Proactionary and Precautionary Principles and Transhumanism

• In Event: STS vis-à-vis Transhumanism: Friends or Foes?

Abstract

In Knowing Humanity in the Social World (2018), Remedios and Dusek explain Steve Fuller’s view that with artificial intelligence, synthetic biology and computer technology, the knower can be enhanced towards transhumanism, which is an exciting topic for STS analysis. The proactionary principle, which is to take risks with medical experimentation with genetics, is one way Fuller considers humanity 1.0 will reach humanity 2.0. The precautionary principle, which is to avoid risks, will keep humanity at humanity 1.0. Our book examines several ethical principles for humanity 2.0 including superutilitarianism, which is humans 1.0 with limited capacity will be replaced with humans 2.0, who have a superior capacity for utility, and find that it is not an appropriate normative theory for humanity 2.0.

Based on the proactionary principle, Fuller advocates for Welfare State 2.0, which promotes risk taking instead protecting humanity from harm. Why should humans 2.0 redistribute welfare to humanity 1.0? Our book suggests that the inequality between humans 2.0 and humans 1.0 will increase. Will hedgenetics, which is to securitize risks for those who suffer from failed medical experiments be adequate? Fuller’s response that he offers transhumanism with aim of morphological freedom, which will not require humanity’s biological substrate as human minds can be uploaded to computers as Ray Kurzweil suggests. To be discussed are problems with minds uploaded to computers such as cyber attacks and viruses, which may extinguish humanity.

Reference:

Remedios, Francis X., and Val Dusek. Knowing Humanity in the Social World. The Path of Steve Fuller’s Social Epistemology

Author

• Francis Remedios, Independent Scholar