About the Author

The author of this blog is a science-geek/nerd with a Bachelor of Science (with majors in both neuroscience and nanotechnology). As for irrelevant stuff, the author is a young, middle-class, Australian Caucasian male and professes to be an atheist and a utilitarian.

The author is approving of the transhumanist point of view (though reluctant to be described as a transhumanist until the term gets a solid meaning of its own). His focus is on the B and C parts of NBIC, and therefore he:

• Approves the use of modifications into the genome of human somatic cells for therapeutic, cosmetic, psychological and physical benefits.
• Approves the use of germline genetic engineering and pre-implantation selection for enhancement of offspring.
• Approves the use of embryonic stem cells and therapeutic cloning for both therapy and, if possible, enhancement.
• Approves the use of reproductive cloning, even without the consent of the person being cloned.
• Approves the use of prosthetic, cybernetics and neurotechnology to repair, augment and enhance the human body or brain.
• Approves of the use of nanotechnology to cure and enhance the human body and brain.
• Approves of using performance-enhancing drugs, if safe, for performance enhancement in sport, business and education. This includes intelligence-boosting drugs (nootropics).
• Approves the creation of human-human and animal-human hybrid embryos through transgenic manipulation or embryo fusion, for research and, if proven safe, reproductive purposes.
• Disapproves of the patenting or ownership of genetic material, even including novel genetic material.
• Disapproves of any restrictions of the above that are not based on concerns for health and safety (and/or technological problems causing a great risk of aforementioned dangers). Liberty is too great a concern for any other issue, but safety, to take precedence.

Politically, the author agrees with the most of the major principles of the Technocracy Movement. This means that he:

• Leans towards meritocracy rather than representational democracy for the choosing of those leaders who would make technical decisions
  • Approves of decisions being made by skilled and qualified individuals in the relevant area
• Favours a liberal, direct democracy for legislation about moral and ethical issues, but only where:
  • Each vote is considered in proportion to the knowledge of the subject matter, as displayed by a short quiz accompanying the ballot (so, a person who scores 5 out of 10 on their quiz about reproductive biology only gets half a vote on issues regarding embryo research)
• Believes there is a relative abundance of key resources (a true abundance may not be present until molecular nanotechnology is perfected)
  • Thinks the free market is an inadequate system for effective distribution of resources
  • Therefore, approves of centrally-planned economies, providing ample resources to all people.
• Disapproves of any economic system that utilises a subjective concept of ‘value’, be it money, credits or otherwise.
  • Approves of a system using objective measures, such as energy, for trade
• Disapproves of building cities and infrastructure without forward planning or top-down design

The author also wishes to remain anonymous for now, due primarily to the animosity of his close family towards human enhancement technology (the animosity of everyone else, however, is welcomed). The name ‘Josh’ will do for now.