HughesWatch on Ethical Technology

Hughes Keynotes @ Bioethics: Religious and Spiritual Approaches

2012-08-23T16:19:17+00:00

http://jain.claremontlincoln.org/2012-conference-2/

Cosponsored by Claremont Lincoln University, the International School for Jain Studies, Jain Center of Southern California, and the Federation of Jain Associations in North America (JAINA)

Bioethics: Religious and Spiritual Approaches

August 24-25, 2012

The rapid growth of the medical sciences and of medical technologies has given doctors the ability to diagnose and to cure as never before. At the same time, these breakthroughs raise perplexing ethical questions: when does life begin, and when does it end? When is the quality of life so compromised that doctors should cease further interventions? What is informed consent? What constraints should apply to research on human subjects? And, above all, how can the sanctity of life be preserved? This conference will bring the resources of Jainism (see note below), of the dharma traditions of India, and of the world’s religious and spiritual traditions in general to bear on the most difficult bioethical questions of our day.

The conference presupposes that religious and spiritual traditions can assist doctors and ethicists in thinking through these questions and coming to answers. We welcome paper proposals addressing any of the overlaps between bioethics and the religious traditions, including procreation, alternative medicines, birth and related issues (abortion, in vitro fertilization, population control, etc.), use of stem cells, cloning, the ethics of medical research, end of life issues. The Claremont International Jain Conferences are sponsored by the Jain community, but papers drawing on any of the world’s religious or spiritual traditions are warmly welcomed.

Paper abstracts of 1,000 words should be emailed to Matthew Fisher matthew.fisher@cgu.edu by May 1, 2012. Applications from a wide range of fields are welcome, and graduate students are especially encouraged to submit proposals. Notifications will be made by May 31st.

Download PDF of Conference Poster Here

Conference Details

Plenary sessions take place in Mudd Auditorium, Claremont Lincoln University, 1325 N. College Ave., Claremont, CA 91711. There is an inexpensive registration fee and a discount for students.Early registration at a reduced rate will close on July 15th.

The conference hotel is the Claremont DoubleTree, 555 W. Foothill Blvd. in Claremont; (909) 626-2411. Other accommodations can be found at Hotel Claremont (909) 621-4831. Claremont is 15 minutes from the Ontario International Airport.

Note on Jainism:

Jainism is one of the oldest religions originating from India. At the very heart of Jainism is the ethic of non-violence, Ahimsa , which means ‘Respect for all living beings.’ Ahimsa continues to guide the daily lives of all Jains, who are egetarians, and practice ecology and conservation. Out of 14 million Jains in the world, 125,000 are settled in North America. The other two tenets of Jainsim are non-absolutism, which means that real truth has multiple facets, and non-possessiveness, which means that one should balance one’s needs and desires. JAINA is the umbrella organization of nearly 70 Jain centers and congregations in North America, that has Special Consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.

Organizing Committee:

Matthew Fisher, Coordinator
Dr. Manoj Jain
Dr. Nitin Shah
Manish Mehta, Ph.D.
Rajen Dhami

Hughes @ The Transhumanist Imagination: Innovation, Secularization, and Eschatology

2012-04-09T16:41:22+00:00

The Transhumanist Imagination: Innovation, Secularization, and Eschatology

April 9, 2012

Arizona State university

The term “transhumanism” denotes an ideology of extreme progress, giving coherence to the accelerated pace of advances in science and technology. As a future-oriented outlook, transhumanism offers a vision of and for humanity in which genetically enhanced humans will live extremely long, intensely happy lives, free of pain and disease. In this imagination of the future, humans will be liberated from the constraints of embodiment and will triumph over death by uploading the mind into machines.

Transhumanism is, fundamentally, an eschatological narrative with ramifications that go well beyond the transhumanist community itself. It draws together a range of religious and secular motifs around an ideology of innovation, thereby giving rise to distinctive social practices, norms, policies and institutions with implications for human flourishing now and into the future. Some of the questions to be examined during this workshop include:

1. How does the transhumanist (religious?) narrative about the posthuman future stimulate technological innovations?
2. To what extent does the techno-social imagination illustrate the hybridization of religious and secular discourses?
3. What are the social and political ramifications of the transhumanist project, especially for liberal democracies?
4. Does transhumanism manifest the post-secular moment?
5. How should we study socio-technical imaginaries comparatively?
6. How do transhumanism and posthumanism reconfigure the relationship between modernism and postmodernism?

Prior to the conference, a faculty seminar will be engaging these questions by focusing on the works of Jürgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, Cary Wolfe, and some essays about socio-technical imaginaries by Sheila Jasanoff, William Bainbridge, and Ilya Klieger and Nasser Zakariah.

Recommended reading includes: Jürgen Habermas, The Future of Human Nature (2003) Jürgen Habermas, An Awareness of What is Missing: Faith and Reason in the Post-Secular Age (2010) Cary Wolfe, What is Posthumanism? (2010) Charles Taylor, Modern Social Imaginaries (2003)

Workshop talks include include:

The Politics of Transhumanism and the Techno-Millennial Imagination, 1626-2030
James Hughes

It’s Virtually the End of the World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine): Games, Play, and the Transhuman Inclination
Robert Geraci

Conflicting visions: speciation and hybridization in religious and secular eschatologies
Ron Cole-Turner

Molecular Necromancy: Nanoscience and the Postmortal Condition
Colin Milburn

The Moral Brain: What Is It? Can It Be Enhanced?

2012-03-30T20:46:04+00:00

Conference Website

Friday, March 30th - Sunday, April 1st, 8:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.

Location: New York University, WSQ Campus, New York, NY USA

This is a two part conference with the NYU Center for Bioethics, Duke Kenan Institute for Ethics, Yale Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics, and the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies.

Download Flyer PDF

RSVP Required

This event is free and open to the public. However, space is limited so please register here only if you plan on attending.
WE ARE AT CAPACITY FOR FRIDAY AND SATURDAY - IF YOU RSVP NOW YOU WILL BE WAITLISTED. You will be contacted at the end of January if space is available, and we are able to accommodate additional attendees. Currently Attendance on Sunday is not restricted.

Hotel Information

Conference Program

Part I: “The Significance of Neuroscience for Morality: Lessons from a Decade of Research”

Organized by the NYU Center for Bioethics in collaboration with the Duke Kenan Institute for Ethics

It has been a decade since the first brain imaging studies of moral judgments by Joshua Greene, Jorge Moll and their colleagues were reported. During this time, there have been rich philosophical and scientific discussions regarding a) whether brain imaging data can tell us anything about moral judgments, and b) what they do tell us if they can tell us something about moral judgments. In this workshop, we aim to bring leading philosophers, neuroscientists, and psychologists in this area together to examine these issues and to explore the future directions of this research.

Opening Remarks:
Thomas Carew, Dean of the Faculty of Arts & Science, New York University

Speakers:
James Blair, Chief of the Unit on Affective Cognitive Neuroscience at NIMH
Paul Bloom, Professor of Psychology, Yale University
Molly Crockett, Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellow, Laboratory of Social & Nueral Systems Research, Department of Economics, University of Zurich
Tamar Gendler, Professor of Philosophy, Yale University
Joshua Greene, John & Ruth Hazel Associate Professor of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Harvard University
Jonathan Haidt, Professor in the Social Psychology, University of Virginia; Henry Kaufman Visiting Professor, Leonard Stern School of Business, New York University
Guy Kahane, Deputy Director & Research Fellow, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford
S. Matthew Liao, Associate Director & Clinical Associate Professor, Center for Bioethics; Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, New York University
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Chauncey Stillman Professor in Practical Ethics, Department of Philosophy & Kenan Institute for Ethics, Duke University
James Woodward, Distinguished Professor of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh
Liane Young, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Boston College

Session Chairs:
Andre Fenton, Professor of Neural Science, Center for Neural Science, New York University
Laura Franklin-Hall, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, New York University
Don Garrett, Chair of Department and Professor of Philosophy, New York University
Paul Glimcher, Director, Center for Neural Economics; Silver Professor; Professor of Neural Science, Economics and Psychology, New York University
Joshua Knobe, Associate Professor, Program in Cognitive Science & Department of Philosophy, Yale University
Joseph LeDoux, University Professor; Henry and Lucy Moses Professor of Science; Professor of Neural Science and Psychology, Center for Neural Science and Psychology, New York University
Victoria McGreer, Research Scholar, Center for Human Values, Princeton University
Jesse Prinz, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, City University of New York
William Ruddick, Director, Center for Bioethics; Professor of Philosophy, New York University
Michael Strevens, Professor of Philosophy, New York University

PART ii: CAN MORAL BEHAVIOR BE IMPROVED OR ENHANCED?

Organized by the Yale Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics and the Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies. Hosted by the NYU Center for Bioethics.

Should the research on moral psychology be interpreted as suggesting new approaches for improving, or perhaps enhancing, moral intuitions, attitudes, judgments, and behavior or for reforming social institutions? Can we create more effective educational tools for improving moral development? For the last century psychiatry has attempted to medicalize moral failings - lack of self-control, addiction, anger, impatience, fear. But what of engineering ourselves to higher states of virtue? If the enhancement of morality is possible, which virtues or cognitive capabilities will it be safe to enhance and how? What might be the unanticipated side effects of attempts to enhance moral behavior?

SATURDAY MORAL ENHANCEMENT PANEL: 4:30-6:30

Should the research on moral psychology be interpreted as suggesting new approaches for improving, or perhaps enhancing, moral intuitions, attitudes, judgments, and behavior or for reforming social institutions?

Paul Bloom
Molly Crockett
Joshua Greene
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
Joshua Knobe

6:30-6:45pm – Break

SATURDAY CLOSING: 6:45-7:45pm – James J. Hughes – Session Chair

Ingmar Persson -- On the Permissibility of Creating Enhanced People
Abstract: In Unfit for the Future: The Need for Moral Enhancement (OUP, forthcoming 2012) Julian Savulescu and I argue that in order to solve the greatest moral problems of the present time, like anthropogenic climate and environmental deterioration and global inequality, it is necessary to morally enhance human beings, not only by traditional means but also, if possible, by biomedical means. Some, like John Harris, have replied that moral enhancement by biomedical means would undercut our freedom and, so, would not really increase our moral value. I believe that this objection is mistaken, that these means would undercut neither our freedom nor our rationality. However, what I shall mainly discuss in my presentation is a reply which grants that this is so, that genuine moral enhancement could be produced by biomedical means. What I shall discuss is Nicholas Agar's argument in Humanity's End (MIT, 2010) to the effect that it is morally permissible for human beings to prevent the creation of morally enhanced people because this could harm the interests of the unenhanced. I argue that this argument fails because it overlooks the distinction between morally permissible and impermissible harm. The harm that the enhanced would cause the unenhanced would be permissible harm, and it is not permissible to prevent such harm.

Andrea Kuszewski -- Enhancing Morality by Strengthening the Moral Decision-Making Mechanisms
Abstract: How do we determine the moral value of behavior? Is morality based on a set of fixed rules, or is it conditional to the circumstances surrounding the behavior? If we look at moral behavior as being context-dependent, then how can we effectively enhance morality?   It isn’t necessary to specifically define “morality” as a construct in order to enhance moral behavior—through resilience training that focuses on emotion regulation and cognitive control, morality can be improved as a byproduct. In essence, we can make it more likely that a person will be able to make a moral decision when confronted with these circumstances if they have the best cognitive and emotional tools to work with. I will discuss a three-part training methodology that can enhance moral behavior by strengthening the moral decision-making mechanisms themselves.

SUNDAY PROGRAM

Breakfast 8:00-9:00am [SUNDAY BREAKFAST AND COFFEE BREAKS ARE SPONSORED BY THE POTOMAC INSTITUTE]

MORAL ENHANCEMENT 1: 9:00-10:30am – Matthew Liao – Session Chair

James Hughes -- The Benefits and Risks of Virtue Engineering
Abstract: In the near future we will have many technologies that will allow us to modify and assist our emotions and reasoning. One of the purposes we will put these technologies to is to assist our adherence to self-chosen moral codes and citizenship obligations. For instance we will be able to suppress unwelcome desires, increase self-regulation, enhance mindfulness and empathy, and expand our understanding our social world and the consequences of our actions. So, contrary to the bioconservative accusation that cognitive enhancement will encourage more selfishness in society, it will probably permit people to be even more moral and responsible than they currently are. The major risks of neurotechnologies that control moral sentiment, cognition and behavior will be their effects on restricting cognitive liberty.

Erik Parens -- Perhaps it would help to distinguish between "engineering" and "cultivating" virtue.
Abstract: According to Plato’s Socrates, if we engage in dialogue, the knowledge we gain can help to give each “module” in our psyches its due, and thereby can cure us of vice and unhappiness. In his hopeful moments, Socrates thought that knowledge, psychological health, virtue, and happiness were, one might say, Siamese quintuplets. And of course in his humble moments, however, Socrates despaired of any of us ever knowing anything. The beauty of Socrates’s dialogical method is that it preserves both his hope that education can enhance our virtue and happiness, and his humble recognition that we don’t know what virtue or happiness is. His dialogical method does not envision wise teachers “engineering” the psyches of students. It does not entail one person doing something to another. Rather, his method calls for a shared activity, aimed at cultivating virtue and happiness in both persons – where with the term “cultivate” I mean to emphasize that both persons respect and work with what is already in their own and in each other’s psyche. In my talk I will suggest that we would do well to embrace such a Socratic conception of education, and that if we do, we may be in a position to begin to distinguish between biotechnologies that would facilitate such an education and ones that would thwart it.

Joshua Knobe -- Seeing a Person as a Body
Abstract: It has sometimes been suggested that thinking of a person in terms of her body leads us to a kind of 'objectification' -- a tendency to treat that person almost as a physical object and not as a human being with a mind. I present a series of new experimental studies that point to a more complex picture. It does appear that seeing aperson as a body leads to a decreased tendency to ascribe certain kinds of psychological states (self-control and planning), but the data also suggests that seeing a person as a body actually leads to an increased tendency to ascribe other kinds of states (emotion and sensation) and can in some cases lead to more compassionate and caring behavior.

Anna Pacholczyk -- What is moral enhancement? The shades of 'moral'.
Abstract: After the recent explosion of cognitive science research about our moral and social functioning, philosophers began to look at the possibility and desirability of enhancing our moral faculty (Savulescu and Persson, 2008, 2011; Harris, 2010; 2011). But what exactly moral enhancement means, and can neuroscience of morality and moral psychology be helpful in finding ways to enhance our moral faculty? I will examine two challenges to the way evidence from moral psychology was so far used in the debate. First, in the current literature the examples of moral enhancement included enhancing empathy, trust and other traits that may translate into dispositions for pro-social behaviour. However, some have pointed out that prosocial does not equal moral (e.g. Chan and Harris, 2011; Pacholczyk, 2011). I suggest that although the point is convincing, there will also be cases when modifying empathy or trust is indeed conducive to moral outcomes. Consequently, simply pointing out whether an intervention enhances prosocial behaviour is not sufficient; there is an additional argument to be made here. Secondly, I will address the difference in the interpretation of what ‘moral’ means. In neuroscientific research moral decision-making or judgement often refers to the decisions and judgements made about morally relevant matters (e.g. Pizarro and Bartels, 2011, Crockett et al. 2010a, 2010b). However, there is also another understanding of moral decisions and judgements – those made on the basis of moral reasons (Harris, 2011). I will explore the implications of this difference in the interpretation of the term ‘moral’ for our discussion about moral enhancement.

Coffee Break: 10:30-10:45am

MORAL ENHANCEMENT 2: 10:46-12:15am – Maxwell Melhman – Session Chair

Jonathan Shook -- Is Ethical Theory Relevant to Neuroethical Evaluations of Enhancing Moral Brains?
Abstract: Judgments on how to 'enhance' moral brains requires premising criteria for what counts as moral conduct and some ideal standard(s) to adjust such conduct towards. Two primary sources for these normative premises are social conventions (embedded in cultures) and ethical principles (from philosophical theories). Neuroethics cannot rely on extant ethical and metaethical theories, as they were designed under conditions of deep ignorance or wild optimism about moral cognition, and 'confirming' how brains are naturally 'deontological' or 'utilitarian' are just exercises in circular reasoning or returns to social convention. Until ethical theorizing is entirely reconstructed, appeals to local social convention will be doing most of the normative work in neuroethics.

William Kabasenche -- Enhancing for Virtue? Towards Holistic Moral Enhancement
Abstract: Some biomedical enhancements are being touted as moral enhancements. More specifically, some are suggested to have the capacity to engineer virtue traits. I will critically examine this claim by comparing a traditional formal account of virtue with the traits that some forms of moral enhancement seem capable of producing. I argue that so-called “virtue engineering” will not in fact directly engineer virtues in a person, or at least not the kinds of traits we have reason to seek. However, I will also examine the role that contemporary biomedical enhancements might play in a more holistic project of moral formation. There are, I suggest, some prospects for using these biomedical technologies in a proper pursuit of moral maturity.

Molly Crockett -- Moral enhancement? Evidence and challenges
Abstract: Could we create a morality pill? Recent work demonstrating how neuromodulators shape moral decisions suggests it may one day be possible to pharmacologically enhance human morality. I will review the evidence for neurochemical manipulation of morally relevant human behaviors and show that the flexibility, context sensitivity, and temporal properties of neurotransmitter systems present important obstacles for moral enhancement.

Wendell Wallach -- The Illusion of a Technological Moral Fix
Abstract: Scientists, philosophers, theologians, and transhumanists commonly fall into error by presuming that moral sensitivity and understanding can be reduced to a single capability. In focusing upon individual facets of moral acumen there is a tendency to misunderstand and pathologize human nature and to thereby empower the illusion that all people can and should be fixed. While it may well be possible to remediate failures in neurological systems that contribute to moral insensitivity, this kind of therapeutic activity differs in kind from enhancing moral acumen. Optimizing individual capabilities has its downside: courage can make one foolhardy, heightened sensitivity can lead to being vulnerable and weak, and trust to being dubbed or manipulated by those who are unscrupulous. Just as there is no center for consciousness or the Self in the nervous system, there is no moral compass or moral subsystem in the brain. In elucidating the various capabilities that contribute to the development of character, sensitivity to moral considerations, and right reasoning, we are only beginning to put in place the pieces for a more comprehensive understanding of moral behavior. Character and sensitivity to the needs of others are not the product of a single faculty. The entire human organism is a moral navigation system.

LUNCH 12:15-2:00pm

MEDICINE 2:00-3:15pm – Wendell Wallach – Session Chair

Patrick Hopkins -- Moral Disease: An Initial Framework for Definition, Classification, Treatment, and Improvement
Abstract: Assuming that moral cognition is biologically generated and mediated and that moral emotions developed over time through an evolutionary process involving adaptation, human moral processes should be understood as capable of going awry in the same way other cognitive and physiological processes can. As such, moral judgment can be subject to disease states. This presentation will examine the concept of disease and show how it can be applied to moral cognition, thus making sense of the notion of medically treating moral dysfunction, preventing moral dysfunction, and improving moral function.

Geoffrey Miller --The Pediatric Physician's Role in Modifying Childhood Behavior. Vendor or Gatekeeper? Facilitator or Judge?
Abstract: More so than in any other area of pediatrics, value judgment is exercised and covered in a veneer of science when the medical management of abnormal childhood behavior is practiced. This is because the judgments applied include attempting to determine indistinct and arguable etiologic boundaries which are contextual, moral and biological, and the origins of the latter are congenital, epigenetic, and acquired. There are, without doubt, pathological behaviors that threaten the child in question, other individuals, and the conduct of society at large. The causes, consequences, and management of these behaviors are legitimate medical interests. However, concern arises when the pediatric physician is asked to distinguish aberrant from eccentric or atypical behavior often in a setting of inadequate knowledge and evaluation and with pressure from caregivers, and the educational system, to “do something about a child’s abnormal brain”, and counter pressure from interested groups that criticize the physician for medicalizing “psycho-social phenomena”. To satisfy and to stay within role expectation the pediatric physician has to have a sound knowledge base, adequate clinical skills, and trusted judgment. That is the presentation of abnormal child behavior to a pediatric physician ought to be managed as a medical problem requiring both scientific evaluation and appropriate value judgment. Furthermore, there remains a societal expectation that the physician is a learned teacher-a doctor-in addition to a purveyor of technical skills. Parents will continue to bring their children to pediatricians and ask “is my child normal, or is there something bad in his brain?”

S. Matthew Liao ---Parental Love Pills: Some Ethical Considerations
Abstract: It may soon be possible to develop pills that allow parents to induce in themselves more loving behavior, attitudes and emotions towards their children. In this paper, I consider whether pharmacologically-induced parental love can satisfy reasonable conditions of authenticity; why anyone would be interested in taking such parental love pills at all, and whether inducing parental love pharmacologically promotes narcissism or results in self-instrumentalization. I also examine how the availability of such pills may affect the duty to love a child.

Coffee Break: 3:15-3:30pm

RAMIFICATIONS FOR LAW, NATIONAL SECURITY AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS 3:30-5:00pm – John Shook – Session Chair

William Casebeer -- The Neurobiology of Virtue: Leveraging Neuroscience to Improve Character Development Institutions
Abstract: How are habits formed? What are the most effective methods for character pedagogy? How can our institutions ensure that ample opportunities are given for human beings to practice flourishing? While it may not be obvious, our answers to these questions can be shaped by a growing neurobiology literature that explores the neural mechanisms responsible for habit formation and moral judgment and development. Here, I briefly review this literature and discuss what upshot it might have for the structure and function of our character development institutions, concluding that effective character development is enabled--not threatened--by neuro-scientific findings.

Fabrice Jotterand -- Enhancing Criminal Brains?
Abstract: Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by emotional dysfunction and anti-social behavior. There is currently no efficacious treatment but progress in the neurosciences opens the possibility of using neurotechnology for the regulation of moral emotions for the control of human behavior. The use of these technologies, however, present a potential conundrum: they might make criminal psychopaths better from a psychiatric standpoint. But the same technology might make psychopaths better criminals by improving their ability to conform to social expectations and thus, enhancing their ability to engage in criminal activities. This presentation examines the ethical and social implications of the potential use of neurotechnologies for the treatment of psychopaths and their possible unintended consequences.

Maxwell Mehlman -- Moral Enhancement and the Law
Abstract: The invention of a drug that enhanced moral judgment would raise a number of legal issues. What should the impact be of taking the drug, or refusing or being unable to take it, on criminal and civil liability? Could taking it be a condition of parole? How safe would such a drug have to be to be approved by the FDA, and how would the agency weigh risks and benefits? Under current law, to what extent could the government require people to take it? Could parents be required to give it to their children? If not, should the law be changed? Would the drug be covered under third party health insurance programs, including the Obama health reform plan, and if not, should it be? Are there certain types of persons who should not take it, such as soldiers, in whom it might interfere with the duty to follow lawful orders? How should the availability of the drug affect international law?

James Giordano -- Neuromorality: Implications for Human Ecology, Global Relations, and National Security Policy
Abstract: Neuroscience is providing information about human dispositions for ecological interactions that are focal to the so-called "first tradition" of neuroethics (ie.- the study of putative neural bases of relational cognition, emotion, and behavior, viz. - neuromorality). Understanding the substrates, mechanisms and variables contributing to individual, group and even species' interactions may be important to developing more comprehensive models of social, economic, ethical, legal and even political motivations and actions. Such information could allow more meaningful approaches to ethics, individual and group relations (on a variety of scales), as well as the formulation of national security and diplomatic policy. Of course, this calls for a pragmatic assessment of any/all neuroscientific information, and prudence in the application of such information and/or the neurotechnologies employed to assess and access neural systems (ie.- neuroethics in the second" tradition"). As well, this approach should not imply a linear abstraction from the synaptic to the social levels, but rather offers an important contribution to more finely-grained bio-psychosocial conceptualizations of human individual and social dynamics, and the ethico-legal constructs that may be developed and employed to guide, direct and govern them.

Speakers:

Paul Bloom, Professor of Psychology, Yale University

William Casebeer, Intelligence Officer & Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Airforce, Former Associate Professor of Philosophy at U.S. Air Force Academy

Molly Crockett, Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellow, Laboratory of Social & Nueral Systems Research, Department of Economics, University of Zurich

James Giordano, Director of the Center for Neurotechnology Studies & Vice President for Academic Programs at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies; Senior Research Associate, Centre for Neuroethics & Uehiro Centre for Practical Philosophy, University of Oxford; University Affiliate Professor of Molecular Neuroscience, Krasnow Institute for Advanced Studies, George Mason University

Joshua Greene, John & Ruth Hazel Associate Professor of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, Harvard University

James Hughes, Executive Director, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies; Director, Institutional Research & Planning, Trinity College

Fabrice Jotterand, Assistant Professor, Clinical Sciences & Psychiatry, Southwestern Medical Center, University of Texas

William Kabasenche, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Washington State University

Joshua Knobe, Associate Professor, Program in Cognitive Science & Department of Philosophy, Yale University

Andrea Kuszewski, Affiliate Scholar of the IEET; Researcher, METODO Social Sciences Institute

S. Matthew Liao, Associate Director, Center for Bioethics; Clinical Associate Professor of Bioethics; Affiliated Professor of Philosophy, New York University

Maxwell Mehlman, Professor of Bioethics & Law, Case Western Reserve University

Geoffrey Miller, Associate Professor of Psychology, University of New Mexico

Anna Pacholczyk, graduate student, University of Machester

Ingmar Persson, Professor of Practical Philosophy, University of Gothenburg; Research Fellow, Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford

Erik Parens, Senior Research Scholar, The Hasting Center

Jonathan Shook, Director of Education and Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Inquiry in Amherst, N.Y.

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Chauncey Stillman Professor in Practical Ethics, Department of Philosophy & Kenan Institute for Ethics, Duke University

Wendell Wallach, Scholar & Lecturer, Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics, Yale University

A Bright and Shining Future Awaits

2012-02-05T13:18:59+00:00

We’ve looked into the future, and it’s dark. Increasingly, we’ve lost a progressive view of our future. Instead of seeing promise and lives made better by technology, we’re seeing lives filled with cyborgs and an uninhabitable society. Should we be afraid? Or are we being unnecessarily pessimistic? TVO’s The Agenda invited science fiction authors Robert Sawyer and Madeline Ashby, internet critic Jesse Hirsh, and the IEET’s James Hughes to address these topics.

http://ww3.tvo.org/video/172270/bright-and-shining-future-awaits

IEET Consults for Japanese Neurotech Consortium

2012-02-02T13:51:21+00:00

The Japanese neurotechnology industry is just beginning to organize along the lines of the Neurotechnology Industry Organization in the United States, but with a much stronger focus on the inclusion of neuroethics as part of their mandate. We spoke to the group about the lessons learned about neurotechnology regulation thus far in the United States, the desirability of more harmonization of drug and device clinical trials and regulations within the OECD countries, and the particular emphases of our technoprogressive take on neurotechnology. The slides from our talk are available here.

Metabods

2012-01-28T19:19:32+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Brian Ramirez Kyle, the creator of Metabods.com, a website devoted to gay erotic fantasies about boytaurs, men with multiple limbs or genitals, and radical size and shape transformations. We talk about how radical body mod subcultures might be on the cutting edge of the fight for tolerance of transhuman diversity. (First broadcast in 2004).

http://ieet.org/archive/20040925metabodsr.mp3

IEET Donation Premiums

2012-01-13T01:49:02+00:00

For donations of $25 or more, we’ll send you Utopia Passport

Or an Only Outlaws Will Evolve bumpersticker:

For donations of $100 or more, we’ll send you a signed copy of Citizen Cyborg

Let us know what kinds of premiums you think would be catchy!

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

Monsanto and Genetically Modified Crops pt2

2011-12-24T15:59:04+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Kurt Heidinger, executive director of the Biocitizen School of Field Environmental Philosophy in Westhampton MA. They discuss the ecological and food security consequences of genetically modified crops, and the corporate accountability of Monsanto in light of a recent EPA investigation of the spread of biopesticide resistant corn-borers. (Part 2 of 2)

http://www.archive.org/download/MonsantoAndGeneticallyModifiedCrops/20111219heidinger-b.mp3

Monsanto and Genetically Modified Crops pt1

2011-12-24T15:51:28+00:00

http://www.archive.org/download/MonsantoAndGeneticallyModifiedCrops/20111219heidinger-a.mp3

The Bodhisattva’s Brain pt2

2011-12-20T21:56:03+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Owen Flanagan, professor of philosophy at Duke University and author of The Bodhisattva’s Brain: Buddhism Naturalized. They discuss the relationship of the Aristotleian and Buddhist ideas of happiness and virtue, and the relevance of neuropsychological research on what it means to have a flourishing life. (Part 2 of 2)

http://www.archive.org/download/TheBodhisattvasBrain/20111220flanagan-b.mp3

The Bodhisattva’s Brain pt1

2011-12-20T21:49:15+00:00

http://www.archive.org/download/TheBodhisattvasBrain/20111220flanagan-a.mp3

Big Changes Afoot for the IEET in 2012

2011-12-17T02:46:51+00:00

First, about Nick Bostrom. It is a testament to our affection and admiration for Nick that we implored him to stay as Chair this long. For years he has had more than enough on his hands running the hugely successful Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, and working on its conferences, papers and collected volumes on Human Enhancement and Global Catastrophic Risks. We thank him for his guidance and support, and look forward to continuing to promote his work as one of our Senior Fellows, especially his much anticipated forthcoming work on superintelligence and its associated catastrophic risks.

Second, Mike Treder. Mike was one of the first people who recruited me (J. Hughes) to transhumanism back in 2001, and he was in from the beginning in our work on the World Transhumanist Association Board of Directors, and then the founding of the IEET. After several years of Mike directing the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, and after I was facing the diminution of my time available for running the IEET due to my promotion at Trinity College, I was able to persuade Mike to come on full-time as IEET Managing Director. His passionate engagement has shaped us since then, from his fierce anger at the injustices and idiocies prevalent in the world, to his fervent optimism and hope for a better, more rational, future. He recruited dozens of new contributors, Fellows and Affiliate Scholars, and edited all their disparate contributions patiently and compassionately. He will continue to be an active part of our community, and we look forward to more of his own writing now that he has less of other people’s to edit.

Third, Hank Pellissier. Since Mike recruited him a year ago Hank has had an unerring sense for identifying issues and articulating viewpoints that ring like a bell in the blogosphere. He has generated the most hits on articles, and pages and pages of comments from our community. Now Hank will be stepping up to help us grow to our next stage, by fundraising, building a more international network of collaborators, and organizing meetings. In the last couple days he has me feeling quite exhausted by his boundless energy and creativity. I think we’re all in for an exciting ride. But I’ll let him speak for himself:

I am thrilled and honored to be assisting the IEET in the future as Managing Director.

Aside from fundraising and managing the website, and publishing fresh articles by our excellent staff of mind-bending scholars, I will be focusing on organizing conferences, such as “The Moral Brain” conference March 30-April 1 at New York University; then a “Cyborg Buddha” event, an event on technology and secularization, and an event on the enhancement of animal intelligence. I hope to meet many of you as we travel around the United States and the world building the technoprogressive community.

Each event’s success depends on the funding support that IEET obtains. Please help? Donate to IEET here.

Thanks for your support, and thanks again to Nick and Mike.

A Short History of the Future

2011-12-17T02:02:54+00:00

This is an interview that I conducted with historian and futurist Warren Wagar in 1998. Wagar was a professor at SUNY Binghamton, an HG Wells scholar, and the author of the technoprogressive classic A Short History of the Future. A special issue of the Journal of World-Systems Research was devoted to commentaries on Warren Wagar’s theory of the forces that are leading to world government. Professor Wagar passed away in 2004.

http://ieet.org/archive/20111216wagar.mp3

Hughes and Wallach essays in Patrick’s new collection on Robot Ethics

2011-12-16T02:24:06+00:00

The collection is published by MIT Press which has this cover blurb:

Robots today serve in many roles, from entertainer to educator to executioner. As robotics technology advances, ethical concerns become more pressing: Should robots be programmed to follow a code of ethics, if this is even possible? Are there risks in forming emotional bonds with robots? How might society—and ethics—change with robotics? This volume is the first book to bring together prominent scholars and experts from both science and the humanities to explore these and other questions in this emerging field. Starting with an overview of the issues and relevant ethical theories, the topics flow naturally from the possibility of programming robot ethics to the ethical use of military robots in war to legal and policy questions, including liability and privacy concerns. The contributors then turn to human-robot emotional relationships, examining the ethical implications of robots as sexual partners, caregivers, and servants. Finally, they explore the possibility that robots, whether biological-computational hybrids or pure machines, should be given rights or moral consideration. Ethics is often slow to catch up with technological developments. This authoritative and accessible volume fills a gap in both scholarly literature and policy discussion, offering an impressive collection of expert analyses of the most crucial topics in this increasingly important field.

Patrick and his co-editors have an introductory essay to the volume “Robot ethics: Mapping the issues for a mechanized world” online here.

Beyond the Soul

2011-12-13T17:22:44+00:00

On Sunday December 11, 2011 the Turing Church Online Workshop 2.0, explored transhumanist spirituality and “Religion 2.0″, the convergence of science and religion, highly imaginative future science and technologies for resurrection, emerging science and technologies for immortality, social and memetic engineering. The event was organized by Giulio Prisco, a member of the IEET Board of Directors. About thirty people dropped in to the virtual space to listen to the talks and participate in the discussion. IEET Fellow Ben Goertzel’s pre-recorded talk is available here. IEET Trustee Martine Rothblatt’s talk about Terasem’s ideas is available here.

IEET Executive Director James Hughes’ talk reprised the ideas presented in his recent essay “Contradictions of the Enlightenment: Liberal Individualism versus the Erosion of Personal Identity,” arguing for the necessity of embracing a Buddhist acknowledgment that the self is a narrative fiction without any real continuous, discrete referent. The slides used for the talk can be downloaded here. The talk was given in the first 23 minutes of this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEHHWI8MNAw

An End of Year Appeal for Support

2011-12-11T19:22:20+00:00

Last year we asked

Does the future seem exciting to you? With new technologies, new hopes for human potential, and potentially even new kinds of humans?

Or does the future seem challenging? With widening gaps between rich and poor? Species loss and climate change? Authoritarian governments who might prevent the use of enhancement and other technologies?

What a difference a year makes! The Arab Spring and then the Occupy movement have exploded into a thousand proliferating points of optimistic resistance around the world, from Oakland to Moscow. An attractive sustainable future seems much more plausible now than it did a year ago.

Still, in the midst of persistent unemployment the policy debate refuses to confront the structural unemployment caused by, and sure to be deepened by, automation and AI. Policy makers are slashing biomedical research support precisely at the time when a couple of billions of dollars spent on anti-aging therapy research could save the world trillions of dollars in nursing and medical costs.

The IEET’s combination of technoprogressive values, near-futurism and practical policy focus is needed now more than ever.

Here at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, we’re taking a close look at what the biggest developments might be over the next few decades and how they will affect humans and our societies. Our distinctive role is that we take the far-reaching impacts of transformative technologies seriously, unlike many ethics and public policy organizations, and then we ask the tough political questions that many futurist and tech-enthusiast groups don’t.

With that unique niche, and with the dozens of diverse scholars and activists we’ve gathered in the global IEET community, no other organization is as well-positioned as we are to make a difference by promoting ethical policies that encourage the rapid, safe, and effective use of emerging technologies for the benefit of everyone. It is important work, vital work, and we are very happy to do it.

In the coming year we will be changing and growing, in ways that we will announce soon.

In March we will be co-sponsoring the first ever conference on “moral enhancement,” the use of neurotechnologies to improve moral sentiment, cognition and behavior. The ramifications of the moral enhancement debate extend from children’s rights, criminal rehabilitation and the freedom of conscience, to the most profound challenges to our political and psychological way of life. Through the Cyborg Buddha project we intend to defend the liberatory uses of neurotechnology, while challenging the incipient threats to cognitive liberty.

But our work can’t be done without your support.

Luckily, a few large contributors have helped us with major gifts. But to maintain our tax-exempt status with the US government (we’re registered as a 501(c)3 in the state of Connecticut), we are required to get at least one-third of our funding from individuals who make small contributions (less than a $1000). People like you, giving $500 or $50 a year.

Without your support, we will lose our legal status as a nonprofit organization. It’s that simple. We need whatever you can give. It doesn’t have to be a lot, and we understand that for many of you it can’t be a $1000. But please consider whatever level of tax-deductible donation you can afford.

Click here to make a secure online contribution via Network for Good or here via PayPal.*

You’ve already set yourself apart as someone who is aware of and interested in the big changes that are coming in the future. You’ve shown that you understand the need to think seriously about the huge challenges we face and the powerful new technologies that could make the years ahead much brighter for all of us, or possibly much darker if bad choices are made.

Please join those who are committed to a future of hope and reason, of science and optimism, of flourishing and sustainable societies. We want you as part of our giving community.

Thanks in advance for your support. It’s not only welcome. It’s essential.

And happy holidays! Occupy the Eggnog!

* Those who prefer not to donate online can send a check to “IEET” to the office of IEET Executive Director James Hughes at this address:

Williams 119
300 Summit St.
Hartford, CT 06106

Hughes and Blackford featured in Free Inquiry

2011-12-11T03:23:55+00:00

Russell’s article “Enhancement Anxiety” can be read online.

Do Christians Need Bodies?

2011-12-09T20:51:55+00:00

Dr. J. chats with theologian Brent Waters, author of This Mortal Flesh: Incarnation and Bioethics and From Human to Posthuman: Christian Theology and Technology in a Postmodern World. Professor Waters teaches Christian Social Ethics at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, Evanston, Illinois. They discuss the importance of the body for Christianity, the ethics of reproductive choice and life extension, and whether human beings are supposed to have a creative role in nature.

http://www.archive.org/download/DoChristiansNeedBodies/20111208waters.mp3

J. Hughes Compassionate AI and Selfless Robots: A Buddhist Approach

2011-12-01T22:16:28+00:00

Buddhist psychology and metaphysics focus on the emergence of selves, their drives, and their potential for developing wisdom and compassion. Buddhism has already entered into a wide ranging dialogue with cognitive science, and can also inform and be informed by efforts to create self-aware machine minds. Buddhism suggests that there are a number of prerequisites for the development of humanlike intelligence in machines. These include embodiment, sensory interaction with the environment, preferences and aversions. The Buddhist view of the advantages of different kinds of minds and embodiments suggests an ethical obligation not to create machine minds which are trapped in particular emotional states or cognitive loops. Rather machine minds should be created with the capacity to dynamically evolve in compassion and wisdom. Compassion must start with empathetic feelings and a theory of mind, but for Buddhism also requires cultivation of equanimity and ethical wisdom. Buddhism suggests the developmental cultivation of ethics from rule-based to virtue-oriented to utilitarian. Finally thoughts are offered on what enlightenment might mean for a machine mind.

What is Character? pt2

2011-11-28T23:15:44+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Christian Miller, Professor of Philosophy and Director of The Character Project at Wake Forest University. They discuss the idea of virtue and moral character and its relationship to moral philosophy, personality theory, religion and neuroscience. Part 2 of 2. Also Dr. J. finishes his chat with Ted Chiang about his Hugo award winning novella “The Lifecycle of Software Objects” and the state of science fiction. (Part 2 of 2)

http://www.archive.org/download/WhatIsCharacter/20111128miller-b.mp3

What is Character? pt1

2011-11-28T23:00:20+00:00

http://www.archive.org/download/WhatIsCharacter/20111128miller-a.mp3

J. Hughes Contradictions of the Enlightenment: Liberal Individualism versus the Erosion of Personal Identity

2011-11-20T02:56:09+00:00

Enlightenment values presume an independent self, the rational citizen and consumer who pursues her self-interests. Since Hume, however, Enlightenment empiricists have questioned the existence of a discrete, persistent self. Today, continuing that investigation, neuroscience is daily eroding the essentialist model of personal identity. Transhumanism has yet to come to grips with the radical consequences of the erosion of the liberal individualist subject for projects of enhancement and longevity. Most transhumanist thought still reflects an essentialist idea of personal identity, even as we advance projects of radical cognitive enhancement that will change every element of consciousness. How do ethics and politics change if personal identity is an arbitrary, malleable fiction?

The Future of Democratic Equality pt2

2011-11-16T04:41:16+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Joseph Schwartz, Professor of Political Science at Temple University and author of The Future of Democratic Equality: Reconstructing Social Solidarity in a Fragmented United States. Prof. Schwartz is a long-time leader in the Democratic Socialists of America, the largest American socialist organization. Part 2 of 2.

http://www.archive.org/download/TheFutureOfDemocraticEquality/2011115schwartz-b.mp3

The Future of Democratic Equality pt1

2011-11-16T04:32:23+00:00

http://www.archive.org/download/TheFutureOfDemocraticEquality/2011115schwartz-a.mp3

Open Source Warfare and Resilient Communities

2011-10-29T17:41:25+00:00

Dr. J. chats with John Robb, a former USAF pilot in special operations and author of Brave New War. He writes the blog Global Guerrillas at globalguerrillas.typepad.com. (Originally broadcast Dec 19, 2009)

http://www.archive.org/download/OpenSourceWarfareAndResilientCommunities/20091219robb.mp3

The Ethics of Creating Conscious Beings

2011-09-29T21:35:48+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Ted Chiang about his Hugo award winning novella “The Lifecycle of Software Objects,” the ethics of creating intelligent machine minds, and the state of science fiction. (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.archive.org/download/TheEthicsOfCreatingConsciousBeings/20110929chiang-a.mp3

The Case for Mars

2011-09-20T20:30:18+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Robert Zubrin, author of the recently updated The Case for Mars: The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must (1996/2011), as well as How to Live on Mars and Entering Space: Creating a Spacefaring Civilization. Zubrin helped found and helps lead the Mars Society, the principal lobby for a Mars mission.

http://www.archive.org/download/TheCaseForMars/20110920zubrin.mp3

100 Plus: The Coming Age of Longevity pt2

2011-09-19T21:53:34+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Sonia Arrison, a futurist and policy analyst who has studied the impact of new technologies for the Pacific Research Institute (PRI). They discuss her new book 100+: How the Coming Age of Longevity Will Change Everything, from Careers and Relationships to Family and Faith. (Part 2 of 2)

http://www.archive.org/download/100PlusTheComingAgeOfLongevity/20110919arrison-b.mp3

100 Plus: The Coming Age of Longevity pt1

2011-09-19T21:45:24+00:00

http://www.archive.org/download/100PlusTheComingAgeOfLongevity/20110919arrison-a.mp3

Class Analysis

2011-09-16T20:56:26+00:00

Dr. J. chats with Erik Olin Wright, professor of Sociology, University of Wisconsin – Madison. He is a foremost scholar of class analysis, and author of many books including Class, Crisis and the State, Class Structure and Income Determination, and Classes, Class Counts and Deepening Democracy. (Originally broadcast Apr 2, 2005).

http://emma2.radio4all.net/pub/archive/04.01.05/jhughes@changesurfer.com/87-2-20050326-0402wright128.mp3