What is a Cyborg Citizen?

I finally got ahold of James Hughes' Cyborg Citizen saturday. Barely began reading it when I came across his references to the Cyborg Democracy Blog. "Wow, they're way ahead of me!" I thought.

Briefly.

There is a sophisticated, thoughtful, and, so far as I have analyzed it, accurate map of the views of biopolitics across the spectrum. There is a rah-rah spirit I find incomplete.

But here's a paragraph from an essay by Hughes, Democratic Transhumanism 2.0 , posted on their site, which I like a Lot:

Today most bioethicists, informed by and contributing to the growing Luddite orientation in left-leaning arts and humanities faculties, start from the assumption that new biotechnologies are being developed in unethical ways by a rapacious medical-industrial complex, and will have myriad unpleasant consequences for society, especially for women and the powerless. Rather than emphasizing the liberty and autonomy of individuals who may want to adopt new technologies, or arguing for increased equitable access to new biotechnologies, balancing attention to the “right from” technology with attention to the “right to” technology, most bioethicists see it as their responsibility to slow the adoption of biotechnology altogether.

"Luddism" he accurately goes on to say, "is a political dead-end for progressive politics. Progressives must revive the techno-optimist tradition if they want to achieve the goals of furthering liberty, equality and solidarity."

Even so, I find the lingering belief in "humanism" and "progress" in this essay and on this site to be untheorized. Let me quote from a quiz they print, and my somewhat cranky responses:

Are you a "democratic transhumanist?"


Do you expect human progress to result from human accomplishment rather than divine intervention, grace, or redemption?
Either/or fallacy. Also argumentative mush. The belief in "human accomplishment" may be the problem. Certainly, "human progress" can only be a proximate measure.

Do you think it would be a good thing if people could live for hundreds of years or longer?
Can’t say. I would like to live 100+ years, but who can judge the "good"?

Do you believe that people have a right to use technology to extend their mental and physical (including reproductive) capacities and to improve their control over their own lives?
Yes

Do you think it would be a good thing if people could become many times more intelligent than they currently are?
How are you going to measure "intelligent"? What is some types of intelligence are counter-indicated with each other?

Would you consider having your mind uploaded to computers if it was the only way you could continue as a conscious person?
I would. I would also object to many people I know being so uploaded. And I do not consider that such an upload would continue "me" or do much other than to assuage my mortal fear of death. Basically, this is the Christian view of heaven reborn in with a techno-halo.

Do you think that by being generally open and embracing of new technology we have a better chance of turning it to our advantage than if we try to ban or prohibit it?
A somehwhat more sophisticated either/or fallacy.

Does your ethical code advocate the well-being of all sentient beings, whether in artificial intellects, humans, posthumans, or non- human animals?
Yes!

Should parents be able to have children through cloning once the technology is safe?
Assuming facts not in evidence. Cloning technology will be developed, I assume, and it will probably create some blowback that we don't now see.

Do you believe women should have the right to terminate their pregnancies?
Yes.

Do you DISAGREE with the idea that human genetic engineering is wrong because it is "playing God"?
"Playing God" is not a good idea. Human genetic engineering may or may not be.

Do you already consider yourself a "transhumanist?"
Never thought of it.

Yeses
Score your transhumanism
7-10
You are a transhumanist. Join the World Transhumanist Association and go forth to share the memes.
5-6
You are probably a transhumanist. Join the World Transhumanist Association and explore the memes.
2-4
You have some (trans)humanist tendencies. See transhumanism.org to nurture them.
0-1
You are not a transhumanist yet. But we can help. Consult transhumanism.org frequently.

If you are a transhumanist, let's see how politically progressive you are:
Do support these movements?

environmental protection
The burden of proof lies with those who don’t.

social democracy
Yes
"fair trade" (vs. neo-liberal globalization)
This is a faddish phrase I am slightly in favor of.

universal health care access through government provided insurance
Don’t get me started. Yes

workplace democracy, coops, trade union movement
Yes.

anti-racism
C'mon! Who today would admit to supporting racism?

world federalism, world government

Two different ideas. Both unproven. Probably bad.

feminism
I support!

gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender rights
I support!

strong social welfare state or guaranteed basic income
I wish the conditions existed to discuss this fully and accurately!

Add 1 point for each yes
# # #

Maybe they just lost me with the talk of "progress," but the history of that word when applied to human conditions usually means that hunter gatherers are "primitive," farms represent "cultured," and factories are "advanced." Basically, it comes with baggage, and without that baggage, it's meaningless.

My own take is that cyborg relationships are always contingent and proximate. So is progress. What appears to be progress from one perspective may later be seen as undoing, and vice versa.

I am not arguing for a radical relativism, but for a radical failable-ism. When the good is perceived, we need to pursue it, but with knowledge that it almost certainly was not God who revealed it.