All your implants are belong to us!

As someone who has learned to distrust isms, I have also learned that it is important to at least keep track of them, lest the ism people sneak up and stop me from doing what I want to do.

Reading this Reason article, I was drawn to an emerging ism — bioconservatism.

Lawler, a member of President George W. Bush’s controversial Council on Bioethics, tried to make the case that using technology to radically extend human lifespans, and boost human intellectual, emotional, and physical capacities, will end in coercion. Those who don’t want to take advantage of the kinds of enhancements that biotechnology, nanotechnology, and cognitive technology will offer, argues Lawler, will ultimately not have a choice about using them.

But is that so? If anyone should be concerned about coercion, it is the transhumanists who rightly fear that bioconservatives like Lawler will try to use the power of the state to halt the research that would lead to the development of enhancements would enable them to improve their life chances and those of their children.

I advocate a liberal tolerant approach: People who reject enhancements for themselves and their progeny are free to do so, whereas those who want to upgrade their mental and physical capacities are also free to do so. Lawler believes, however, that the tolerance I favor must inevitably give way to coercion. What does he mean by “coercion?”

Lawler sees competition as a form of coercion. I don’t think it is. If I don’t like something, I don’t have to use it. The other day I complained about a Facebook feature I didn’t like, but I’d be the first to acknowledge that there is no obligation to use Facebook. Hell, I don’t even have to own a telephone if I don’t want to. The feeling that I “should” is not actual coercion. Coercion is when the government says I have to be on Facebook or own a phone, the way I have to have to be on the power grid. No one can make me have my hips replaced if they go bad, but the fact that the technology is there and is constantly improving, that my doctor would tell me I’d be a fool not to have it — none of that is coercion.

Bioconservatism fascinates me, though. Here’s the Wiki definition:

Bioconservatism (a portmanteau word combining “biology” and “conservatism“) is a stance of hesitancy about technological development especially if it is perceived to threaten a given social order. Strong bioconservative positions include opposition to genetic modification of food crops, the cloning and genetic engineering of livestock and pets, and, most prominently, rejection of the genetic, prosthetic, and cognitive modification of human beings to overcome what are broadly perceived as current human biological and cultural limitations.[1][2]

Bioconservatives range in political perspective from right-leaning religious and cultural conservatives to left-leaning environmentalists and technology critics. What unifies bioconservatives is skepticism about medical and other biotechnological transformations of the living world.

Hmmm…. Does “prosthetic modification” include braces for the kids’ teeth, dental implants, hip replacements, and orthopedic surgery involving the insertion of metal plates and screws? How about fillings in teeth? I mean, where do we draw the line? And are these people merely personally opposed, or do they want the government telling us what we can and cannot have done to our bodies?

There are some real nutjobs out there, and while there are probably “reasonable” bioconservatives (maybe they’d let kids have braces, but not allow hip and knee replacement surgery), I certainly hope this WorldNetDaily piece does not typify the bioconservative philosophy.

….the emergence of trans-humanism is just part of the warping of the human race.

“The intention of Lucifer is to rule this world. He has probes that he’s sent out in these orbs that I believe are collectors of human conversations. Our conversations are intercepted by these probes, and these probes can then sort of make designer diseases for your mind. I realize it’s pretty far out thinking. But when you read in the book of Ephesians, it says ‘Put on the whole armor of God,’ and we’re warned about certain ways of behaving because we are being monitored by these fallen angels,” he said.

“Their desire is to destroy us and to twist us, and trans-humanism is part of their twisting. They’re behind all of these things that afflict humanity,” he said.

“We have been invaded. These forces are animating politicians: They don’t realize they’re being assailed, and many of the thoughts they have are coming from the fallen realm. Many of the doctors and the lawyers and all kinds of people in prominent positions of authority are being affected by this invasion, not knowing that they’re being listened to, and their voices are being dissected and designer diseases or mental diseases are being injected into their minds. They think they’re their own thoughts and they’re not. It’s the twisted one who has successfully disguised himself as their own voice,” he suggested.

Geez. What if my thoughts are not my own, and I’m thinking that they are? I better start thinking long and hard about this before the transhumanists totally brainwash the thoughts I have left!

Beware!

And remember. Enabling deaf children to hear by means of cochlear implants has seriously been called “cultural genocide” by activists normally thought of as being on the left.

Those who adopt corrective technologies such as the cochlear implant in an attempt to conform affirm that deafness is in fact a disability that can and should be corrected. Alternately, one can resist the conforming process, thereby resisting the label and the association of deafness as a disability in need of correction.

The affirmation of the infirmity understanding of deafness leads to the search for new and better technologies to address deafness, including stem cell research and gene transfer therapies that aim to ultimately eliminate the birth of deaf infants. This work is done partially to eliminate the stigma of deafness. These advanced techniques, if “successful,” will have the effect of regulating and eventually eliminating Deaf culture, language, and Deaf people altogether. These attempts are seen by those adopting a cultural understanding of deafness as parallel to eugenics or genocide. Although the term eugenics implies the reduction or elimination of deafness through compulsory exogamous marriage and sterilization or through gene therapy, genocide evokes a more active attempt to eliminate a group of people or a culture. The word genocide recalls vast pogroms and systematic killing, however, the slow elimination of a minority group can occur by the destruction of the distinct elements that bind the collectivity, such as language, customs, and art forms. Because the infirmity model of deafness aims to eliminate the need for American Sign Language (ASL), the loss of this language could result in the loss of the culture itself. In this way, language death, or glottocide, can lead to the loss of cultural identity, and may represent the denial of the basic human and civil rights of children to speak their native language.

Wow. It’s obvious that there are anti-technology nuts from across the spectrum. Should the word “conservative” be attached to all who oppose advances in healing technology?

Perhaps “bioreactionary” would be a better word.

I’d say that my life is not their business, but such arguments are lost on those who think it is.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

4 responses to “All your implants are belong to us!”

  1. Joseph Hertzlinger Avatar

    Well… I can the the Deaf activists have a little bit of a point. Not providing cochlear implants might someday be regarded as child abuse and that redefinition would involve State power.

  2. arcs Avatar
    arcs

    “What if my thoughts are not my own, and I’m thinking that they are?”

    Then you’re being a conduit for God.

    Right?

  3. Eric Avatar

    I can’t retract what isn’t mine, can I?

  4. John S. Avatar
    John S.

    Deaf activists burn me up. Not people who are sincerely trying to improve the lot of the hearing-impaired, but those who pretend that deafness isn’t an impairment, and don’t want their kids to have the opportunity to hear.