Libertarian transhumanism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Libertarian transhumanism is a political philosophy synthesizing libertarianism and transhumanism.[1]
Self-identified libertarian transhumanists, such as Ronald Bailey of Reason magazine and Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit, are advocates of the sovereignty of the individual and his or her right to human enhancement.[2][3]
Contents |
[edit] Beliefs
Extropianism, an early current of transhumanist thought defined by philosopher Max More, used to include the idea of "spontaneous order" in its principles, which was and still is interpreted by many adherents and critics as a libertarian sociopolitical system.[1]
As strong civil libertarians, libertarian transhumanists hold that any attempt to limit or eliminate the right to human enhancement is a violation of civil rights and civil liberties. Libertarian transhumanists believe that the principle of self-ownership is the most fundamental idea from which both libertarianism and transhumanism stem. Some of them are ethical egoists embracing self-help, which they believe stems from the self-interested application of reason and will in the context of individual freedom. They extend this ethical egoism to advocate a form of biolibertarianism. However, as strong economic libertarians, they also reject proposed public policies of government-regulated and -insured human enhancement technologies, which are advocated by democratic transhumanists, because they fear that any state intervention will steer or limit their choices.[4][5]
[edit] Criticisms
Critiques of the techno-utopianism of libertarian transhumanists include Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron's The California Ideology, and Pauline Borsook's Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech.[6][7] Political scientist Klaus-Gerd Giesen is one forceful critic of libertarian transhumanism. While pointing out that the works of neoliberal theorist Friedrich von Hayek figure in practically all of their recommended reading lists, Giesen argues that libertarian transhumanists, convinced of the sole virtues of the free market, advocate a simplified inegalitarianism and implacable meritocracy which can be reduced to an ideology of biological determinism. He is especially critical of their promotion of a pseudoscientific form of libertarian eugenics, virulently opposed to any political regulation of human genetics, where the consumerist model presides over their ideology. Giesen concludes that the despair of finding social and political solutions to today's sociopolitical problems incites libertarian transhumanists to reduce everything to the hereditary gene, as a fantasy of omnipotence to be found within the individual, even if it means transforming the subject (human) to a new draft (posthuman).[8]
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ a b Hughes, James (2001). "Politics of Transhumanism". Retrieved on 2007-01-26.
- ^ Bailey, Ronald (2005). Liberation Biology: The Scientific And Moral Case For The Biotech Revolution. Prometheus Books. ISBN 1591022274.
- ^ Reynolds, Glenn Harlan (2006). "A Rapture for the Rest of Us". Retrieved on 2006-02-05.
- ^ Bailey, Ronald (2005). "Trans-Human Expressway: Why libertarians will win the future". Retrieved on 2006-02-05.
- ^ Carrico, Dale (2005). "Bailey on the CybDemite Menace". Retrieved on 2006-02-05.
- ^ Barbrook, Richard; Cameron, Andy (2000). "The California Ideology". Retrieved on 2007-02-06.
- ^ Borsook, Pauline (2000). Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech. PublicAffairs. ISBN 1-891620-78-9.
- ^ Giesen, Klaus-Gerd (2004). "Transhumanisme et génétique humaine". Retrieved on 2006-04-26.
