Tough Questions
Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net)
Tue, 31 Aug 1999 13:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
NOTE: I am not specifically inviting debate on the topics I list
below (nor am I discouraging it), but rather meta-discussion about
the topics themselves and how to deal with them.
There are a few recurring topics on this forum that are the source
of lively and contentious debate, and are likely to continue to be.
But far from advocating, as some have, that they be stepped around
or treated delicately, I think the problem is that they need to be
taken on more directly; their various points of view and criticisms
thereof enumerated and explained. There are good reasons to do
this. For one, any "philosophy" or "movement" or other group of
folks organized around ideas can be justly criticized for avoiding
application of those ideas to hard questions. If you honestly
believe in your point of you, you /want/ to find all opposing ones
and figure out why they fail. Secondly, these questions are
important, if not critical, to our future. I would like to see
(and am willing to host on my web site if ExI is not interested) a
set of short essays or a collection of email excerpts on the various
points of view on these topics (my own included of course); perhaps
having these to point to when the topics arise again may short-circuit
reopening discussions that have already happened. The "basic" political
and ethical positions of individual freedom and responsibility I
consider a given here, so I don't count that among the tough
questions--but that leaves plenty of room to debate the rough edges.
(1) Children's rights.
It is intellectually consistent, and even rationally defensible in
some ways, to believe that children have no rights at all and are
entirely subject to the whim of parents on whom they are dependent.
Most of us (including me) would grant them more rights than that,
and even more entitlements than basic food and shelter. Definitions
of "abuse" can vary from beatings to brainwashing to circumcision.
The point at which childhood protections and entitlements give way
to adult freedom and respnsibility is a tough question. Are parents
allowed to teach their children anything, profit from their labor,
modify their bodies (genetically or otherwise), deny medicine? Do
we have the right to create new sentient life forms however we want?
(2) Gender differences.
In earlier centuries it was taken for granted that men and women
had their fixed places in society and family dictated by the culture
they lived in; today it is taken for granted than men and women are
equally capable of any role. Both positions are wrong. There are
unquestionably differences in capability, temperament, inclination,
and style--perhaps significant enough even to justify different
rights and responsibilities--related to differences in biology, and
it is important that we understand and properly deal with these to
create the best future for all of us. Can we alter our approach
to better attract women to Extropian ideas?
Can we attack the root
of the women's resistance to them? Is segregated dicussion useful
and appropriate?
(3) Societal responsibility.
Where does one draw the lines where individual freedom unreasonably
endangers society/environment? Tort law can cover a lot more than
many people think, but it still can't cover everything. Do we have
the right to restrict the freedom of someone who is insane (and how
do we define that)? What level of risk to others can we allow an
idividual to take--driving a car, piloting a plane, developing bioweapons
in the basement?
(4) What is "harm" anyway?
Have I committed a crime if I psychologically abuse a spouse or
child? Is a cult leader who manipulates his followers to give him
money using persuasion or force? Is a religious leader/astrologer/
quack prosecutable for fraud? At what point (if any) does ridicule
become slander/libel? At what point does advocacy of an action
(such as violent revolt) become a dangerous act itself?
(5) Intellectual property.
Do I have a right to exclude others from using my creations?
Should the government help me exclude them? Do I own my genome?
My likeness? My name?
(6) Privacy.
Do I have a right to expect others to refrain from collecting and
distributing information about me? Even if I appear in public,
or speak on a public forum? Can I reveal the contents of a private
conversation without the consent of others involved, so long as it
just the contents of my memory? Can I put recording devices in my
home or on my body and use them without the consent of the recorded?
(7) Inclusiveness of the movement.
Are we willing to dilute our ideals to be more popular? Do we
want two levels of discussion--a friendly public one and a more
rigorous private one? We may not want to start a conversation
with "I want to upload all our brains into a computer the size
of a planet.", but we /do/ want to have that discussion somewhere.
Do we downplay the dangers of technology at the risk of seeming
disingenuous, or honestly confront them at the risk of scaring
off the public?
If there are other recurring "tough questions" I have missed,
let me know and I'll add them to my list. If you can point me to
interesting discussions or essays on these topics elsewhere, I
would be interested as well.
--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC