcesandepistemologicalstatusofdisagreementsofopinion,thedynamicsof aspacecolonizationrace,andinformationmarketsasasystemforaggregatinginformation andguidingpolicy. 66 RelatedtoHansonsworkonuploadcompetitionandcolonization races,Bostromhasexploredhowdystopianoutcomescouldresultinsomefuture evolutionaryscenarios. 67 Drawingonhisearlierworkonobservationselectioneffects,he alsoformulatedtheSimulationargument,whichpurportstoshowthatitfollowsfromsome fairlyweakassumptionsthat atleastoneofthefollowingpropositionsistrue:(1)thehumanspeciesisverylikely togoextinctbeforereachingaposthumanstage;(2)anyposthumancivilizationis extremelyunlikelytorunasignificantnumberofsimulationsoftheirevolutionary history(orvariationsthereof);(3)wearealmostcertainlylivinginacomputer simulation.Itfollowsthatthebeliefthatthereisasignificantchancethatwewillone daybecomeposthumanswhorunancestorsimulationsisfalse,unlessweare currentlylivinginasimulation. 68
(Bostrom2002). (Joy2000). 65(Leslie1996;Rees2003;Posner2004). 66E.g.(Hanson1994,1995,1998). 67(Bostrom2005). 68(Bostrom2003).
63 64

21

 Wedonotknowwhatwillhappen,butseveralsubtleconstraintsenableustonarrowdown therangeoftenableviewsabouthumanitysfutureandourplaceintheuniverse.These constraintsderivefromavarietyofsources,includinganalysisofthecapacitiesofpossible technologiesbasedonphysicalorchemicalsimulations;economicanalysis;evolutiontheory; probabilitytheory;gametheoryandstrategicanalysis;andcosmology.Partlybecauseofthe interdisciplinaryandsometimestechnicalnatureoftheseconsiderations,theyarenotwidely understood.Yetanyseriousattempttograpplewiththelongtermimplicationsof technologicaldevelopmentshouldtakethemintoaccount.

6.21stcenturybiopolitics:thetranshumanistbioconservativedimension
JamesHugheshasarguedthatbiopoliticsisemergingasafundamentalnewdimensionof politicalopinion.InHughesmodel,biopoliticsjoinswiththemorefamiliardimensionsof culturalandeconomicpolitics,toformathreedimensionalopinionspace.Wehavealready seenthatintheearly90s,theextropianscombinedliberalculturalpoliticsandlaissezfaire laissezfaireconomicpoliticswithtranshumanistbiopolitics.InCitizenCyborg(2004), Hughessetsforwardwhathetermsdemocratictranshumanism,whichmates transhumanistbiopoliticswithsocialdemocraticeconomicpoliticsandliberalcultural politics. 69 Hearguesthatwewillachievethebestposthumanfuturewhenweensurethat technologiesaresafe,makethemavailabletoeveryone,andrespecttherightofindividuals tocontroltheirownbodies.Thekeydifferencebetweenextropiantranshumanismand democratictranshumanismisthatthelatteraccordsamuchbiggerroleforgovernmentin 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

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.Ecofeministshavesuspected biotechnology,especiallyitsusetoreshapebodiesorcontrolreproduction,ofbeingan extensionoftraditionalpatriarchalexploitationofwomen,or,alternatively,haveseenitasa symptomofacontrolobsessed,unemphatic,gadgetfixated,bodyloathingmindset.Some haveofferedakindofpsychoanalysisoftranshumanism,concludingthatitrepresentsan embarrassingrationalizationofselfcenteredimmaturityandsocialfailure.Butothershave welcomedthelibratorypotentialofbiotechnology.ShulamithFirestonearguedinthe feministclassicTheDialecticofSex(1971)thatwomenwillbefullyliberatedonlywhen technologyhasfreedthemfromhavingtoincubatechildren. 70 CyberfeministDonna Harawayproclaimsthatshewouldratherbeacyborgthanagoddessandarguesagainst thedualisticviewthatassociatesmenwithcultureandtechnologyandwomenwith nature. 71
70 71

(Firestone1970). (Haraway1991).

23

PerhapsthemostprominentbioconservativevoicetodayisthatofLeonKass,chairmanof PresidentBushsCouncilonBioethics[[Q:stillextant?]].Kassacknowledgesanintellectual debttothreeotherdistinguishedbioconservatives:ProtestanttheologianPaulRamsey, ChristianapologistapologeticC.S.Lewis,andGermanbornphilosophertheologianHans Jonas(whostudiedunderMartinHeidegger). 72 Kasssconcernscenteronhumandignity 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. 74 For Fukuyama,however,thechiefconcernisnotaboutthesubtleunderminingofmeanings buttheprospectofviolenceandoppression.Hearguesthatliberaldemocracydependson thefactthatallhumansshareanundefinedFactorX,whichgroundstheirequaldignity andrights.Theuseofenhancingtechnologies,hefears,coulddestroyFactorX. 75 BioethicistsGeorgeAnnas,LoriAndrews,andRosarioIsasihaveproposedlegislationto makeinheritablegeneticmodificationinhumansacrimeagainsthumanity,liketorture andgenocide.TheirrationaleissimilartoFukuyamas: Thenewspecies,orposthuman,willlikelyviewtheoldnormalhumansas inferior,evensavages,andfitforslaveryorslaughter.Thenormals,ontheother hand,mayseetheposthumansasathreatandiftheycan,mayengageina
(Kass2002). (Kass1997). 74(Fukuyama2004).Foraresponse,see(Bostrom2004). 75(Fukuyama2002).
72 73

24

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.Bothsides condemntheracistandcoercivestatesponsoredeugenicsprogramsofthe20 thtwentieth century.Bioconservativesdrawattentiontothepossibilitythatsubtlehumanvaluescould begeterodedbytechnologicaladvances,andtranshumanistsshouldperhapslearntobe moresensitivetotheseconcerns.Ontheotherhand,transhumanistsemphasizethe enormouspotentialforgenuineimprovementsinhumanwellbeingandhumanflourishing thatareattainableonlyviatechnologicaltransformation,andbioconservativescouldtryto bemoreappreciativeofthepossibilitythatwecouldrealizegreatvaluesbyventuring beyondourcurrentbiologicallimitations. 77

76 77

(Annas,Andrews,andIsasi2002). ImgratefultoAndersSandbergandSaraLippincottforcomments.

25

Appendix
TheTranshumanistDeclaration (VersionofMarch2009) (1)Humanitystandstobeprofoundlyaffectedbyscienceandtechnologyinthefuture.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,orotherintelligencestowhich technologicalandscientificadvancemaygiverise. (8)Wefavorallowingindividualswidepersonalchoiceoverhowtheyenabletheirlives. Thisincludesuseoftechniquesthatmaybedevelopedtoassistmemory,concentration,and mentalenergy;lifeextensiontherapies;reproductivechoicetechnologies;cryonics

26

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:AnalyzingHumanExtinctionScenariosandRelated Hazards,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),TranshumanismTheWorldsMostDangerousIdea?Betterhumans 10/19/2004. (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

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

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 DisasterThreatenHumankindsFutureinThisCenturyOnEarthandBeyond:Basic Books.

29

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.

30