Recorded Oct 4th, 2017
Link to the interview, goo.gl/8rQ6YS
Link to Aubrey de Grey’s SENS Research Foundation — http://www.sens.org/
Read more
Category: ethics – Page 53
There’s no doubt that Dr. Ilia Stambler’s Longevity promotion: multidisciplinary perspective is a great book for the advocate and keen supporter of healthy life extension. Check out our review by Nicola Bagalà.
There’s no doubt that Dr. Ilia Stambler’s Longevity promotion: multidisciplinary perspective is a thorough book that all kinds of advocates of healthy longevity may find very useful. The book reads pretty much like a collection of academics papers, each dealing with a different aspect of the matter, including science, history, social and moral implications, legislation, and advocacy. Just like you would expect from an academic work, each section of this book is complete with exhaustive sources that will indubitably prove helpful should you wish to dig deeper into the topic being discussed.
The first section of the book focuses on advocacy, discussing typical concerns raised in the context of life extension, outreach material, and initiatives, and it offers suggestions for effective policies to promote aging and longevity research. The latter part of this section was one of the hardest for me to read since policies and legislation are not at all my strongest suit, but I do believe that professional lobbyists and advocates who have legal and regulatory backgrounds and wish to take action will find numerous ideas in it.
The longevity history section discusses the progression of longevity science during the last century. It was surprising to learn that quite a few well-established scientific disciplines of today, such as endocrinology, owe their existence to early efforts to create rejuvenation treatments. This section discusses other aspects as well, such as the holism vs reductionism controversy in the history of longevity research and the legacy of Elie Metchnikoff, a pioneering immunologist and microbiologist who can safely be regarded as the father of gerontology and made no mystery of his conviction that aging should be considered a disease and treated as such.
Full Interview ► https://goo.gl/PvUjjU
Michael B. Fossel, M.D., Ph.D. (born 1950, Greenwich, Connecticut) was a professor of clinical medicine at Michigan State University and is the author of several books on aging, who is best known for his views on telomerase therapy as a possible treatment for cellular senescence. Fossel has appeared on many major news programs to discuss aging and has appeared regularly on National Public Radio (NPR). He is also a respected lecturer, author, and the founder and former editor-in-chief of the Journal of Anti-Aging Medicine (now known as Rejuvenation Research).
Prior to earning his M.D. at Stanford Medical School, Fossel earned a joint B.A. (cum laude) and M.A. in psychology at Wesleyan University and a Ph.D. in neurobiology at Stanford University. He is also a graduate of Phillips Exeter Academy. Prior to graduating from medical school in 1981, he was awarded a National Science Foundation fellowship and taught at Stanford University.
In addition to his position at Michigan State University, Fossel has lectured at the National Institute for Health, the Smithsonian Institution, and at various other universities and institutes in various parts of the world. Fossel served on the board of directors for the American Aging Association and was their executive director.
How will our relationship to technology evolve in the future? Will we regard it as something apart from ourselves, part of ourselves, or as a new area of evolution? In this new video from the Galactic Public Archives, Futurist Gray Scott explains that we are a part of a technological cosmos. Do you agree with Scott that technology is built into the universe, waiting to be discovered?
It’s de rigeur for the many of the richest of the rich to tout the benefits of giving cash handouts to all American citizens, in part as a way to end poverty. The idea, called universal basic income (UBI), is for every individual to be paid a regular sum of money regardless of employment status.
One of the tech elite who has an interest in universal basic income is self-made multimillionaire and Y Combinator President Sam Altman. “Eliminating poverty is such a moral imperative and something that I believe in so strongly,” Altman tells CNBC Make It.
“There’s so much research about how bad poverty is. There’s so much research about the emotional and physical toll that it takes on people.
Read more
Facts of life, even for passionate seperation of church and state advocates like me: Religious #transhumanism is growing.
WASHINGTON – A Christian pastor from Florida is promoting acceptance of some forms of transhumanism, saying believers should be open to finding an “ethical alternative” to the complete rejection of the scientific, technical and philosophical transhumanist movement that has already begun.
Rev. Christopher Benek, associate pastor of family ministries and mission at First Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, writes in the Christian Post that it’s time for the development of “Christian transhumanism.”
“If you have read the The American Conservative’s recent postings about the evolving transhumanist movement, you have likely developed reasonable concerns,” Benek wrote. “People should be dismayed at Zoltan Istvan’s misguided article in TAC from two weeks ago entitled: ‘The Growing World of Libertarian Transhumanism.’ And, if one believes that Istvan’s transhumanism represents all transhumanists, then Kai Weiss’ follow-up piece “Transhumanism is Not Libertarian, It’s an Abomination,” is correct and appropriately titled. But these two depictions do not represent the majority of transhumanist thought. As such I would request: Please folks do not throw the transhumanist-baby out with Zoltan Istvan’s bathwater. There is an ethical transhumanist alternative: Christian Transhumanism.”
(Getty/Science Source/Mike Agliolo)
T he concept of artificial intelligence has been fuel for science fiction since at least 1920, when the Czech writer Karel Čapek published R.U.R., his play about a mutiny led by a throng of robots. Speculation about the future of intelligent machines has run rampant in the intervening decades but recently has taken a more critical turn. Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer imaginary, and the implications of its future development are far-reaching. As computer scientists confirm their intent to push the limits of AI capabilities, religious communities and thinkers are also debating how far AI should go—and what should happen as it becomes part of the fabric of everyday life.
“Scientists want to be at the cutting edge of research, and they want the contribution to knowledge,” says Brendan Sweetman, chair of philosophy at Rockhurst University. “But at the same time, a lot of what they do raises moral questions.”
Read more
” … Paul Tudor Jones co-founded JUST Capital to fix the ills of corporate capitalism by identifying the most just or “good” companies. Will it work?”
The intelligence value argument and effects on regulating autonomous artificial intelligence.
~ David J Kelley
Newton Lee in partnership with Springer is working on an upcoming book covering transhumanist topics, one of the chapters covers IVA (Intelligence Value Argument) which is summary of the chapter titled: “The Intelligence Value Argument and Effects on Regulating Autonomous Artificial Intelligence” which I wrote and am including only the first part of that chapter on IVA.
Abstract: This paper is focused on the Intelligence Value Argument or IVA and the ethics of how that applies to autonomous systems and how such systems might be governed by the extension of current regulation. IVA is based on some static core definitions of ‘Intelligence’ as defined by the measured ability to understand, use and generate knowledge, or information independently all of which are a function of sapience and sentience. The IVA logic places the value of any individual human and their potential for Intelligence and the value of other systems to the degree that they are self-aware or ‘intelligent’ as a priority. Further, the paper lays out the case for how the current legal framework could be extended to address issues with autonomous systems to varying degrees depending on the IVA threshold as applied to autonomous systems.
Introduction
In this chapter, I articulate the case using the Intelligence Value Argument (IVA) that, “ethically”, a fully Sapient and Sentient Intelligence is of equal value regardless of the underlying substrate which it operates on meaning a single fully Sapient and Sentient software system has the same moral agency [10] as an equally Sapient and Sentient human being. We define ‘ethical’ according to dictionary.com as pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principals of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct. Moral agency is, according to Wikipedia; is “an individual’s ability to make moral judgments based on some notion of right and wrong and to be held accountable for these actions. A moral agent is “a being who is capable of acting with reference to right and wrong.” Such value judgments need to be based on potential for Intelligence as defined here.
Read more
Self Driving Cars and Ethics. It’s a topic that has been debated in blogs, op-eds, academic research papers, and youtube videos. Everyone wants to know, if a self-driving car has to choose between sacrificing its occupant, or terminating a car full of nobel prize winners, who will it pick? Will it be programmed to sacrifice for the greater good, or protect itself — and its occupants — at all costs? But in the swirl of hypothetical discussion around jaywalking Grandmas, buses full of school-children, Kantian Ethics and cost-maps, one crucial question is being forgotten:
What about the Squirrels?
What is your take on the ethics of driverless vehicles? Should programmers attempt to give vehicles the ability to weigh moral problems, or just vehicles only have the aim of self-preservation?