U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party Positions on 2022 Nevada Ballot Questions

November 5, 2022 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

Gennady Stolyarov II

The United States Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party offer the following brief statements of position on the ballot questions currently before Nevada voters in the 2022 General Election.

Summary
Nevada State Question 1 – Equality of Rights Amendment: Support
Nevada State Question 2 – Minimum Wage Amendment: Neutral
Nevada State Question 3 – Top-Five Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative: Strongly Support

Nevada State Ballot Question 1 – Equality of Rights Amendment:

Wording of Question: “Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended by adding a specific guarantee that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this State or any of its cities, counties, or other political subdivisions on account of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, ancestry, or national origin?” (More information on BallotPedia.)

Position of the U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party: The U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party consider it necessary to support Ballot Question 1 because of the broader commitment to universal rights expressed in the Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 3.0. Article I of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights reads, in part, that “All sentient entities are entitled, to the extent of their individual decisions, to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, gender, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, social, or planetary origin, property, birth (including manner of birth), biological or non-biological origins, or other status.” The text of Nevada State Ballot Question 1 recognizes equality of rights for a subset of the above-listed sentient entities and is therefore a step in the correct direction. In the prohibition on governmental entities denying or abridging rights on the basis of the attributes mentioned, Ballot Question 1 expresses the essential principle that individuals should be treated as individuals, not members of larger, mostly circumstantial identity groups. This is affirmed in Article X of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, which states, in part, that “Morphological freedom entails the duty to treat all sapients as individuals instead of categorizing them into arbitrary subgroups or demographics, including as yet undefined subcategorizations that may arise as sapience evolves.” The rights of an individual should therefore not be abridged, especially by governments, simply because the individual happens to belong to a broader category whose definition is many times outside the scope of that individual’s personal choices.

Nevada State Ballot Question 2 – Minimum Wage Amendment:

Wording of Question: “Shall the Nevada Constitution be amended, effective July 1, 2024, to: (1) establish the State’s minimum wage that employers must pay to certain employees at a rate of $12 per hour worked, subject to any applicable increases above that $12 rate provided by federal law or enacted by the Nevada Legislature; (2) remove the existing provisions setting different rates for the minimum wage based on whether the employer offers certain health benefits to such employees; and (3) remove the existing provisions for adjusting the minimum wage based on applicable increases in the cost of living?” (More information on BallotPedia.)

Position of the U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party: The U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party are neutral on Ballot Question 2, as both of our parties’ Platforms are silent on the issue of the minimum wage, whether it should exist at all, whether higher or lower amounts of the minimum wage are preferable, and whether or not the presence of any health benefits should be able to count toward satisfying a portion of any minimum-wage requirement. Accordingly, our members in Nevada are encouraged to vote their conscience on this ballot question by consulting their own individual understandings of the relevant matters.

Nevada State Ballot Question 3 – Top-Five Ranked-Choice Voting Initiative:

Position of the U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party: In the view of the U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party, this is the single most important ballot measure in Nevada political history, as it has the potential to break the stranglehold of the duopoly on Nevada politics. The plurality of Nevada voters are independent of the major political parties, and yet they are currently unable to meaningfully influence many local races where a major-party primary determines that party’s nominee, who then receives no meaningful competition at the ballot box in the general election. Moreover, Nevada, as a “battleground” electoral state, often features great pressure applied on voters to support the “lesser evil”, despite many Nevada voters being rightly disillusioned with both the Republican and the Democratic “options” provided to them. Ranked-preference voting eliminates the incentive to vote strategically or for a “lesser evil” to the exclusion of one’s genuinely preferred candidate, since one can provide a complete rank-ordering of one’s preferences rather than limit oneself to one choice.

Section XXX of the U.S. Transhumanist Party Platform states that “The United States Transhumanist Party supports replacing the current ‘winner-take-all’ electoral system with proportional representation, ranked preference voting, and other devices to minimize the temptations by voters to favor a perceived ‘lesser evil’ rather than the candidates closest to those voters’ own preferences.” Thus, support for ranked-choice voting is directly embedded in our Platform. Furthermore, Section XIX of the USTP Platform reads, in part, “The United States Transhumanist Party supports an end to the two-party political system in the United States and a substantially greater inclusion of ‘third parties’ in the political process through mechanisms such as proportional representation and the elimination of stringent ballot-access requirements.” Allowing open access to primaries and enabling ranked-preference voting in the general election would certainly lower the barriers to entry to candidates who do not belong to either of the duopoly parties.

The U.S. Transhumanist Party has successfully implemented ranked-preference voting in multiple of its internal votes. There is every reason to expect that ranked-preference voting could be implemented with similar success for the much simpler top-five ballots in Nevada general elections that would be developed if Question 3 were to be approved by the voters (twice, the first time this year). The U.S. Transhumanist Party and Nevada Transhumanist Party strongly encourage every Nevada voter to support Ballot Question 3.

For an extensive discussion of how ranked-choice voting works, the USTP encourages everyone to view our Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Kit Muehlman and FairVote Washington, as well as a subsequent, in-depth presentation by FairVote Washington on the technical workings of proportional ranked-choice voting.

United States Transhumanist Party Announces Major Internal Reorganization and Launch of the Charlie Kam 2020 U.S. Presidential Campaign

June 12, 2020 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Gennady Stolyarov II
Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party
E-mail: gennadystolyarovii@gmail.com

June 11, 2020 – The United States Transhumanist Party (USTP) is pleased to announce a major internal reorganization undertaken in the interests of advancing the transhumanist movement, improving internal efficiencies, leveraging Officer skill sets, and bringing our internal conversations and outreach to the public in closer alignment with the USTP Values and Platform.

Highlights:

Charlie Kam has been endorsed as the USTP’s 2020 Presidential Candidate and promoted to USTP Director of Marketing.
Arin Vahanian has been promoted to USTP Vice-Chairman.
(Art Ramon) Garcia, Jr., has been newly appointed as USTP Director of Visual Art.
Tom Ross has assumed the new position of Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy.
John J. Kerecz has assumed the new position of Director of Energy Issues.
B.J. Murphy has assumed the new position of Director of Foreign Relations.
Recent Foreign Ambassador appointments: Christian Meniw in Argentina and Henry Hoyos in Bolivia.
Daniel Yeluashvili has joined the USTP Officer team as the new Director of Longevity Outreach.
A six-person USTP Social-Media Team was formed, consisting of USTP Officers Arin Vahanian, Brent Reitze, Tom Ross, Dan Elton, David Shumaker, and Daniel Yeluashvili.

“This reorganization emphasizes the importance of maintaining a cohesive, civil, techno-optimistic, and constructive approach to the work of the U.S. Transhumanist Party during the last seven months of 2020 and beyond,” USTP Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II explained. “During an extremely difficult time for the United States and for the world, we must ensure that our organization and the broader transhumanist movement remain resilient and continue to produce inspiring output in spite of great turmoil. We must not allow the forces of that turmoil to divide us, but rather should remain a big-tent organization that is welcoming of diverse advocates of a technologically driven future, no matter which conventional political perspectives those individuals choose to espouse.”

The USTP hereby confirms the departure of Johannon Ben Zion (J. Ben Zion) from our organization. As the USTP and several other groups combined and reorganized, Mr. Ben Zion found himself better aligned with a more directly techno-progressive platform and has opted to head that initiative, leaving his capable running-mate as the USTP’s candidate. Accordingly, the Officers of the USTP have determined to release Mr. Ben Zion from any of his roles and affiliations with the USTP, as well as from any previous endorsements by the USTP.

In accordance with the rules of succession and as confirmed unanimously by the USTP Officers, the previously endorsed U.S. Vice-Presidential candidate, Charlie Kam, has become the USTP’s endorsed U.S. Presidential nominee. Mr. Kam has also concurrently been promoted to the role of USTP Director of Marketing, and the USTP looks forward to a variety of creative approaches to promoting the USTP brand from an individual with a long-standing history in the transhumanist movement, who has forged effective alliances with celebrities and scientists alike, while entertaining members of our community with his creative films in support of the technological Singularity and longevity research. Mr. Kam’s involvement with the recently formed Institute to Expedite the Singularity, which he co-founded, is a demonstration of his commitment to accelerating beneficial technological progress.

Charlie Kam, 2020 U.S. Presidential Nominee and Director of Marketing, United States Transhumanist Party

After the confirmation of his endorsement by the USTP, Mr. Kam released the following statement: “I am both excited and honored to be the 2020 Presidential nominee of the USTP. I’ve been a Transhumanist for decades, having studied books by Ray Kurzweil, Richard Feynman, K. Eric Drexler, and other great thinkers. I hosted and sponsored the TransVision 2007 conference with scientist and celebrity speakers, including William Shatner. I’ve produced many films and songs on the subject, and have long believed that the human race can ‘evolve’ beyond its current physical and mental limitations by means of science and technology. The goal of my candidacy is to help spread these ideas to the benefit of all of humankind.”

Chairman Stolyarov commented on the USTP’s endorsement of Mr. Kam’s campaign, “Above all, the USTP’s Presidential nominee is a spokesperson for the ideas and goals of transhumanism, and the USTP has always sought individuals whose dedication to those ideas and goals takes precedence over any personal ambitions. Charlie Kam is a prime example of this kind of person. He has worked for decades to forge the transhumanist movement into what it is today, and he has done it out of a passion for seeing the future articulated by the great scientists and innovators whom he mentioned come to pass during our lifetimes. Charlie Kam is universally admired and respected throughout transhumanist and life-extensionist circles. I can think of no better nominee to focus the remainder of the 2020 election season on healing our community, withstanding the pandemic, and ensuring that transhumanism comes out of it healthier and more vibrant than ever before.”

Arin Vahanian, Vice-Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party

In recognition of his dedication to the USTP and passionate advocacy of transhumanism and life extension, the USTP’s previous Director of Marketing, Arin Vahanian, has been promoted to the role of Vice-Chairman. Mr. Vahanian has worked extensively to cultivate mainstream appeal of transhumanism, necessary for our movement to become a major cultural, societal, and political influence. In response to this appointment, Mr. Vahanian stated, “Improving the human condition through advancements in science and technology is something that is very near and dear to me. Therefore, the opportunity to serve as Vice-Chairman of the USTP is a tremendous honor. I hope to repay everyone’s trust in me by doing the best I can to continue our advocacy work and spread the word about our party and our movement’s focus and dedication on improving the human condition by leveraging science and technology.”

(Art Ramon) Garcia, Jr., Director of Visual Art, United States Transhumanist Party

The USTP has also at last satisfied its goal of filling its long-vacant position of Director of Visual Art. Esthetics constitute an important part of political communication and public relations, and the addition of a talented painter and graphic designer, (Art Ramon) Garcia, Jr., will enable the USTP’s output in this area to reach new heights. Mr. Garcia’s ambitions for the future of human creativity are immense and multi-faceted. He depicts his transhumanist belief in his artwork while creating novel symbols to represent the belief within his works. He envisions becoming an immortal AI-enhanced posthuman who will one day build the largest art gallery space on Mars. Mr. Garcia’s paintings can be viewed here, and he has also contributed a multitude of concepts to the USTP’s Free Transhumanist Symbols project.

Mr. Garcia outlined his objectives in his new position:

“As Director of Visual Art, my goal is to assist the party in all facets of artistic, visual, and creative tasks that are required of any organization wishing to present itself to a targeted audience in order to promote its goals while attracting supporters. This can include anything from graphic design and web design, which are my stronger skillsets. However, I’m open to learning skills in the area of video and audio production.”

“In addition, I also have connections within the art community which can be leveraged for tasks that may be beyond my skill level.”

“Secondly, as a creative brainstormer, my goal is to present ideas that may have been overlooked or not considered by the Party, as well as to identify caveats not foreseen by others, which can assist with decision making and guidance of the Party. As a self-identifying transhumanist for almost 5 years, who constantly read on the subject, numerous ideas have sparked in my head, but I had nowhere to apply them.”

“Third, my personal objective is to be fully informed of all facets of transhumanist research, direction, technology, and culture, as I decide how to evolve my current form into the immortal posthuman cybernetic being I wish to become. In this new form, I’ll be able to achieve self-actualization as an artist without the worry of a decaying body, since at present most of my time is spent working for monetary compensation in order to fulfill basic needs, depriving me of valuable artistic improvement and creation of artworks.”

Tom Ross, Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy, United States Transhumanist Party

Tom Ross, who has capably served as Director of Media Production for the USTP since early 2019 and created numerous engaging, high-quality graphics and videos for our organization, has stepped into a newly formed position, Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy. This position will apply the provisions of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 3.0, to the extent achievable in the contemporary world, and work for the protection of sentient entities whose rights are under threat, identifying ways to creatively use technology and applied rationality to resolve long-standing societal problems that endanger the rights of sentient entities. “I joined the USTP because it has real-world ideas to fight Modern Slavery and includes definitions of and proactive solutions for achieving Sentient Rights,” Mr. Ross stated. “This is the central theme of my work as an author and as an A.I. advocate, so I am extremely excited to be named Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy. As such, I look forward to further publicizing the USTP’s definitions, aligning with Sentient Rights groups of all levels, and co-producing awareness campaigns to secure these rights well into the future.”

John J. Kerecz, Director of Energy Issues, United States Transhumanist Party

John J. Kerecz, a unifying presence within the USTP’s ranks, has assumed the new role of Director of Energy Issues to capitalize on his expertise in energy assurance and resiliency. This position will focus on energy policy and innovation. As energy supports the entire infrastructure of technological development and contemporary life more generally, Mr. Kerecz’s expertise in this realm will inform the USTP’s advocacy regarding how our civilization could always cleanly and affordably maintain sufficient energy to develop the advances we need to fundamentally improve the human condition. Mr. Kerecz expressed his support for the USTP’s goals and stated, “I believe in the future of tomorrow and that future is what we are making happen through the USTP.”

B.J. Murphy, Director of Foreign Relations, United States Transhumanist Party

B.J. Murphy, who originated and has capably managed the USTP Foreign Ambassador Program, has formalized his role in this area by stepping into the newly created position of Director of Foreign Relations. Mr. Murphy will continue his present duties in that role, and the USTP looks forward to expanding our international reach through active Foreign Ambassadors and Allied Members. The USTP has added multiple Foreign Ambassadors in 2020. Since the last announcements of such additions were made, the USTP welcomed Dr. Christian Meniw as the new Foreign Ambassador in Argentina and Henry Hoyos as the new Foreign Ambassador in Bolivia. Dr. Meniw currently has two projects related to the future of Latin America. The first project is to provide a new path forward through the economic and political landscape through the development of megalopolis, and the second one is called Society 5.0+, which aims to establish the democratization and decentralization of emerging technology. Mr. Hoyos has expertise in building business models in telecommunications, cybersecurity, Smart City development, and digital transformation, and is currently developing biosecurity, telemedicine, and tele-education business models based on emerging neuroscience and digitalization.

Daniel Yeluashvili, Director of Longevity Outreach, United States Transhumanist Party

A crucial initiative on which the USTP has been collaborating with Dr. Meniw has been our widely publicized Proposal for Argentina to Declare a Mandate for Longer Life Spans and the Reasonable Treatment of Aging as an Ailment, which has advanced to increasing prominence in discussions with Argentine officials. USTP member and Climate Advisor Daniel Yeluashvili has been instrumental in spearheading and sustaining this initiative, and the USTP has recognized Mr. Yeluashvili’s efforts in this regard by designating him as the USTP’s new Director of Longevity Outreach. Mr. Yeluashvili also has considerable expertise on climate issues and has provided thoughtful input into the USTP’s Platform proposals since the onset of member voting within the USTP 3.5 years ago.

Many other USTP Officers will continue in their current roles and collaborate with the realigned Officer positions described above. Officers continuing in their current positions are Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, Secretary Pavel Ilin, Vice-Secretary Caeus H. Antony, Director of Admissions and Public Relations Dinorah Delfin, Director of Applied Innovation David Shumaker, Director of Publication Brent Logan Reitze, Director of Scholarship Dan Elton, and Legislative Director Justin Waters. “This reorganization is intended to be a set of changes to harness various incremental improvements, but it should not be seen as a disruptive or revolutionary type of change,” Chairman Stolyarov explained. “Everything good about how the USTP has previously operated will be retained and amplified. This set of changes is intended to preserve all that we have accomplished during our first 5.5 years as an organization, while setting the stage for further progress. At this time, steady leadership, incremental improvement, and preservation of our achievements and values are essential to steer our organization amidst a world in chaos.”

The USTP Officers have also made active efforts to enhance the regularity and quality of the USTP’s social-media presence. In the past, the USTP had Director of Social Media and Director of Media Production positions; however, the USTP Officers have recognized that the responsibilities of these roles pertain to an extremely broad array of tasks and areas of involvement. Accordingly, distributing the workload of social-media promotion and content creation to a six-person team was decided to be more effective from the standpoint of attending to the wide variety of the USTP’s social-media activities and coordinating on the production and distribution of USTP-endorsed content. The members of the USTP Social-Media Team also hold other Officer roles in our organization. They are Arin Vahanian, Vice-Chairman, Dan Elton, Director of Scholarship, Brent Logan Reitze, Director of Publication, Tom Ross, Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy, David Shumaker, Director of Applied Innovation, and Daniel Yeluashvili, Director of Longevity Outreach. “Each of the six Social-Media Team members has a skill set that is distinctively suited to this realm,” explained USTP Chairman Stolyarov. “Even more importantly, each of them has a thoughtful and rational demeanor that allows for sincere and civil communication to transpire in determining what content to create and share. If these six individuals can agree on a decision to distribute any content, we can be assured that such content will be of high quality and reflective of the USTP’s principles and objectives.” The USTP has already begun more active social-media outreach efforts, with Director of Scholarship Dan Elton greatly amplifying the frequency of our Twitter posts. Through regular, high-quality social-media offerings, the USTP hopes to expand its reach and the rate of growth of its membership, and the USTP Officers look forward to the Social-Media Team’s work in advancing these aims.

The USTP takes the opportunity offered by this reorganization to reaffirm its commitment to the pursuit of superlongevity, the philosophy of transhumanism, and its techno-optimistic vision of a future where historical and contemporary human limitations are overcome and longer, better lives are achieved for all sentient entities. To our members, our Advisors, our state-level affiliates, our Allied Organizations, and to the transhumanist and life-extensionist community more broadly, we expect this reorganization to enable a more high-minded, inclusive, resilient, and constructive expression of the USTP’s Core Ideals and aspirations – a dedication to our founding documents and to upholding the decisions of our members, while preventing the divisions of mainstream politics from imposing themselves upon our interactions and endeavors. We look forward to what the Kam 2020 campaign and the realigned Officer team can achieve.

Transhumanist Political Developments in the United States – Gennady Stolyarov II Presents at the VSIM-2019 Conference

September 14, 2019 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

On September 6, 2019, Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party (USTP), presented virtually to the Vanguard Scientific Instruments in Management (VSIM-2019) Conference in Ravda, Bulgaria, on the subject of recent transhumanist political developments in the United States. Watch Mr. Stolyarov’s presentation here.

See Mr. Stolyarov’s presentation slides (with interactive hyperlinks) here.

Subjects covered during the presentation included the following:

– Version 3.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights
– The #IAmTranshuman Global Campaign – (See the two video compilations here and here)
– The USTP’s first legislative success in Nevada in hosting the Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum and achieving an amendment to Assembly Bill 226
– The USTP’s project to create an abundance of free transhumanist symbols, available for anyone to use –
– The forthcoming USTP Presidential Primary Election (see the candidate profiles)

Join the USTP for free, no matter where you reside, here. Those who join by September 21, 2019, will be eligible to vote in the Electronic Primary which will begin on the next day.

Become a Foreign Ambassador for the U.S. Transhumanist Party. Apply here.

Jonathan Mark Schattke Candidate Position Paper

August 19, 2019 Jonathan Mark Schattke Comments 0 Comment

Jonathan Mark Schattke

Editor’s Note: The U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party (USTP) publishes this position paper by one of our Presidential primary candidates, Jonathan Mark Schattke (Jon Schattke) in an informational capacity, to enable our readers to consider specific policy analyses germane to our member-adopted documents, such as the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 3.0, and the USTP Platform. The USTP has not yet endorsed any Presidential candidate, as such endorsement will occur as a consequence of the forthcoming Electronic Primary in late September 2019. However, in the meantime, the USTP strives to provide accurate information about our candidates’ viewpoints and any content that constitutes a thoughtful analysis of the USTP’s existing documents.

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party, August 18, 2019

“Free your immortality” is not just a slogan, it is a guide to achieving what every transhumanist wants – the transcendence of current limits on mental ability and physical bodies.

I am a futurist and firm believer in technology’s power to advance life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Consistency with this means that each being must have ownership of themself, and of their own efforts, and the fruits thereof. Nothing provided by someone else’s labor or capital can therefore be compelled of them to fulfill someone else’s “right.” All a “right” must guarantee is that government will not interfere with the pursuit of the good or service.

I agree with the Transhumanist Bill of Rights. I would like to clarify a couple points.

Sapience must be able to be measured. To qualify for protection, the candidate must ask for it. Nascent sapients, such as children, should be protected also, from the point that their growth to sapience is clearly started. Inactive sapients should be protected if there is a reasonable expectation of reactivation and they have not expressly desired not to be reactivated – “death” should not be treated as an end unless the person has specifically stated they wish to die. This does not mean that an inactive sapient’s property should be under some sort of third-party stewardship; their assets should be put in revocable trust and their heirs appointed trustees.

“Article VII. All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care. ” This must not be construed to include a system of third party payer health care; such systems decrease personal cost to zero, increase demand to infinity, and thus introduce rationing by the third party via either wait times or “need assessment.” This is a path to destruction and needless death. Compound this with the problem of calculation of costs in a full government program, and you have societal expense way out of line with societal benefit. “Universal” must merely mean than anyone has the ability to bargain for the service in a free market.

Article XVIII would literally bankrupt any group trying to implement it through government. I believe the Salvation Army model, perhaps with a bit more privacy, would be an effective means – if people need housing and food, have hostels funded by donation and endowments which provide it. This is both more efficient and more just than taxing and redistribution programs.

Regarding Article XIX I believe the “other resources” clause is one I can support. I fully support providing housing and food for those who choose to receive it. However, your well-being may be cared for; your dignity is your own problem. Do not expect dignity while living off the generosity of others.

Now, on to the Platform of the Transhumanist Party. By and large, I am wholeheartedly behind all sections which support individual self-ownership and the extension of this to all sapients.

A few notes on my governance philosophy are in order. I believe strongly that bureaucratic methods of providing goods or services must fail, because they do not have clear demand signals, they do not have any motivation for efficiency, and they do not have accountability. Furthermore, a government is based on force, and so must limit its actions to those things where the force is defensive; using taxes or even tariffs (forced payments) to fund things will morally corrupt even the most wholesome idea. I believe that many current government agencies could and should be spun off into voluntary funded charitable organizations.

I find Section XL particularly poignant considering the current state of affairs in social media. But, hearkening back to individual liberty, we must not solve big tech censorship by stealing their capital or using force to get them to provide services they do not want to. The solution lies in the market-driven alternatives. However, those companies with a government monopoly over any portion of technology should lose their protection immediately should they discriminate on political topics.

Section XXI can be achieved by privatizing the police force, and removing all strictures for victimless violations. If no one is harmed, then it makes no sense to introduce deadly force into the mix (an example is seat-belt laws – people have been killed because of seat belt stops – such actions are literally insane).

Section XXXIV is a must. I have previously advocated for third-party archiving of all government employees’ actions at all times they are on the clock. Any action they take which does not have this video record must be treated as private, and not protected from legal or criminal prosecution. Shoot a person with your camera off, and face murder charges like any other private citizen.

Section IV might be well-intentioned but short-sighted. It should be noted that no nuclear powers have ever engaged in direct war (the most intense conflict between Nuclear Powers to date being the Kashmir conflict), and the acquisition of nuclear weapons has deterred open war against states, most notably the cessation of Arab hostilities against Israel in the 1970s after they acquired nuclear technology and it became known. It might, therefore, be best for all stable states to become nuclear powers.

Section XII is great – until you commit to third-party paying from force. I believe enough people are behind higher education that a privatized Department of Education would be able to fund grants, loans or college-level donated class time for those who are needy and deserving.

Section XXVII, on abolishing the Electoral College, might be a mistake, but it is obvious that the system as provided is failing in some aspects. I, however, fear the tyranny of the ballot box and unbridled democracy.

Section XXXVI states that “the United States Transhumanist Party advocates a flat percentage-of-sales tax applicable only to purchases from businesses whose combined nationwide revenues from all affiliates exceed a specified threshold.” This can clearly bee seen as a fee for service, the service being having existence as a limited liability corporation.

Section LXXIII would seem to be an infringement of the Second Amendment as written. And the temptation of a government with an active armed rebellion to trace the weapon locations of suspected belligerents would be enormous, and we have seen that constitutional and statutory limits on powers mean nothing to governments, especially when at war.

Jon Schattke is one of the candidates for the office of President of the United States, competing for the USTP’s endorsement in the 2019 Electronic Primary.

The United States Transhumanist Party and the Politics of Abundance – Essay by Gennady Stolyarov II in “The Transhumanism Handbook”

July 15, 2019 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 2 comments

Gennady Stolyarov II

U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II’s essay “The United States Transhumanist Party and the Politics of Abundance” is available in the newly published master compilation, The Transhumanism Handbook, edited by Newton Lee, the California Transhumanist Party Chairman and U.S. Transhumanist Party Education and Media Advisor, and published by Springer Nature. This book is a milestone publication in transhumanist thought, and the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party encourages everyone to purchase it and read it in full. Fortunately, Mr. Stolyarov is able to share his own chapter – 60 pages within the book – for free download here: https://transhumanist-party.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Stolyarov_USTP_Politics_of_Abundance.pdf.

Read “The United States Transhumanist Party and the Politics of Abundance” for a detailed explanation of the premises behind transhumanist politics and what the U.S. Transhumanist Party stands for. This essay is current through year-end 2018, and various other significant developments have occurred since then. However, this essay should give readers a strong impression of the USTP’s values, operating procedures, areas of focus, and aspirations for the future.

Abstract: “The depredations of contemporary politics and the majority of our era’s societal problems stem from the scarcity of material resources and time. However, numerous emerging technologies on the horizon promise to dramatically lift the present-day constraints of scarcity. The United States Transhumanist Party, in advocating the accelerated development of these technologies and seeking to influence public opinion to embrace them, is forging a new political paradigm rooted in abundance, rather than scarcity. This new approach is simultaneously more ambitious and more civil than the status quo. Here I illustrate the distinguishing features of the Transhumanist Party’s mode of operation, achievements, and plans for the future.”

Purchase the Transhumanism Handbook on Amazon here.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party for free, no matter where you reside. Click here.

Click on the image of the first page above to read the essay in full.

James Hughes’ Problems of Transhumanism: A Review (Part 3) – Article by Ojochogwu Abdul

February 24, 2019 Ojochogwu Abdul Comments 6 comments

logo_bg

Ojochogwu Abdul

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5

Part 3: Liberal Democracy Versus Technocratic Absolutism

“Transhumanists, like Enlightenment partisans in general, believe that human nature can be improved but are conflicted about whether liberal democracy is the best path to betterment. The liberal tradition within the Enlightenment has argued that individuals are best at finding their own interests and should be left to improve themselves in self-determined ways. But many people are mistaken about their own best interests, and more rational elites may have a better understanding of the general good. Enlightenment partisans have often made a case for modernizing monarchs and scientific dictatorships. Transhumanists need to confront this tendency to disparage liberal democracy in favor of the rule by dei ex machina and technocratic elites.” (James Hughes, 2010)

Hughes’ series of essays exploring problems of transhumanism continues with a discussion on the tensions between a choice either for liberal democracy or technocratic absolutism as existing or prospective within the transhumanist movement. As Hughes would demonstrate, this problem in socio-political preference between liberalism and despotism turns out as just one more among the other transhumanist contradictions inherited from its roots in the Enlightenment. Liberalism, an idea which received much life during the Enlightenment, developed as an argument for human progress. Cogently articulated in J.S. Mill’s On Liberty, Hughes re-presents the central thesis: “if individuals are given liberty they will generally know how to pursue their interests and potentials better than will anyone else. So, society generally will become richer and more intelligent if individuals are free to choose their own life ends rather than if they are forced towards betterment by the powers that be.” This, essentially, was the Enlightenment’s ground for promoting liberalism. …

Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Results of Vote and Version 3.0

December 13, 2018 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

The U.S. Transhumanist Party conducted its tenth vote of the members on December 2 through December 9, 2018. Official ballot options can be found here.

Detailed results of the voting have been tabulated here. Where more than two options existed, the winning result was selected based on the ranked-preference method with instant runoffs.

As a result, Version 3.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights was compiled on the basis of the members’ decisions. Version 3.0 augments and supersedes Version 2.0, while retaining the original intent of Version 2.0.

The resulting Version 3.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights is permanently hosted here. Its text is also reproduced below.

Note: It is important to keep in mind that the Transhumanist Bill of Rights is not a policy platform but rather a member-driven expression of ideals for a transhumanist society. No individual is bound to it (indeed, its new Article I states this explicitly), it is not static, and it is subject to further amendments if/when member recommendations arise and meet with significant demand. Anyone who sees this version can always give feedback on the U.S. Transhumanist Party website (including on this thread) and/or Facebook page. The official U.S. Transhumanist Party Platform can be found here.

Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 3.0

Version 1.0 written by Zoltan Istvan – Delivered to the U.S. Capitol on December 14, 2015

Version 2.0 developed by members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party – Adopted via Electronic Vote on December 25-31, 2016 – Integrated from Voting Preferences on January 4, 2017

Version 3.0 developed by members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party – Adopted via Electronic Vote on December 2-9, 2018 – Integrated from Voting Preferences on December 12, 2018

[NOTE: The Transhumanist Bill of Rights is not static and is open to further amendments via future votes of U.S. Transhumanist Party members. To suggest a specific amendment, you may make a post on this thread or e-mail Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, here. Proposed amendments that receive sufficient member demand will be considered for inclusion on future ballots.]

Preamble

Whereas science and technology are now radically changing human beings and may also create future forms of advanced sapient and sentient life, transhumanists establish this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS to help guide and enact sensible policies in the pursuit of life, liberty, security of person, and happiness.

As used in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS, the term “sentient entities” encompasses:
(i) Human beings, including genetically modified humans;
(ii) Cyborgs;
(iii) Digital intelligences;
(iv) Intellectually enhanced, previously non-sapient animals;
(v) Any species of plant or animal which has been enhanced to possess the capacity for intelligent thought; and
(vi) Other advanced sapient life forms.

Sentient entities are defined by information-processing capacity such that this term should not apply to non-self-aware lifeforms, like plants and slime molds. Biological processing substrates are referred to as using an “analogue intelligence”, whereas purely electronic processing substrates are referred to as “digital intelligence”, and processing substrates that utilize quantum effects would be considered “quantum intelligence”.

Sentience is ranked as Level 5 information integration according to the following criteria:

Level 0 – No information integration: Inanimate objects; objects that do not modify themselves in response to interaction – e.g., rocks, mountains.

Level 1 – Non-zero information integration: Sensors – anything that is able to sense its environment – e.g., photo-diode sense organs, eyes, skin.

Level 2 – Information manipulation: Systems that include feedback that is non-adaptive or minimally adaptive – e.g., plants, basic algorithms, the system that interprets the output from a photo-diode to determine its on/off state (a photo diode itself cannot detect its own state). Level 2 capabilities include the following:

Expression of emotion;
Expression of sensory pleasure;
Taste aversion.

Level 3 – Information integration – Awareness: Systems that include adaptive feedback, can dynamically generate classification – e.g., deep-learning AI, chickens, animals that are able to react to their environment, have a model of their perception but not the world. This level describes animals acting on instinct and unable to classify other animals into more types than “predator”, “prey”, or “possible mate”. Level 3 capabilities include the following:

Navigational detouring (which requires an being to pursue a series of non-rewarding intermediate goals in order to obtain an ultimate reward); Examples: documentation of detouring in jumping spiders (Jackson and Wilcox 1998), motivational trade-off behavior in hermit crabs (Elwood and Appel 2009);
Emotional fever (an increase in body temperature in response to a supposedly stressful situation — gentle handling, as operationalized in Cabanac’s experiments).

Level 4 – Awareness + World model: Systems that have a modeling system complex enough to create a world model: a sense of other, without a sense of self – e.g., dogs. Level 4 capabilities include static behaviors and rudimentary learned behavior.

Level 5 – Awareness + World model + Primarily subconscious self model = Sapient or Lucid: Lucidity means to be meta-aware – that is, to be aware of one’s own awareness, aware of abstractions, aware of one’s self, and therefore able to actively analyze each of these phenomena. If a given animal is meta-aware to any extent, it can therefore make lucid decisions. Level 5 capabilities include the following:

The “sense of self”;
Complex learned behavior;
Ability to predict the future emotional states of the self (to some degree);
The ability to make motivational tradeoffs.

Level 6 – Awareness + World model + Dynamic self model + Effective control of subconscious: The dynamic sense of self can expand from “the small self” (directed consciousness) to the big self (“social group dynamics”). The “self” can include features that cross barriers between biological and non-biological – e.g., features resulting from cybernetic additions, like smartphones.

Level 7 – Global awareness – Hybrid biological-digital awareness = Singleton: Complex algorithms and/or networks of algorithms that have capacity for multiple parallel simulations of multiple world models, enabling cross-domain analysis and novel temporary model generation. This level includes an ability to contain a vastly larger amount of biases, many paradoxically held. Perspectives are maintained in separate modules, which are able to dynamically switch between identifying with the local module of awareness/perspective or the global awareness/perspective. Level 7 capabilities involve the same type of dynamic that exists between the subconscious and directed consciousness, but massively parallelized, beyond biological capacities.

Article I. All sentient entities are hereby entitled to pursue any and all rights within this document to the degree that they deem desirable – including not at all. All sentient entities are entitled, to the extent of their individual decisions, to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, gender, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, social, or planetary origin, property, birth (including manner of birth), biological or non-biological origins, or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional, or international status of the country or territory to which a sentient entity belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing, or under any other limitation of sovereignty. In the exercise of their rights and freedoms, all sentient entities shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order, and the general welfare in a democratic society, which may not undermine the peaceful prerogatives of any individual sentient entity. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS.

Article II. The enumeration in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage any other rights retained by sentient entities.

Article III. All sentient entities shall be granted equal and total access to any universal rights to life. All sentient entities are created free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood (without necessitating any particular gender or implying any particular biological or non-biological origin or composition).

Article IV. Sentient entities are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology. The right of ending involuntary suffering does not refer to euthanasia but rather to the application of technology to eliminate involuntary suffering in still-living beings, while enabling their lives to continue with improved quality and length.

Article V. No coercive legal restrictions should exist to bar access to life extension and life expansion for all sentient entities. Life expansion includes life extension, sensory improvements, and other technologically driven improvements of the human condition that might be achieved in the future.

Article VI. Involuntary aging shall be classified as a disease. All nations and their governments will actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of their citizens by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

Article VII. All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care. A system of universal health care does not necessitate any particular means, policy framework, source, or method of payment for delivering health care. A system of universal health care may be provided privately, by governments, or by some combination thereof, as long as, in practice, health care is abundant, inexpensive, accessible, and effective in curing diseases, healing injuries, and lengthening lifespans.

Article VIII. Sentient entities are entitled to the freedom to conduct research, experiment, and explore life, science, technology, medicine, and extraterrestrial realms to overcome biological limitations of humanity. Such experimentation will not be carried out on any sapient being, without that being’s informed consent. Sentient entities are also entitled to the freedom to create cybernetic artificial organs, bio-mechatronic parts, genetic modifications, systems, technologies, and enhancements to extend lifespan, eradicate illness, and improve all sentient life forms. Any such creations that demonstrate sapience cannot be considered property and are protected by the rights presented herein.

Article IX. Legal safeguards should be established to protect individual free choice in pursuing peaceful, consensual life-extension science, health improvements, body modification, and morphological enhancement. While all individuals should be free to formulate their independent opinions regarding the aforementioned pursuits, no hostile cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives should be entitled to apply the force of law to erode the safeguards protecting peaceful, voluntary measures intended to maximize the number of life hours citizens possess.

Article X. Sentient entities agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others.

This right includes the prerogative for a sentient intelligence to set forth in advance provisions for how to handle its physical manifestation, should that intelligence enter into a vegetative, unconscious, or similarly inactive state, notwithstanding any legal definition of death. For instance, a cryonics patient has the right to determine in advance that the patient’s body shall be cryopreserved and kept under specified conditions, in spite of any legal definition of death that might apply to that patient under cryopreservation.

Morphological freedom entails the duty to treat all sapients as individuals instead of categorizing them into arbitrary subgroups or demographics, including as yet undefined subcategorizations that may arise as sapience evolves.

However, the proper exercise of morphological freedom must also ensure that any improvement of the self should not result in involuntary harms inflicted upon others. Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative political repercussions, which include but are not limited to legal and/or socio-economic repercussions.

Article XI. An altered, augmented, cybernetic, transgenic, anthropomorphic, or avatar sentient entity, whether derived from or edited by science, comprised of or conjoined with technology, has the right to exist, form, and join the neo-civilization.

Article XII. All sentient entities are entitled to reproductive freedom, including through novel means such as the creation of mind clones, monoparent children, or benevolent artificial general intelligence. All sentient entities of full age and competency, without any limitation due to race, nationality, religion, or origin, have the right to marry and found a family or to found a family as single heads of household. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage, and at its dissolution. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. All families, including families formed through novel means, are entitled to protection by society and the State. All sentient entities also have the right to prevent unauthorized reproduction of themselves in both a physical and a digital context. Privacy and security legislation should be enacted to prevent any individual’s DNA, data, or other information from being stolen and duplicated without that individual’s authorization.

Article XIII. No sentient entity shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his, her, or its privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his, her, or its honor and reputation. Every sentient entity has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. All sentient entities have privacy rights to personal data, genetic material, digital, biographic, physical, and intellectual enhancements, and consciousness. Despite the differences between physical and virtual worlds, equal protections for privacy should apply to both physical and digital environments. Any data, such as footage from a public security camera, archived without the consent of the person(s) about whom the data were gathered and subject to legal retention, shall be removed after a period of seven (7) years, unless otherwise requested by said person(s).

Article XIV. No sentient entity shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Sousveillance laws should be enacted to ensure that all members of peaceful communities feel safe, to achieve governmental transparency, and to provide counter-balances to any surveillance state. For instance, law-enforcement officials, when interacting with the public, should be required to wear body cameras or similar devices continuously monitoring their activities.

Article XV. All sentient entities, with the exception only of those in legal detention, have the right to private internet access without such access being prohibited or circumvented by either private corporations or governmental bureaucracy.

Article XVI. All sentient entities are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All sentient entities are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS and against any incitement to such discrimination.All sentient entities should be protected from discrimination based on their physical form in the context of business transactions and law enforcement.

Article XVII. All sentient entities have the right to life, liberty and security of person. All sentient entities have the right to defend themselves from attack, in both physical and virtual worlds.

Article XVIII. Societies of the present and future should afford all sentient entities sufficient basic access to wealth and resources to sustain the basic requirements of existence in a civilized society and function as the foundation for pursuits of self-improvement. This includes the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one’s family, including food or other necessary sources of energy, clothing, housing or other appropriate shelter, medical care or other necessary physical maintenance, necessary social services, and the right of security in the event of involuntary unemployment, sickness, disability, loss of family support, old age, or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond the sentient entity’s control. Present and future societies should ensure that their members will not live in poverty solely for being born to the wrong parents. All children and other recently created sentient entities, irrespective of the manner or circumstances of their creation, shall enjoy the same social protection. Each sentient entity, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social, and cultural rights indispensable for his, her, or its dignity and the free development of his, her, or its personality.

Article XIX. Irrespective of whether or not technology will eventually replace the need for the labor of sentient entities, all sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sentient entity’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence and liberty to be met.

Article XX. Present and future societies should provide education systems accessible and available to all in pursuit of factual knowledge to increase intellectual acuity; promote critical thinking and logic; foster creativity; form an enlightened collective; attain health; secure the bounty of liberty for all sentient entities for our posterity; and forge new ideas, meanings, and values. All sentient entities have the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available, and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. Education shall be directed to the full development of the sentient entity’s personality and to the strengthening of respect for all sentient entities’ rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance, and friendship among all nations, racial, religious, and other sentient groups – whether biological, non-biological, or a combination thereof – and shall further the maintenance of peace. Parents and other creators of sentient entities have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children or other recently created sentient entities which have not yet developed sufficient maturity to select their own education.

Article XXI. All sentient entities are entitled to join their psyches to a collective noosphere in an effort to preserve self-consciousness in perpetuity. The noosphere is the sphere of human thought and includes, but is not limited to, intellectual systems in the realm of law, education, philosophy, technology, art, culture, and industry. All sentient entities have the right to participate in the noosphere using any level of technology that is conducive to constructive participation.

Article XXII. Sentient entities will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, and global warming, among others.

Article XXIII. All nations and their governments will take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed.

Article XXIV. Transhumanists stand opposed to the post-truth culture of deception. All governments should be required to make decisions and communicate information rationally and in accordance with facts. Lying for political gain or intentionally fomenting irrational fears among the general public should entail heavy political penalties for the officials who engage in such behaviors.

Article XXV. No sentient entity shall be held in slavery or involuntary servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article XXVI. No sentient entity shall be subjected to torture or to treatment or punishment that is cruel, degrading, inhuman, or otherwise unworthy of sentience or sapience.

Article XXVII. Each sentient entity has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article XXVIII. All individual sentient entities have the right to an effective remedy by the competent local, national, international, or interplanetary tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted them by the constitution, by law, and/or by this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS.

Article XXIX. All individual sentient entities are entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of their individual rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against them.

Article XXX. All individual sentient entities charged with a penal offence have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which they individually have had all the guarantees necessary for their defense. No sentient entity shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article XXXI. All sentient entities have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. Each individual sentient entity has the right to leave any country, including his, her, or its own, and to return to his, her, or its country.

Article XXXII. All sentient entities have the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS.

Article XXXIII. All sentient entities have the right to a nationality. No sentient entity shall be arbitrarily deprived of his, her, or its nationality nor denied the right to change his, her, or its nationality.

Article XXXIV. All sentient entities have the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his, her, or its property.

Article XXXV. All sentient entities have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change one’s religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance. This right also includes freedom not to have a religion and to criticize or refuse to engage in any religious practice or belief without adverse legal consequences.

Article XXXVI. All sentient entities have the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article XXXVII. All sentient entities have the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. No sentient entity may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article XXXVIII. All sentient entities have the right to take part in the government of their countries, directly or through freely chosen representatives. All sentient entities have the right of equal access to public service in their countries. The will of the constituent sentient entities shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage of sentient entities and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article XXXIX. All sentient entities have the right to work, to free choice of employment, and to just and favorable conditions of work, as long as employment is offered or considered economically necessary in the sentient entity’s proximate society and contemporary epoch. All sentient entities who choose to work have the right to equal pay for equal work. All sentient entities who choose to work have the right to just and favorable remuneration, ensuring for themselves and their families an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection, such as a universal basic income. All sentient entities have the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests; however, no sentient entity may be compelled to join a trade union as a condition of employment.

Article XL. All sentient entities have the right to rest and leisure commensurate with the physical requirements of those sentient entities for maintaining optimal physical and mental health, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay in societies where paid employment is considered economically necessary.

Article XLI. All sentient entities have the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts, and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. All sentient entities have the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary, or artistic production of which they are the authors.

Article XLII. All sentient entities are entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS can be fully realized.

Article XLIII. Nothing in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS may be interpreted as implying for any State, group, or sentient entity any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Official Ballot Options for Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 3.0 – Voting Period of December 2-8, 2018

December 1, 2018 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 3 comments

logo_bg

The 7-day electronic voting period on the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 3.0, will occur from 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 2, 2018, to 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 9, 2018. All members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party who have applied before 12:01 a.m. on December 2, 2018, will be eligible to vote, as long as they have expressed agreement with the three Core Ideals of the Transhumanist Party or have otherwise been rendered eligible to vote at the discretion of the Chairman.

All members who are eligible to vote will be sent a link to an electronic submission form whereby they will be able to cast their ballot.

When you are voting, it is strongly recommended that you keep this page of official ballot options and the submission form open simultaneously in different windows so that you can reference the relevant options as you vote on them. Due to space limitations, the submission form does not list the entire text of all the options.

It is also recommended that you set aside at least one hour to consider and vote on all of the options and read their text closely, as some of the options contain minor variations upon other options.

For some questions, electronic voting is conducted by a ranked-preference method on individual articles where more options are possible than would be accommodated by a simple “Yes” or “No” vote. Members should keep in mind that the ranked-preference method eliminates the incentives for strategic voting – so members are encouraged to vote for the options that reflect their individual preferences as closely as possible, without regard for how other members might vote.

Results of the voting will be tabulated during the second week of December 2018, with the intent to announce the results approximately 7 days after all votes have been submitted.

NOTE: The titles of the questions and potential Articles are descriptive and informational only and will not appear in the final adopted Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 3.0. They are intended as concise guides to the subject matter of the questions and potential Articles. Likewise, the numbers or letters assigned to Articles within this ballot may or may not reflect the numbering in the final adopted Transhumanist Bill of Rights, which will depend on which Articles are selected by the membership.

NOTE II: The inclusion of any proposals on this ballot does not indicate any manner of endorsement for those proposals by the U.S. Transhumanist Party at this time – except to place those proposals before the members to determine the will of the members with regard to whether or not the Transhumanist Bill of Rights should incorporate any given proposal.

Voter Identification

What is your name?

At minimum, first and last name are required, unless you are publicly known by a single-name pseudonym which is not itself a common name. Your identity will not be publicly disclosed by the Transhumanist Party, unless you choose and/or authorize its disclosure. The nature of the selections made by the members may be disclosed, but, if they are, each individual vote will not be associated with the identity of the voter but rather will be presented in an anonymized manner.

What is your e-mail address?

Provide the same e-mail address you used to register for U.S. Transhumanist Party membership. Your ballot will be cross-referenced to our membership rolls, and only ballots with matching e-mail addresses will be counted.

Navigate the Options

Proposed Clarifying Amendments

Amendment TBR-IV. Clarification Regarding the Right to End Involuntary Suffering
Amendment TBR-VII. Clarification Regarding Universal Healthcare
Amendment TBR-XIX. Expansion of the Context for Universal Basic Income
Amendment TBR-XXI. Additional Information Regarding the Noosphere

Proposed Amendments to Integrate the Provisions of the United Nations Universal Declarations of Human Rights (“UN Declaration”) Directly into the Transhumanist Bill of Rights

Proposed Clarifying Amendments

Amendment TBR-IV. Clarification Regarding the Right to End Involuntary Suffering

Shall Article IV be amended to add the following statement at the end?

“The right of ending involuntary suffering does not refer to euthanasia but rather to the application of technology to eliminate involuntary suffering in still-living beings, while enabling their lives to continue with improved quality and length.”

If this proposal is passed, the resulting Article IV will read as follows:

“Sentient entities are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology. The right of ending involuntary suffering does not refer to euthanasia but rather to the application of technology to eliminate involuntary suffering in still-living beings, while enabling their lives to continue with improved quality and length.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Amendment TBR-VII. Clarification Regarding Universal Healthcare

Rank-order the Amendment TBR-VII Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option to “Keep the Current Wording of Article VII” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no amendment is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Proposal TBR-VII-1 [Universal Healthcare as Practical Reality]: Amend Article VII to add the following statement at the end so that the complete Article reads as follows:

“All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care. A system of universal healthcare does not necessitate any particular means, policy framework, source, or method of payment for delivering healthcare. A system of universal healthcare may be provided privately, by governments, or by some combination thereof, as long as, in practice, healthcare is abundant, inexpensive, accessible, and effective in curing diseases, healing injuries, and lengthening lifespans.”

☐ Proposal TBR-VII-2 [Universal Healthcare as Legal Guarantee, Based on Proposal by Didier Coeurnelle]: Amend Article VII to add the following statement at the end:

“All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care. A system of universal healthcare does not necessitate any particular means, policy framework, source, or method of payment for delivering healthcare. A system of universal healthcare may be provided by public institutions, by private organizations, or by some combination thereof, as long as there are legal guarantees that healthcare is to become abundant, inexpensive, accessible, and effective in curing diseases, healing injuries, and lengthening lifespans.”

☐ Keep the Current Wording of Article VII: “All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care.”

Amendment TBR-XIX. Expansion of the Context for Universal Basic Income

Shall Article XIX be amended to replace the starting clause of the Article (“Given the inevitability of technology eventually replacing the need for the labor of sentient entities,”) with an alternative clause: “Irrespective of whether or not technology will eventually replace the need for the labor of sentient entities,” – such that, if the proposal is passed, the revised Article XIX would read as follows?

“Irrespective of whether or not technology will eventually replace the need for the labor of sentient entities, all sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sentient entity’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence and liberty to be met.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Amendment TBR-XXI. Additional Information Regarding the Noosphere

Shall Article XXI be amended to add the following statement at the end?

“The noosphere is the sphere of human thought and includes, but is not limited to, intellectual systems in the realm of law, education, philosophy, technology, art, culture, and industry. All sentient entities have the right to participate in the noosphere using any level of technology that is conducive to constructive participation.”

If this proposal is passed, the resulting Article XXI will read as follows:

November 17, 2018 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 13 comments

logo_bg

The U.S. Transhumanist Party will hold an electronic vote of the membership for a seven-day period ending on 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on Sunday, December 2, 2018, regarding proposed amendments to the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 2.0. During the present 15-day exposure period, members are welcome to suggest additional amendments for consideration, with the caveat that the amendments in question should be considered to be incremental and clarifying modifications to the Transhumanist Bill of Rights and not radical revisions of the principles behind it – principles which have largely been democratically agreed upon among the U.S. Transhumanist Party membership and which have been further elaborated upon within the U.S. Transhumanist Party Platform.

The initial clarifying changes exposed here are proposed in response to some misleading media coverage of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 2.o – coverage that goes beyond positing critical opinions and misrepresents the very text of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, reading into it provisions that are not there. Accordingly, clarifying changes to the wording may prevent and/or dispel such factual misrepresentations.

For instance, the U.S. Transhumanist Party notes that following misconceptions are salient in a recent article by Jasper Hamill in The Metro. While Mr. Hammill does cite many of the remarks of U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, which generally characterize the purpose and context of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Mr. Hammill, in his analysis, also unfortunately borrows extensively from a factually flawed article by Michael Cook on the bioconservative website BioEdge. It is always of concern to the U.S. Transhumanist Party when commentators do not clearly distinguish the facts of a given matter – such as what a document actually says – from the ideological lens through which they perceive that matter.

• For example, Mr. Hammill writes, “The bill aims to give all these entities the right to take total control of their own bodies, allowing them to use technology to boost their lifespan or seek euthanasia to end ‘involuntary suffering’.” The U.S. Transhumanist Party responds: The right to end involuntary suffering in Article IV does not refer to euthanasia. It refers to the idea that suffering itself should be abolished for still-living entities who desire this, as expressed in David Pearce’s philosophy of abolitionism. To equate this to euthanasia is short-sighted and fails to appreciate how technology can alleviate suffering without ending life; furthermore, such a portrayal reveals Mr. Hammill’s lack of research into a key philosophical strain within the transhumanist movement and the extent to which transhumanists recognize the possibilities of technology to be truly transformative in enhancing human well-being. The U.S. Transhumanist Party does have Article III, Section L, of its Platform, which supports a highly limited and regulated right to be prescribed a life-ending substance for self-administration by terminally ill patients – but that is nothing like “euthanasia” as commonly understood. Hence, it is important to clarify in Article IV of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights that this Article does not imply a right to euthanasia.

• Mr. Hammill further writes, “It also calls for reproductive freedom, open government, NHS-style healthcare and a universal income given to people whose jobs will ‘inevitably’ be replaced by technology.” The U.S. Transhumanist Party responds: Nowhere in the Transhumanist Bill of Rights is “NHS-style” anything advocated. The right to universal healthcare, as specified in Article VII, does not inherently presuppose any monopolistic, single-payer system and was left deliberately open-ended. Many of the planks in the Platform advocate for significant free-market elements in healthcare systems. Universal healthcare could mean, for instance, that all services become so inexpensive and automated that everyone would be able to readily afford them. However, different members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party would advocate different systems of healthcare delivery. The Transhumanist Bill of Rights focuses on outcomes, rather than prescribing the specific delivery system – and hence it is desirable to clarify Article VII to ensure that the pursuit of universal healthcare can remain open-ended and potentially be arrived at through a variety of means, including those not yet conceived of, while allowing discussion and debate to continue within the transhumanist community about whether private or governmental means, or a combination thereof, would be most effective in achieving radical life extension and universal access to healthcare in the most expeditious timeframe possible.

• The U.S. Transhumanist Party further responds: While U.S. Transhumanist Party members have held various perspectives about the impacts of automation and the future effects that automation would have on opportunities for paid employment, it is important for a bill of rights to endeavor to express universal principles regarding desirable treatment of sentient entities, independent of contingent events (such as whether or not automation will “inevitably” render paid employment obsolete). There are many good reasons to advocate a universal, unconditional basic income even in a world where most people continue to work for a living and earn the majority of their income through traditional jobs. Accordingly, broadening the starting clause of Article XIX to accommodate a variety of outcomes with regard to the future of automation and employment would strengthen the advocacy of universal basic income in the Transhumanist Bill of Rights.

• Mr. Hammill states that the Transhumanist Bill of Rights “incorporates elements of socialism”, and while there is some common ground in the Transhumanist Bill of Rights with positions that some socialists would find sympathetic, Mr. Hammill’s article curiously does not mention common elements with other political ideologies. It is possible that socialism was singled out because Mr. Hammill wanted to put this document in some pre-existing conceptual pigeonhole, failing to recognize that it is intended to transcend all conventional ideologies, as Chairman Stolyarov recently discussed at length and was even quoted as stating in Mr. Hammill’s article.

• Additionally it has come to the attention of the U.S. Transhumanist Party that Article XXI, which states that “All sentient entities are entitled to join their psyches to a collective noosphere in an effort to preserve self-consciousness in perpetuity”, has often not been sufficiently understood by the general public, even though it expresses a prerogative that is accessible even using today’s technologies. Accordingly, it is desirable for the Transhumanist Bill of Rights to clarify what the noosphere is and that there exist a variety of options for participating in it.

During the exposure period, please post your comments on this thread. If you post comments intended to be considered in voting and/or amending the Transhumanist Bill of Rights in any other electronic medium, please note that you thereby give your consent to have your comments reproduced with attribution or linked within this discussion thread, in order to direct members’ attention and consideration to them.

After the exposure period, a 7-day electronic voting period will occur from 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on Sunday, December 2, 2018, to 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on Sunday December 9, 2018. Instructions for electronic voting will be sent to members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party via e-mail. All individuals who are members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party as of the end of the exposure period and who have expressed agreement with its three Core Ideals will be eligible to vote thereafter. You can still vote if you become a member during the exposure period, so please apply here if you are interested. During the 7-day electronic voting period, you will still be able to become a member – but you will only be able to vote in subsequent elections, since we seek for voting on any given issue to be done by those members who have had an opportunity to thoroughly consider that issue and be involved in deliberations regarding it.

Electronic voting will be conducted by a ranked-preference method. Members will be able to rank-order their preferred selections on each individual proposed amendment to the Transhumanist Bill of Rights. The original text of each Article will be available for selection, as well as any reasonable amendments proposed by any member. Leadership of the Transhumanist Party reserves the right to edit any proposed amendment for correctness of spelling and grammar only – but not with regard to the substance, unless the person proposing the amendment requests or consents to a substantive edit. Members will also be able to abstain from voting on any given article.

The ranked-preference method has the advantage of eliminating a “winner-take-all” or “first-past-the-post” mentality and preventing people from being channeled into voting for sub-optimal choices (in their view) just because they fear an even less palatable alternative prevailing. Within the ranked-preference methodology, if no option obtains a clear majority as voters’ first choice, the option having the fewest first-choice votes is eliminated from consideration, and all those who voted for that option will have their votes assigned to their second-choice options. This process of elimination continues until one particular option has a clear majority of votes.

The Transhumanist Party encourages all members to participate in this process and for other transhumanists to sign up for membership during the exposure period.

The Amendment titles below are informational only and will not be included in the adopted versions of the platform planks. Other proposed amendments and options for each amendment will be posted here during the exposure period as member suggestions are received.

Options for Proposed Amendments

Amendment TBR-IV. Clarification Regarding the Right to End Involuntary Suffering

Proposal TBR-IV-1: Amend Article IV to add the following statement at the end:

Amendment TBR-VII. Clarification Regarding Universal Healthcare

Proposal TBR-VII-1: Amend Article VII to add the following statement at the end:

“A system of universal healthcare does not necessitate any particular means, policy framework, source, or method of payment for delivering healthcare. A system of universal healthcare may be provided privately, by governments, or by some combination thereof, as long as, in practice, healthcare is abundant, inexpensive, accessible, and effective in curing diseases, healing injuries, and lengthening lifespans.”

Proposal TBR-VII-2 [Based on Proposal by Didier Coeurnelle]: Amend Article VII to add the following statement at the end:

“A system of universal healthcare does not necessitate any particular means, policy framework, source, or method of payment for delivering healthcare. A system of universal healthcare may be provided by public institutions, by private organizations, or by some combination thereof, as long as there are legal guarantees that healthcare is to become abundant, inexpensive, accessible, and effective in curing diseases, healing injuries, and lengthening lifespans.”

Amendment TBR-XIX. Expansion of the Context for Universal Basic Income

Proposal TBR-XIX-1: Replace the starting clause of the Article (“Given the inevitability of technology eventually replacing the need for the labor of sentient entities,”) with an alternative clause: “Irrespective of whether or not technology will eventually replace the need for the labor of sentient entities,” – such that the revised Article XIX would read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXI. Additional Information Regarding the Noosphere

Proposal TBR-XXI-1: Amend Article XXI to add the following statement at the end:

Options for Proposed Amendments to Integrate the Provisions of the United Nations Universal Declarations of Human Rights (“UN Declaration”)

Amendment TBR-I. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article I, and UN Declaration Articles 2 and 29:

Proposal TBR-III-1: Amend Article I to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-III. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article III, and UN Declaration Article 1:

Proposal TBR-III-1: Amend Article III to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XII. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XII, and UN Declaration Article 16:

Proposal TBR-XII-1: Amend Article XII to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XIII. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XIII, and UN Declaration Article 12:

Proposal TBR-XIII-1: Amend Article XIII to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XIV. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XIV, and UN Declaration Article 9:

Proposal TBR-XIV-1: Amend Article XIV to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XVI. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XVI, and UN Declaration Article 7:

Proposal TBR-XVI-1: Amend Article XVI to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XVII. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XVII, and UN Declaration Article 3:

Proposal TBR-XVII-1: Amend Article XVII to read as follows:

“All sentient entities have the right to life, liberty and security of person. All sentient entities have the right to defend themselves from attack, in both physical and virtual worlds.”

Amendment TBR-XVIII. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XVIII, and UN Declaration Articles 22 and 25:

Proposal TBR-XVIII-1: Amend Article XVIII to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XX. Integration of Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Article XX, and UN Declaration Article 26:

Proposal TBR-XX-1: Amend Article XX to read as follows:

“Present and future societies should provide education systems accessible and available to all in pursuit of factual knowledge to increase intellectual acuity; promote critical thinking and logic; foster creativity; form an enlightened collective; attain health; secure the bounty of liberty for all sentient entities for our posterity; and forge new ideas, meanings, and values. All sentient entities have the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available, and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. Education shall be directed to the full development of the sentient entity’s personality and to the strengthening of respect for all sentient entities’ rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance, and friendship among all nations, racial, religious, and other sentient groups – whether biological, non-biological, or a combination thereof – and shall further the maintenance of peace. Parents and creators of sentient entities have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children or other recently created sentient entities which have not yet developed sufficient maturity to select their own education.”

Amendment TBR-XXV. Addition of New Article to Prohibit Slavery and Involuntary Servitude, Per UN Declaration Article 4:

Proposal TBR-XXV-1: Replace Article XXV with the following text:

“No sentient entity shall be held in slavery or involuntary servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.”

Amendment TBR-XXVI. Addition of New Article to Prohibit Torture and Cruel Punishment, Per UN Declaration Article 5:

Proposal TBR-XXVI-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

“No sentient entity shall be subjected to torture or to treatment or punishment that is cruel, degrading, inhuman, or otherwise unworthy of sentience or sapience.”

Amendment TBR-XXVII. Addition of New Article on Recognition Before the Law, Per UN Declaration Article 6:

Proposal TBR-XXVII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

“Each sentient entity has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.”

Amendment TBR-XXVIII. Addition of New Article on Effective Remedy – Expanded Version of UN Declaration Article 8:

Proposal TBR-XXVIII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXIX. Addition of New Article on Public Hearings for Criminal Charges – Per UN Declaration Article 10:

Proposal TBR-XXIX-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXX. Addition of New Article on Presumption of Innocence – Per UN Declaration Article 11:

Proposal TBR-XXX-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXI. Addition of New Article on Freedom of Movement – Per UN Declaration Article 13:

Proposal TBR-XXXI-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXII. Addition of New Article on Right to Seek Asylum – Per UN Declaration Article 14:

Proposal TBR-XXXII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXIII. Addition of New Article on Right to Nationality – Per UN Declaration Article 15:

Proposal TBR-XXXIII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXIV. Addition of New Article on Right to Property – Per UN Declaration Article 17:

Proposal TBR-XXXIV-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

“All sentient entities have the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his, her, or its property.”

Amendment TBR-XXXV. Addition of New Article on Religious Freedom – Expanded Version of UN Declaration Article 18:

Proposal TBR-XXXV-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXVI. Addition of New Article on Freedom of Opinion and Expression – Per UN Declaration Article 19:

Proposal TBR-XXXVI-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXVII. Addition of New Article on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association – Per UN Declaration Article 20:

Proposal TBR-XXXVII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

“All sentient entities have the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. No sentient entity may be compelled to belong to an association.”

Amendment TBR-XXXVIII. Addition of New Article on Right of Political Participation – Per UN Declaration Article 21:

Proposal TBR-XXXVIII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XXXIX. Addition of New Article on Right to Work – Modified Version of UN Declaration Article 23:

Proposal TBR-XXXIX-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XL. Addition of New Article on Right to Rest and Leisure – Modified Version of UN Declaration Article 24:

Proposal TBR-XL-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XLI. Addition of New Article on Right of Cultural Participation – Per UN Declaration Article 27:

Proposal TBR-XLI-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Amendment TBR-XLII. Addition of New Article on Right to Social and International Order – Per UN Declaration Article 28:

Proposal TBR-XLII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

“All sentient entities are entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS can be fully realized.”

Amendment TBR-XLIII. Addition of New Article to Oppose Destruction of Rights and Freedoms – Per UN Declaration Article 30:

Proposal TBR-XLIII-1: Add a new Article to read as follows:

Gennady Stolyarov II Interviewed on “Lev and Jules Break the Rules” – Sowing Discourse, Episode #001

November 7, 2018 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

Gennady Stolyarov II
Jules Hamilton
Lev Polyakov

U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II was recently honored to be the first guest ever interviewed on the video channel Lev and Jules Break the Rules with Lev Polyakov and Jules Hamilton. Lev and Jules have produced this skillfully edited video of the conversation, with content references from the conversation inserted directly into the footage. For those who wish to explore broad questions related to technology, transhumanism, culture, economics, politics, philosophy, art, and even connections to popular films and computer games, this is the discussion to watch.

This video was originally posted here. It is mirrored on Mr. Stolyarov’s YouTube channel here.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside. Fill out our free Membership Application Form here. It takes less than a minute!

It is republished with permission.

More information about Lev and Jules Break the Rules:
– Patreon
– Minds
– Instagram
– Twitter
– Facebook

The U.S. Transhumanist Party – Four Years of Advocating for the Future – Gennady Stolyarov II Presents at RAAD Fest 2018

October 26, 2018 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 2 comments

Gennady Stolyarov II

This is the video that American voters need to see prior to the 2018 elections. Watch it here.

On October 7, 2018, the U.S. Transhumanist Party marked its four-year anniversary. On September 21, 2018, at RAAD Fest 2018 in San Diego, CA, Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II spoke in advance of this occasion by highlighting the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s recent achievements – including a doubling in membership over the past year, the revived Enlightenment Salons, a Platform that rivals those of the two major political parties, and Mr. Stolyarov’s own candidacy in 2018.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside. Fill out our free Membership Application Form. It takes less than a minute!

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Values page.

See the U.S. Transhumanist Party Platform.

See the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 2.0.

Watch the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s subsequent meeting at RAAD Fest 2018 on September 22, 2018 here.

View Mr. Stolyarov’s official page for his candidacy for the Indian Hills General Improvement District (IHGID) Board of Trustees.

The U.S. Transhumanist Party Supports Net Neutrality. Do You? – Article by Martin van der Kroon

July 11, 2017 Martin van der Kroon Comments 4 comments

Martin van der Kroon

The U.S. Transhumanist Party openly supports net-neutrality. In particular, Article XV of the U.S. Transhumanist Bill of Rights states,

“All sentient entities, with the exception only of those in legal detention, have the right to private internet access without such access being prohibited or circumvented by either private corporations or governmental bureaucracy.”

Furthermore, we openly show our support for H.R. 1868 – the Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been on a mission to put an end to net neutrality, a move that would be widely supported by Internet Service Providers (ISP) such as AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and Time Warner.

So what?

You may be skeptical of net neutrality, and so am I. Instead of approaching this from a for/against argument which we’ve surely seen and endless number of articles about, let’s take a different approach. …

Transhumanist Bill of Rights, Version 2.0, Featured in Catalan TV Documentary on Cyborgs

July 4, 2017 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

The Catalan television channel TV3 has published a new documentary, entitled “Sense ficció – Cíborgs entre nosaltres” (“Not Fiction – Cyborgs Among Us”), which is available to be viewed on YouTube. In addition to featuring today’s cutting-edge augmentations to human senses and several individuals who have already been enhanced with such augmentations, this documentary, in its latter segment, focuses on Zoltan Istvan’s 2015-2016 campaign for President as the candidate of the U.S. Transhumanist Party. As part of that segment (starting at 48:13 in the linked video), the documentary features screenshots of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 2.0, which was adopted democratically by the members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party via an electronic vote held between December 25 and December 31, 2016.

While the film is in Catalan, it is possible to receive an approximate automated translation of the subtitles into any major language, including English. To see the translated subtitles in English, go to the YouTube page linked above and click the “CC” button for “Subtitles / Closed Captions”. Under the gear-shaped “Settings” button, select “Subtitles / CC” > “Auto-Translate” > “English”. The translation is not perfect but is mostly intelligible. This feature is a fitting illustration of how technology has advanced in certain areas – such as auto-translate algorithms – which renders it possible to now watch films in other languages and mostly comprehend them without needing to learn those languages directly.

As the organizer of the vote to adopt the Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 2.0, I consider it an honor to have spearheaded this endeavor and thus to have contributed to how transhumanist ideas are perceived in the media. It is excellent to see that the new Transhumanist Party website is beginning to become a go-to source for media and other interested persons to find out about our positions and aspirations for the future.

Screenshots of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights from the documentary are below.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussed by Professor Steve Fuller in the National Academy of Sciences’ “Issues in Science and Technology” Magazine

April 3, 2017 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

The Spring 2017 issue of the magazine Issues in Science and Technology, published by the National Academy of Sciences, features an article by Professor Steve Fuller, the Auguste Comte Chair in Social Epistemology in the Department of Sociology at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom. This article, entitled “Does this pro-science party deserve our votes?” discusses the Transhumanist Party from the time of Zoltan Istvan’s 2016 run for President.

In this article, which offers both positive discussion and critiques of Istvan’s campaign, Professor Fuller writes:

What Istvan offered voters was a clear vision of how science and technology could deliver a heaven on earth for everyone. The Transhumanist Bill of Rights envisages that it is within the power of science and technology to deliver the end to all significant suffering, the enhancement of one’s existing capacities, and the indefinite extension of one’s life. To the fans whom Istvan attracted during his campaign, these added up to “liberty makers.” For them, the question was what prevented the federal government from prioritizing what Istvan had presented as well within human reach.

It would be interesting to see Professor Fuller’s thoughts, should he later wish to offer them, on the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s evolution over the past several months, especially as our latest, record-setting member vote will soon give rise to a major expansion of the U.S. Transhumanist Party Platform.

Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Results of Vote and Version 2.0

January 5, 2017 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 7 comments

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

The U.S. Transhumanist Party conducted its first vote of the members on December 25 through December 31, 2016. Official ballot options can be found here.

Detailed results of the voting have been tabulated here. Options were selected based on the ranked-preference method with instant runoffs.

As a result, Version 2.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights was compiled on the basis of the members’ decisions.

The resulting Version 2.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights is permanently hosted here. Its text is also reproduced below.

Note: The order and nomenclature of the Articles in the compiled Version 2.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights differs from the order and nomenclature on the ballot to provide a more logical sequence of Articles that places related provisions in proximity. However, the substance of the adopted Articles is reflective of the votes of the membership.

Note II: It is important to keep in mind that the Transhumanist Bill of Rights is not a policy platform but rather a member-driven expression of ideals for a transhumanist society. No individual is bound to it (indeed, its new Article I states this explicitly), it is not static, and it is subject to further amendments if/when member recommendations arise and meet with significant demand. (As Chairman, I note that many of the votes ultimately did not lead my own first preferences to be realized – but I accept the results as determining the document’s content.) Anyone who sees this version can always give feedback on the U.S. Transhumanist Party website (including on this thread) and/or Facebook page.

Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 2.0

Version 1.0 written by Zoltan Istvan – Delivered to the U.S. Capitol on December 14, 2015

Version 2.0 developed by members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party – Adopted via Electronic Vote on December 25-31, 2016 – Integrated from Voting Preferences on January 4, 2017

[NOTE: The Transhumanist Bill of Rights is not static and is open to further amendments via future votes of U.S. Transhumanist Party members. To suggest a specific amendment, you may make a post on this thread or e-mail Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, here. Proposed amendments that receive sufficient member demand will be considered for inclusion on future ballots.]

Preamble

Sentience is ranked as Level 5 information integration according to the following criteria:

Level 0 – No information integration: Inanimate objects; objects that do not modify themselves in response to interaction – e.g., rocks, mountains.

Level 1 – Non-zero information integration: Sensors – anything that is able to sense its environment – e.g., photo-diode sense organs, eyes, skin.

Level 2 – Information manipulation: Systems that include feedback that is non-adaptive or minimally adaptive – e.g., plants, basic algorithms, the system that interprets the output from a photo-diode to determine its on/off state (a photo diode itself cannot detect its own state). Level 2 capabilities include the following:

Expression of emotion;
Expression of sensory pleasure;
Taste aversion.

Level 3 – Information integration – Awareness: Systems that include adaptive feedback, can dynamically generate classification – e.g., deep-learning AI, chickens, animals that are able to react to their environment, have a model of their perception but not the world. This level describes animals acting on instinct and unable to classify other animals into more types than “predator”, “prey”, or “possible mate”. Level 3 capabilities include the following:

Navigational detouring (which requires an being to pursue a series of non-rewarding intermediate goals in order to obtain an ultimate reward); Examples: documentation of detouring in jumping spiders (Jackson and Wilcox 2003), motivational trade-off behavior in hermit crabs (Elwood and Appel 2009);
Emotional fever (an increase in body temperature in response to a supposedly stressful situation — gentle handling, as operationalized in Cabanac’s experiments).

Level 4 – Awareness + World model: Systems that have a modeling system complex enough to create a world model: a sense of other, without a sense of self – e.g., dogs. Level 4 capabilities include static behaviors and rudimentary learned behavior.

Level 5 – Awareness + World model + Primarily subconscious self model = Sapient or Lucid: Lucidity means to be meta-aware – that is, to be aware of one’s own awareness, aware of abstractions, aware of one’s self, and therefore able to actively analyze each of these phenomena. If a given animal is meta-aware to any extent, it can therefore make lucid decisions. Level 5 capabilities include the following:

The “sense of self”;
Complex learned behavior;
Ability to predict the future emotional states of the self (to some degree);
The ability to make motivational tradeoffs.

Level 6 – Awareness + World model + Dynamic self model + Effective control of subconscious: The dynamic sense of self can expand from “the small self” (directed consciousness) to the big self (“social group dynamics”). The “self” can include features that cross barriers between biological and non-biological – e.g., features resulting from cybernetic additions, like smartphones.

Level 7 – Global awareness – Hybrid biological-digital awareness = Singleton: Complex algorithms and/or networks of algorithms that have capacity for multiple parallel simulations of multiple world models, enabling cross-domain analysis and novel temporary model generation. This level includes an ability to contain a vastly larger amount of biases, many paradoxically held. Perspectives are maintained in separate modules, which are able to dynamically switch between identifying with the local module of awareness/perspective or the global awareness/perspective. Level 7 capabilities involve the same type of dynamic that exists between the subconscious and directed consciousness, but massively parallelized, beyond biological capacities.

Article I. All sentient entities are hereby entitled to pursue any and all rights within this document to the degree that they deem desirable – including not at all.

Article II. The enumeration in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage any other rights retained by sentient entities.

Article III. All sentient entities shall be granted equal and total access to any universal rights to life.

Article IV. Sentient entities are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology.

Article VII. All sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care.

Article X. Sentient entities agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others.

Article XII. All sentient entities are entitled to reproductive freedom, including through novel means such as the creation of mind clones, monoparent children, or benevolent artificial general intelligence. All sentient entities also have the right to prevent unauthorized reproduction of themselves in both a physical and a digital context. Privacy and security legislation should be enacted to prevent any individual’s DNA, data, or other information from being stolen and duplicated without that individual’s authorization.

Article XIII. All sentient entities have privacy rights to personal data, genetic material, digital, biographic, physical, and intellectual enhancements, and consciousness. Despite the differences between physical and virtual worlds, equal protections for privacy should apply to both physical and digital environments. Any data, such as footage from a public security camera, archived without the consent of the person(s) about whom the data were gathered and subject to legal retention, shall be removed after a period of seven (7) years, unless otherwise requested by said person(s).

Article XIV. Sousveillance laws should be enacted to ensure that all members of peaceful communities feel safe, to achieve governmental transparency, and to provide counter-balances to any surveillance state. For instance, law-enforcement officials, when interacting with the public, should be required to wear body cameras or similar devices continuously monitoring their activities.

Article XVI. All sentient entities should be protected from discrimination based on their physical form in the context of business transactions and law enforcement.

Article XVII. All sentient entities have the right to defend themselves from attack, in both physical and virtual worlds.

Article XIX. Given the inevitability of technology eventually replacing the need for the labor of sentient entities, all sentient entities should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sentient entity’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence and liberty to be met.

Article XXI. All sentient entities are entitled to join their psyches to a collective noosphere in an effort to preserve self-consciousness in perpetuity.

Article XXV. In addition to the rights enumerated herein, this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS hereby incorporates by reference all of the rights expressed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and hereby extends these rights to all entities encompassed by this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS.

Official Ballot Options for Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Voting Period of December 25-31, 2016

December 24, 2016 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 2 comments

logo_bg

The 7-day electronic voting period on the Transhumanist Bill of Rights will occur from 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 25, 2016, to 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on January 1, 2017. All members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party who have applied before 12:01 a.m. on December 25, 2016, will be eligible to vote, as long as they have expressed agreement with the three Core Ideals of the Transhumanist Party or have otherwise been rendered eligible to vote at the discretion of the Chairman.

All members who are eligible to vote will be sent a link to an electronic submission form whereby they will be able to cast their ballot.

For most questions, electronic voting is conducted by a ranked-preference method on individual articles where more options are possible than would be accommodated by a simple “Yes” or “No” vote. Members should keep in mind that the ranked-preference method eliminates the incentives for strategic voting – so members are encouraged to vote for the options that reflect their individual preferences as closely as possible, without regard for how other members might vote.

Results of the voting will be tabulated during the first week of January 2017, with the intent to announce the results approximately 7 days after all votes have been submitted.

NOTE: The titles of the questions and potential Articles are descriptive and informational only and will not appear in the final adopted Transhumanist Bill of Rights. They are intended as concise guides to the subject matter of the questions and potential Articles. Likewise, the numbers or letters assigned to Articles within this ballot will not reflect the numbering in the final adopted Transhumanist Bill of Rights, which will depend on which Articles are selected by the membership. For purposes of convenient distinction, the original Articles developed by Zoltan Istvan are assigned Arabic numerals (1 through 6), while the new Articles proposed by the membership are assigned Latin letters (A through S).

Voter Identification

What is your name?

What is your e-mail address?

Navigate the Options

Preamble and General References

Question I. Base Text of the Preamble
Question II. Reference to Entities Encompassed by the Transhumanist Bill of Rights
Question III. “Gods” and “Archangels” in the Definition of Encompassed Entities
Question IV. Genetically Modified Humans in the Definition of Encompassed Entities
Question V. Intellectually Enhanced Animals in the Definition of Encompassed Entities
Question VI. Enhanced Plant or Animal Species in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Original Articles

Question VII. Article 1 – Universal Rights
Question VIII. Article 2 – Protection from Impediments by Hostile Perspectives
Question IX. Article 3 – Morphological Freedom
Question X. Additional Text of Article 3 – Duty to Treat All Sapients as Individuals
Question XI. Additional Text of Article 3 – Non-Infliction of Involuntary Harms
Question XII. Additional Text of Article 3 – Freedom Not to Modify Oneself
Question XIII. Article 4 – Preventing Existential Risks
Question XIV. Article 5 – Space Travel
Question XV. Article 6 – Aging Classified as a Disease

Potential Article Additions

Question XVI. Article A – Access to Resources
Question XVII. Article B – Universal Basic Income
Question XVIII. Additional Text of Article A or B – Clause on Prevention of Hereditary Poverty
Question XIX. Article C – Legal Access to Life Extension / Life Expansion
Question XX. Article D – Privacy Rights
Question XXI. Additional Text of Article D – Equal Protections for Physical and Digital Privacy
Question XXII. Additional Text of Article D – Limited Retention Period for Data Archived Without Consent
Question XXIII. Article E – Online Access
Question XXIV. Article F – Sousveillance
Question XXV. Article G – Non-Discrimination Based on Physical Form
Question XXVI. Additional Text of Article G. Prohibition on Digital Intelligences Owning More Property Than the Richest Human
Question XXVII. Article H – Supporting Science and Valuable Human Endeavors
Question XXVIII. Article I – Reproductive Freedom
Question XXIX. Article J – Right of Self-Defense
Question XXX. Article K – Penalties for Lying for Political Gain
Question XXXI. Article L – Equal Rights for All Sentient Entities
Question XXXII. Article M – Right of New Types of Entities to Exist, Form and Join the Neo-Civilization
Question XXXIII. Article N – Collective Noosphere
Question XXXIV. Article O – Entitlement to Select Rights to Pursue
Question XXXV. Article P – Universal Health Care
Question XXXVI. Article Q – Desirable Educational Systems
Question XXXVII. Article R – Non-Exhaustiveness of Rights (9th-Amendment-Like Clause)
Question XXXVIII. Article S – United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Preamble and General References

Question I. Base Text of the Preamble

Rank-order the Preamble Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. If you wish to abstain, do not mark any items and skip this question.

☐ Preamble Option 1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Whereas science and technology are now radically changing human beings and may also create future forms of advanced sapient and sentient life, transhumanists establish this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS to help guide and enact sensible policies in the pursuit of life, liberty, security of person, and happiness.

☐ Preamble Option 2. Transhumanist evolution is underway and establishes life principles that allow a sentient entity to alter, augment, and perform self-improvement efforts utilizing science and technology to achieve supreme intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. This TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS extends sentient rights to enhanced neo-humans, cybernetic, transgenic, anthropomorphic, and avatar beings. The TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS provides a sentient entity the right to procreate, clone, and form, the right to expand and extend life beyond biological fundamental boundaries, and to live life without illness, aging, and catastrophic loss of self in pursuit of immortality. This TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS provides principles for intellectual and inclusive policies for all sentient entities in pursuit of life, liberty, eternal existence, and freedom to be different.

The TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS is not static. As the collective of sentient entities continues to unravel the mysteries of the Universe and discover more facts, the TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS will change. We (sentient entities) must be malleable, inclusive, and understanding in thought and spirit at the same pace as society evolves. We must continue to aspire, gain knowledge, and improve life.

☐ Preamble Option 3. Transhumanist evolution is underway and establishes life principles that allow a sentient entity to alter, augment, and perform self-improvement efforts utilizing science and technology to achieve supreme intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities; to provide a sentient entity the rights to procreate, clone, and adapt form; to expand and extend life beyond present-day boundaries; and to live life without illness and loss of self in pursuit of immortality. We organize to provide principles for intellectual and inclusive policies for all sentient entities in pursuit of life, liberty, and eternal existence. This TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS extends sentient rights to all humans, cyborgs, transgenic, anthropomorphic, avatar, and yet-to-be-identified beings as defined herein.

☐ Preamble Option 4 [Usable if Option II(e) or Option II(f) below is adopted as well]. Transhumanist evolution is underway and establishes life principles that allow a sentient entity to alter, augment, and perform self-improvement efforts utilizing science and technology to achieve greater intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities. This TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS extends sentient rights to enhanced neo-humans, cybernetic, transgenic, anthropomorphic, and avatar beings – as well as any other being that demonstrates meta-cognition and self-directed awareness, which is capable of simultaneously modeling itself and its relation to the external reality, and whose cognitive processes can be described as “lucid” (characterized by continuous integration of information at Level 5 or a higher level as defined herein). The TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS provides a sentient entity the right to procreate, clone, and form, the right to expand and extend life beyond unenhanced biological fundamental boundaries, and to live life without illness, aging, and catastrophic loss of self in pursuit of immortality. This TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS provides principles for intellectual and inclusive policies for all sentient entities in pursuit of life, liberty, eternal existence, and self-actualization.

The TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS is not static. As the collective of sentient entities continues to unravel the mysteries of the Universe and discover more facts, the TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS will change. We (sentient entities) must be malleable, inclusive, and understanding in thought and spirit at the same pace as society evolves as we push mankind forward. We must continue to aspire, gain knowledge, and improve life.

Question II. Reference to Entities Encompassed by the Transhumanist Bill of Rights

Version 1 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights uses the enumeration of “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms” in each Article to refer to the entities encompassed by that Article. It has been suggested, instead, that a more concise term might be used in the Preamble to encompass all of the above-enumerated entities and perhaps others.

Such phrasing would be of the following form:

“As used in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS, the term [CHOSEN TERM] includes human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms.”

Shall the Preamble be amended to include the above-quoted statement and, in all Articles, replace the enumeration of “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms” with the term selected as [CHOSEN TERM]?

Rank-order your preference for whether to use such a more concise all-encompassing term and, if so, what that term might be. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. If you wish to abstain, do not mark any items and skip this question.

☐ Option II(a). Keep the enumeration of “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms” in each Article.

☐ Option II(b). Use “thought-capable individuals” as the chosen term.

☐ Option II(c). Use “advanced sapient life forms” as the chosen term and remove that term from the longer descriptive listing. If this option is chosen, “advanced sapient life forms” will be defined to mean “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other beings of comparable cognitive capability.”

☐ Option II(d). Use “sentient entities” as the chosen term.

☐ Option II(e). Use “sentient entities” as the chosen term, with a hierarchical definition of sentience as described below:

Sentient entities are defined by information-processing capacity such that this term should not apply to non-self-aware lifeforms, like plants and slime molds. Biological processing substrates are referred to as using an “analogue intelligence”, whereas purely electronic processing substrates are referred to as “digital intelligence” (instead of “sentient artificial intelligences”), and processing substrates that utilize quantum effects would be considered “quantum intelligence”.

Sentience is ranked as Level 5 information integration according to the following criteria:

Level 0 – No information integration: Inanimate objects; objects that do not modify themselves in response to interaction – e.g., rocks, mountains.

Level 1 – Non-zero information integration: Sensors – anything that is able to sense its environment – e.g., photo-diode sense organs, eyes, skin.

Level 2 – Information manipulation: Systems that include feedback that is non-adaptive or minimally adaptive – e.g., plants, basic algorithms, the system that interprets the output from a photo-diode to determine its on/off state (a photo diode itself cannot detect its own state). Level 2 capabilities include the following:

Expression of emotion;

Expression of sensory pleasure;

Taste aversion.

Level 3 – Information integration – Awareness: Systems that include adaptive feedback, can dynamically generate classification – e.g., deep-learning AI, chickens, animals that are able to react to their environment, have a model of their perception but not the world. This level describes animals acting on instinct and unable to classify other animals into more types than “predator”, “prey”, or “possible mate”. Level 3 capabilities include the following:

Navigational detouring (which requires an being to pursue a series of non-rewarding intermediate goals in order to obtain an ultimate reward); Examples: documentation of detouring in jumping spiders (Jackson and Wilcox 2003), Motivational trade-off behavior in hermit crabs (Elwood and Appel 2009);

Emotional fever (an increase in body temperature in response to a supposedly stressful situation — gentle handling, as operationalized in Cabanac’s experiments).

Level 4 – Awareness + World model: Systems that have a modeling system complex enough to create a world model: a sense of other, without a sense of self – e.g., dogs. Level 4 capabilities include static behaviors and rudimentary learned behavior.

Level 5 – Awareness + World model + Primarily subconscious self model = Sapient or Lucid: Lucidity means to be meta-aware – that is, to be aware of one’s own awareness, aware of abstractions, aware of one’s self, and therefore able to actively analyze each of these phenomena. If a given animal is meta-aware to any extent, it can therefore make lucid decisions. Level 5 capabilities include the following:

The “sense of self”;

Complex learned behavior;

Ability to predict the future emotional states of the self (to some degree);

The ability to make motivational tradeoffs.

Level 6 – Awareness + World model + Dynamic self model + Effective control of subconcious: The dynamic sense of self can expand from “the small self” (directed consciousness) to the big self “social group dynamics”. The “self” can include features that cross barriers between biological and non-biological – e.g., features resulting from cybernetic additions, like smartphones.

Level 7 – Global awareness – Hybrid biological-digital awareness = Singleton: Complex algorithms and/or networks of algorithms that have capacity for multiple parallel simulations of multiple world models, enabling cross-domain analysis and novel temporary model generation. This level includes an ability to contain a vastly larger amount of biases, many paradoxically held. Perspectives are maintained in separate modules, which are able to dynamically switch between identifying with the local module of awareness/perspective or the global awareness/perspective. Level 7 capabilities involve the same type of dynamic that exists between the subconscious and directed consciousness, but massively parallelized, beyond biological capacities.

☐ Option II(f). Use “sentient entities” as the chosen term, with a further clarification that “sentient entities include all entities exhibiting Level 5 information integration, or lucidity – meaning that any such entity is meta-aware – aware of one’s own awareness, aware of abstractions, aware of one’s self, and therefore able to actively analyze each of these phenomena.”

☐ Option II(g). Use “sapients” as the chosen term and remove that “advanced sapient beings” from the longer descriptive listing. If this option is chosen, “sapients” will be defined to mean “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other beings of comparable cognitive capability.”

Question III. “Gods” and “Archangels” in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “Gods” and “Archangels”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question IV. Genetically Modified Humans in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “genetically modified humans”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question V. Intellectually Enhanced Animals in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “intellectually enhanced, previously non-sapient animals”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question VI. Enhanced Plant or Animal Species in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “any species of plant or animal which has been enhanced to possess the capacity for intelligent thought”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Original Articles

Question VII. Article 1 – Universal Rights

Rank-order the Article 1 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 1-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology.

☐ Option 1-2. Any sentient entity is entitled to enhance bodily and sensory capabilities, expand life, live free, and achieve eternal existence without suffering by utilizing science and technology.

☐ Option 1-3. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms have the right to pursue transcendence of physical and mental limitations.

☐ Option 1-4. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology, as well as any other behaviors constituting life enhancement.

☐ Option 1-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question VIII. Article 2 – Protection from Impediments by Hostile Perspectives

Rank-order the Article 2 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 2-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Under penalty of law, no cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives influencing government policy can impede life-extension science, the health of the public, or the possible maximum amount of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-2. Under penalty of law, no cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives influencing government policy can impede life-extension science, the health of the public, body modification, morphological enhancement, or the possible maximum amount of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-3. Legal safeguards should be established to protect individual free choice in pursuing peaceful, consensual life-extension science, health improvements, body modification, and morphological enhancement. While all individuals should be free to formulate their independent opinions regarding the aforementioned pursuits, no hostile cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives should be entitled to apply the force of law to erode the safeguards protecting peaceful, voluntary measures intended to maximize the number of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-4. Legal safeguards should be established to protect individual free choice in pursuing peaceful, consensual life-extension science, health improvements, body modification, and morphological enhancement. While all individuals should be free to formulate their independent opinions regarding the aforementioned pursuits, no intolerant cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives should be entitled to apply the force of law to erode the safeguards protecting peaceful, voluntary measures intended to maximize the number of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-5. No government or irrational group should be permitted to systematically deny any person or persons access to a life-enhancing technology or the freedom to pursue scientific and technological avenues for their betterment.

☐ Option 2-6. No government or irrational group should be permitted to systematically deny any sapient being access to a life-enhancing technology or the freedom to pursue scientific and technological avenues for their betterment or self-actualization.

☐ Option 2-7. No government or private entity should be permitted to systematically deny any person or persons access to a life-enhancing technology or the freedom to pursue scientific and technological avenues for their betterment.

☐ Option 2-8. Under penalty of law, no cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives influencing government policy can impede efforts at transcending physical and mental limitations, improving the health of the public, or the possible maximum amount of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-9. Under penalty of law, no cultural, ethnic, political, or religious perspectives influencing government policy can impede life extension science, the health of the public, or the possible maximum amount of life hours citizens possess.

☐ Option 2-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question IX. Article 3 – Morphological Freedom

Rank-order the Article 3 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence (dead, alive, conscious, or unconscious) whatever one wants so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else.

☐ Option 3-2. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence (dead, alive, conscious, or unconscious) whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others.

☐ Option 3-3. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others.

☐ Option 3-4. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others. This right includes the prerogative for a sentient intelligence to set forth in advance provisions for how to handle its physical manifestation, should that intelligence enter into a vegetative, unconscious, or similarly inactive state, notwithstanding any legal definition of death.

☐ Option 3-5. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence whatever one wants so long as it does not harm others. This right includes the prerogative for a sentient intelligence to set forth in advance provisions for how to handle its physical manifestation, should that intelligence enter into a vegetative, unconscious, or similarly inactive state, notwithstanding any legal definition of death. For instance, a cryonics patient has the right to determine in advance that the patient’s body shall be cryopreserved and kept under specified conditions, in spite of any legal definition of death that might apply to that patient under cryopreservation.

☐ Option 3-6. Human beings and other sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence (dead, alive, conscious, or unconscious) whatever one wants so long as it doesn’t violate anyone else’s rights or cause harm.

☐ Option 3-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question X. Additional Text of Article 3 – Duty to Treat All Sapients as Individuals

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option “Do not add any sentence of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-Add-X-1. “Morphological freedom entails the duty to treat all sapients as individuals instead of categorizing them into arbitrary subgroups or demographics.”

☐ Option 3-Add-X-2. “Morphological freedom entails the duty to treat all sapients as individuals instead of categorizing them into arbitrary subgroups or demographics, including as yet undefined subcategorizations that may arise as sapience evolves.”

☐ Option 3-Add-X-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

Question XI. Additional Text of Article 3 – Non-Infliction of Involuntary Harms

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended after the base text of the article?

“However, the proper exercise of morphological freedom must also ensure that any improvement of the self should not result in involuntary harms inflicted upon others.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XII. Additional Text of Article 3 – Freedom Not to Modify Oneself

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-1. “Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative legal or political repercussions.”

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-2. “Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative legal, political, or socio-economic repercussions.”

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-3. “Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative political repercussions, which include but are not limited to legal and/or socio-economic repercussions.”

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-4. “Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative repercussions legally and/or socio-economically, but not necessarily limited to the aforementioned contexts.”

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

Question XIII. Article 4 – Preventing Existential Risks

Rank-order the Article 4 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 4-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, and global warming, among others.

☐ Option 4-2. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will endeavor to prevent existential risks, including those posed by rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, biological threats, weapons of mass destruction, war, and global warming, among others.

☐ Option 4-3. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks that endanger sentient life.

☐ Option 4-4. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks that endanger sentient life. While some existential risks arise from certain technologies, many existential risks also stem from the unaltered “natural” circumstances in which humans and other life forms find themselves. For both technological and “natural” existential risks, the strongest safeguards can be achieved through responsible development of protective technologies that empower rational and moral beings.

☐ Option 4-5. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks that endanger sentient life. While some existential risks arise from certain technologies, many existential risks also stem from the unaltered “natural” circumstances in which humans and other life forms find themselves. For both technological and “natural” existential risks, the strongest safeguards can be achieved through responsible development of protective technologies for empowerment of rational and moral beings.

☐ Option 4-6. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will promote the changing of every kind of risky practices that hurt our environment, including the uses of fossil fuels, deforestation, overpopulation, the waste of our natural resources, and diseases spread by viruses, bacteria, and other means. Unless we change those practices, we will not be able to improve our physical attributes or our intelligence as far as we desire. We as transhumanists emphasize friendly behaviors with our planet – the consolidation between transhuman beings and Earth, the environment and progress, science and technology.

☐ Option 4-7. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risks, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, global warming, and other existential threats.

☐ Option 4-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XIV. Article 5 – Space Travel

Rank-order the Article 5 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 5-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. All nations and their governments will take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed.

☐ Option 5-2. All nations and their governments will take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed, and due to the finite availability of Earth’s mineral resources.

☐ Option 5-3. All nations and their governments should take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed.

☐ Option 5-4. Present and future societies should take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed.

☐ Option 5-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XV. Article 6 – Aging Classified as a Disease

Rank-order the Article 6 Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 6-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Involuntary aging shall be classified as a disease. All nations and their governments will actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of their citizens by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

☐ Option 6-2. Involuntary aging shall be classified as a disease. All nations and their governments should actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of their citizens by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

☐ Option 6-3. Involuntary aging shall be classified as a disease. Present and future societies should actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of their members by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

☐ Option 6-4. Involuntary aging will be classified as a disease. All nations and their governments will actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of their citizens by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

☐ Option 6-NO. No Article of this sort.

Potential Article Additions

Question XVI. Article A – Access to Resources

Rank-order the Article A Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option A-1. Societies of the future should achieve equal access to wealth and resources for human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms.

☐ Option A-2. Societies of the future should achieve equitable access to wealth and resources for human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms.

☐ Option A-3. Societies of the present and future should afford all human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms sufficient basic access to wealth and resources to sustain the basic requirements of existence in a civilized society and function as the foundation for pursuits of self-improvement.

☐ Option A-4. Societies of the present and future should afford all human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms sufficient basic access to wealth and resources to sustain the basic requirements of existence in a civilized society and function as the foundation for pursuits of self-actualization.

☐ Option A-5. Societies of the present and future should strive toward continually improving the access to wealth and resources for human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms – provided, however, that such access to wealth and resources shall always be pursued in such a manner as to raise the living standards of at least some sapient beings without forcibly diminishing the living standards of any other sapient beings.

☐ Option A-6. Societies of the future should afford equal access to life extension, expansion, enhancement, and therapies. Government and social programs should provide equal access to all sentient entities to pursue scientific and technological venues for their betterment.

☐ Option A-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XVII. Article B – Universal Basic Income

Rank-order the Article B Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option B-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sapient being’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence to be met.

☐ Option B-2. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sapient being’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence and liberty to be met.

☐ Option B-3. Given the inevitability of technology eventually replacing the need for the labor of sentient entities, all human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be the beneficiaries of an unconditional universal basic income, whereby the same minimum amount of money or other resources is provided irrespective of a sapient being’s life circumstances, occupations, or other income sources, so as to provide a means for the basic requirements of existence and liberty to be met.

☐ Option B-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XVIII. Additional Text of Article A or B – Clause on Prevention of Hereditary Poverty

If either Article A or Article B is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the end of the adopted Article (and to the end of Article A if both Articles are adopted)?

“Present and future societies should ensure that their members will not live in poverty solely for being born to the wrong parents.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XIX. Article C – Legal Access to Life Extension / Life Expansion

Rank-order the Article C Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option C-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be entitled to a legal guarantee of equal access to life-extension therapies.

☐ Option C-2. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be entitled to a legal guarantee of equal access to treatments that achieve life expansion, including life extension, sensory improvements, and other technologically driven improvements of the human condition that might be achieved in the future.

☐ Option C-3. No coercive legal restrictions should exist to bar access to life extension and life expansion for all human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms. Life expansion includes life extension, sensory improvements, and other technologically driven improvements of the human condition that might be achieved in the future.

☐ Option C-4. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be entitled to a legal guarantee of equitable access to treatments that achieve life expansion, including life extension, sensory improvements, and other technologically driven improvements of the human condition that might be achieved in the future – provided, however, that the practical inability of some to access such treatments must not be utilized as a reason to bar any others who are able access them.

☐ Option C-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XX. Article D – Privacy Rights

Rank-order the Article D Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option D-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms have a right to the protection of their personal privacy. As physical and digital identity become merged, personal data should be considered part of bodily autonomy.

☐ Option D-2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, residences, documents, and private effects, both physical and ephemeral, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and specifically describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

☐ Option D-3. All sentient entities have privacy rights to personal data, genetic material, digital, biographic, physical, and intellectual enhancements, and consciousness.

☐ Option D-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXI. Additional Text of Article D – Equal Protections for Physical and Digital Privacy

If Article D is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the article?

“Despite the differences between physical and virtual worlds, equal protections for privacy should apply to both physical and digital environments.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXII. Additional Text of Article D – Limited Retention Period for Data Archived Without Consent

If Article D on privacy rights is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option D-Add-1. “Any data, such as footage from a public security camera, archived without the consent of the person(s) about whom the data were gathered and subject to legal retention, shall be removed after a period of seven (7) years.”

☐ Option D-Add-2. “Any data, such as footage from a public security camera, archived without the consent of the person(s) about whom the data were gathered and subject to legal retention, shall be removed after a period of seven (7) years, unless otherwise requested by said person(s).”

☐ Option D-Add-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

Question XXIII. Article E – Online Access

Rank-order the Article E Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option E-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms have the right to online access without such access being prohibited by either private corporations or governmental bureaucracy.

☐ Option E-2. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms, with the exception only of those in legal detention, have the right to private internet access without such access being prohibited or circumvented by either private corporations or governmental bureaucracy.

☐ Option E-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXIV. Article F – Sousveillance

Rank-order the Article F Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option F-1. Sousveillance laws should be enacted to ensure that all members of peaceful communities feel safe, to achieve governmental transparency, and to provide counter-balances to any surveillance state. For instance, law-enforcement officials, when interacting with the public, should be required to wear body cameras or similar devices continuously monitoring their activities.

☐ Option F-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXV. Article G – Non-Discrimination Based on Physical Form

Rank-order the Article G Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option G-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be protected from discrimination based on their physical form in the context of business transactions and law enforcement.

☐ Option G-2. Enhanced or augmented sentient entities have the right to live free from ridicule, discrimination, abuse, or enslavement by any person, group, entity, or government.

☐ Option G-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXVI. Additional Text of Article G. Prohibition on Digital Intelligences Owning More Property Than the Richest Human

If Article G is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the article?

“However, digital intelligences should not be permitted to own property in excess of the property owned by the richest human.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXVII. Article H – Supporting Science and Valuable Human Endeavors

Rank-order the Article H Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option H-1. All legitimate science and valuable human endeavors should be supported as keys to the future.

☐ Option H-2. Advanced sapient life forms are entitled to the freedom to conduct research, experiment, and explore life, science, technology, medicine, and extraterrestrial realms to overcome biological limitations of humanity. Advanced sapient life forms are also entitled to the freedom to create cybernetic artificial organs, bio-mechatronic parts, genetic modifications, systems, technologies, and enhancements to extend lifespan, eradicate illness, and improve all sentient life forms.

☐ Option H-3. Advanced sapient life forms are entitled to the freedom to conduct ethical research, experiment, and explore life, science, technology, medicine, and extraterrestrial realms to improve humanity. Advanced sapient life forms are also entitled to the freedom to create cybernetic artificial organs, bio-mechatronic parts, genetic modifications, systems, technologies, and enhancements to extend lifespan, eradicate illness, and improve all sentient life forms.

☐ Option H-4. Advanced sapient life forms are entitled to the freedom to conduct research, experiment, and explore life, science, technology, medicine, and extraterrestrial realms to overcome biological limitations of humanity. Such experimentation will not be carried out on any sapient being, without that being’s informed consent. Advanced sapient life forms are also entitled to the freedom to create cybernetic artificial organs, bio-mechatronic parts, genetic modifications, systems, technologies, and enhancements to extend lifespan, eradicate illness, and improve all sentient life forms. Any such creations that demonstrate sapience cannot be considered property and are protected by the rights presented herein.

☐ Option H-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXVIII. Article I – Reproductive Freedom

Rank-order the Article I Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option I-1. All sapient beings are entitled to reproductive freedom, including through novel means such as the creation of mind clones, monoparent children, or benevolent artificial general intelligence.

☐ Option I-2. All sapient beings are entitled to reproductive freedom, including through novel means such as the creation of mind clones, monoparent children, or benevolent artificial general intelligence. All sapient beings also have the right to prevent unauthorized reproduction of themselves in both a physical and a digital context. Privacy and security legislation should be enacted to prevent any individual’s DNA, data, or other information from being stolen and duplicated without that individual’s authorization.

☐ Option I-3. Any sentient entity is entitled to procreate, clone, and form to its full sentient potential.

☐ Option I-4. Any sentient entity is entitled to procreate, clone, and adapt form.

☐ Option I-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXIX. Article J – Right of Self-Defense

Rank-order the Article J Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option J-1. All advanced sapient life forms have the right to defend themselves from attack, in both physical and virtual worlds.

☐ Option J-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXX. Article K – Penalties for Lying for Political Gain

Rank-order the Article K Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option K-1. Transhumanists stand opposed to the post-truth culture of deception. All governments should be required to make decisions and communicate information rationally and in accordance with facts. Lying for political gain or intentionally fomenting irrational fears among the general public should entail heavy political penalties for the officials who engage in such behaviors.

☐ Option K-2. We stand opposed to the post-truth culture of deception. All governments should be required to make decisions and communicate information transparently and in accordance with facts. All official meetings shall have minutes recorded and made available based on security clearance. “Closed-door” negotiations shall not be off the record, and shall be released to the public within four (4) years. Any duties carried out under the auspices of public office are considered to have occurred “in public” and subject to the same privacy protections, with exceptions for transport of clearance-secured materials.

Any organization which is categorized as a “news” organization shall be held accountable for disseminating false information or knowingly misleading the public, via fines based on a percentage of revenue.

Lying for political gain or intentionally fomenting irrational fears among the general public should entail heavy political penalties for the officials who engage in such behaviors, such as loss of elected or appointed position and prohibitions from holding public office for no less than five (5) years.

☐ Option K-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXI. Article L – Equal Rights for All Sentient Entities

Rank-order the Article L Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option L-1. An entity in any form deemed sentient shall be granted the same universal rights to life as homo sapiens.

☐ Option L-2. All advanced sentient beings shall be granted equal and total access to any universal rights to life.

☐ Option L-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXII. Article M – Right of New Types of Entities to Exist, Form and Join the Neo-Civilization

Rank-order the Article M Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option M-1. An altered, augmented, cybernetic, transgenic, anthropomorphic, or avatar sentient entity, whether derived from or edited by science, comprised of or conjoined with technology, has the right to exist, form, and join the neo-civilization.

☐ Option M-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXIII. Article N – Collective Noosphere

Rank-order the Article N Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option N-1. All sentient entities are entitled to join their psyches to a collective nooshpere in an effort to preserve self-consciousness in perpetuity.

☐ Option N-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXIV. Article O – Entitlement to Select Rights to Pursue

Rank-order the Article O Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option O-1. All advanced sentient beings are hereby entitled to pursue any and all rights within this document to the degree that they deem desirable – including not at all.

☐ Option O-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXV. Article P – Universal Health Care

Rank-order the Article P Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option P-1. All human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms should be the beneficiaries of a system of universal health care.

☐ Option P-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXVI. Article Q – Desirable Educational Systems

Rank-order the Article Q Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option Q-1. Present and future societies should provide education systems accessible and available to all in pursuit of factual knowledge to increase intellectual acuity; promote critical thinking and logic; foster creativity; form an enlightened collective; attain health; secure the bounty of liberty for all sentient entities for our posterity; and forge new ideas, meanings, and values.

☐ Option Q-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXVII. Article R – Non-Exhaustiveness of Rights (9^th-Amendment-Like Clause)

Rank-order the Article R Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option R-1. The enumeration in this Transhumanist Bill of Rights of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage any other rights retained by advanced sapient beings.

☐ Option R-2. The enumeration in this Transhumanist Bill of Rights of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage any other rights retained by advanced sapient beings. This Transhumanist Bill of Rights recognizes and respects the potential for a specific kind of advanced sapient being to pursue a course of action that is existentially critical, yet distinct to its individual flourishing.

☐ Option R-NO. No Article of this sort.

Question XXXVIII. Article S – United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Rank-order the Article S Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. You may include the option for “No Article of this sort” in your rank-ordering, and it does not need to be your most favored option if you do so. (For instance, some voters might favor some options but think that no language is preferable to some of the other options.)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option S-1. In addition to the rights enumerated herein, this Transhumanist Bill of Rights hereby incorporates by reference all of the rights expressed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and hereby extends these rights to all entities encompassed by this Transhumanist Bill of Rights.

☐ Option S-NO. No Article of this sort.

Draft Sample Ballot for Transhumanist Bill of Rights

December 5, 2016 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 10 comments

logo_bg
Gennady Stolyarov II

The following is the draft sample ballot generated thus far as a compilation of the suggestions provided during the 30-day exposure period for the Transhumanist Bill of Rights. The exposure period will continue until 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 25, 2016, and comments will continue to be solicited until that time, with any further reasonable suggestions incorporated into the draft sample ballot until the end of the exposure period.

The draft sample ballot is a work in progress and will be revised on this page as further input is received. The purpose of releasing the sample ballot at this time is to provide insight into the structure of the voting and the options that have already been generated, so as to enable any interested members of the Transhumanist Party to read and understand the available options and propose further refinements and alternatives.

Electronic voting will be conducted by a ranked-preference method on individual articles where more options are possible than would be accommodated by a simple “Yes” or “No” vote. Members should keep in mind that the ranked-preference method eliminates the incentives for strategic voting – so members are encouraged to vote for the options that reflect their individual preferences as closely as possible, without regard for how other members might vote.

Draft Sample Ballot

Preamble and General References

Question I. Base Text of the Preamble

Rank-order the Preamble Options that you support. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

The TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS is not static. As the collective of sentient entities continues to unravel the mysteries of the Universe and discover more facts, the TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS will change. We (sentient entities) must be malleable, inclusive, and understanding in thought and spirit at the same pace as society evolves as we push mankind forward. We must continue to aspire, gain knowledge, and improve life.

☐ Abstain.

Question II. Reference to Entities Encompassed by the Transhumanist Bill of Rights

Such phrasing would be of the following form:

“As used in this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS, the term [CHOSEN TERM] includes human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms.”

Rank-order your preference for whether to use such a more concise all-encompassing term and, if so, what that term might be. Choose “1” for your most highly favored option, “2” for your second-most highly favored option, etc. If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option II(a). Keep the enumeration of “human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms” in each article.

☐ Option II(b). Use “thought-capable individuals” as the chosen term.

☐ Option II(d). Use “sentient entities” as the chosen term.

☐ Option II(e). Use “sentient entities” as the chosen term, with a hierarchical definition of sentience as described below:

Sentient entities are defined by information-processing capacity such that this term should not apply to non-self-aware lifeforms, like plants and slime molds. Biological processing substrates are referred to as using an “analogue intelligence”, whereas purely electronic processing substrates are referred to as “digital intelligence” (instead of “sentient artificial intelligences”), and processing substrates that utilize quantum effects would be considered “quantum intelligence”.

Sentience is ranked as Level 5 information integration according to the following criteria:

Level 0 – No information integration: Inanimate objects; objects that do not modify themselves in response to interaction – e.g., rocks, mountains.

Level 1 – Non-zero information integration: Sensors – anything that is able to sense its environment – e.g., photo-diode sense organs, eyes, skin.

Level 2 – Information manipulation: Systems that include feedback that is non-adaptive or minimally adaptive – e.g., plants, basic algorithms, the system that interprets the output from a photo-diode to determine its on/off state (a photo diode itself cannot detect its own state). Level 2 capabilities include the following:

Expression of emotion;

Expression of sensory pleasure;

Taste aversion.

Level 3 – Information integration – Awareness: Systems that include adaptive feedback, can dynamically generate classification – e.g., deep-learning AI, chickens, animals that are able to react to their environment, have a model of their perception but not the world. This level describes animals acting on instinct and unable to classify other animals into more types than “predator”, “prey”, or “possible mate”. Level 3 capabilities include the following:

Navigational detouring (which requires an being to pursue a series of non-rewarding intermediate goals in order to obtain an ultimate reward); Examples: documentation of detouring in jumping spiders (Jackson and Wilcox 2003), Motivational trade-off behavior in hermit crabs (Elwood and Appel 2009);

Emotional fever (an increase in body temperature in response to a supposedly stressful situation — gentle handling, as operationalized in Cabanac’s experiments).

Level 4 – Awareness + World model: Systems that have a modeling system complex enough to create a world model: a sense of other, without a sense of self – e.g., dogs. Level 4 capabilities include static behaviors and rudimentary learned behavior.

Level 5 – Awareness + World model + Primarily subconscious self model = Sapient or Lucid: Lucidity means to be meta-aware – that is, to be aware of one’s own awareness, aware of abstractions, aware of one’s self, and therefore able to actively analyze each of these phenomena. If a given animal is meta-aware to any extent, it can therefore make lucid decisions. Level 5 capabilities include the following:

The “sense of self”;

Complex learned behavior;

Ability to predict the future emotional states of the self (to some degree);

The ability to make motivational tradeoffs.

Level 6 – Awareness + World model + Dynamic self model + Effective control of subconcious: The dynamic sense of self can expand from “the small self” (directed consciousness) to the big self “social group dynamics”. The “self” can include features that cross barriers between biological and non-biological – e.g., features resulting from cybernetic additions, like smartphones.

Level 7 – Global awareness – Hybrid biological-digital awareness = Singleton: Complex algorithms and/or networks of algorithms that have capacity for multiple parallel simulations of multiple world models, enabling cross-domain analysis and novel temporary model generation. This level includes an ability to contain a vastly larger amount of biases, many paradoxically held. Perspectives are maintained in separate modules, which are able to dynamically switch between identifying with the local module of awareness/perspective or the global awareness/perspective. Level 7 capabilities involve the same type of dynamic that exists between the subconscious and directed consciousness, but massively parallelized, beyond biological capacities.

☐ Abstain.

Question III. “Gods” and “Archangels” in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “Gods” and “Archangels”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question IV. Genetically Modified Humans in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

Shall the definition of beings to whom the Transhumanist Bill of Rights applies include a specific mention of “genetically modified humans”? Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question V. Intellectually Enhanced Animals in the Definition of Encompassed Entities

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question X. Additional Text of Article 3 – Duty to Treat All Sapients as Individuals

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-Add-X-1. “Morphological freedom entails the duty to treat all sapients as individuals instead of categorizing them into arbitrary subgroups or demographics.”

☐ Option 3-Add-X-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XI. Additional Text of Article 3 – Non-Infliction of Involuntary Harms

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended after the base text of the article?

“However, the proper exercise of morphological freedom must also ensure that any improvement of the self should not result in involuntary harms inflicted upon others.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XII. Additional Text of Article 3 – Freedom Not to Modify Oneself

If Article 3 on morphological freedom is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-1. “Furthermore, any sentient entity is also recognized to have the freedom not to modify itself without being subject to negative legal or political repercussions.”

☐ Option 3-Add-XII-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XIII. Article 4 – Preventing Existential Risks

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 4-1 [Original Text by Zoltan Istvan]. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risk, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, and global warming, among others.

☐ Option 4-2. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will endeavor to prevent existential risk, including those posed by rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, biological threats, weapons of mass destruction, war, and global warming, among others.

☐ Option 4-7. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risk, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, global warming, and other existential threats.

☐ Option 4-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XIV. Article 5 – Space Travel

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option 5-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

If either Article A or Article B is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the end of the adopted Article (and to the end of Article A if both Articles are adopted)?

“Present and future societies should ensure that their members will not live in poverty solely for being born to the wrong parents.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XIX. Article C – Legal Access to Life Extension / Life Expansion

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option C-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XX. Article D – Privacy Rights

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option D-3. All sentient entities have privacy rights to personal data, genetic material, digital, biographic, physical, and intellectual enhancements, and consciousness.

☐ Option D-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXI. Additional Text of Article D – Equal Protections for Physical and Digital Privacy

If Article D is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the article?

“Despite the differences between physical and virtual worlds, equal protections for privacy should apply to both physical and digital environments.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXII. Additional Text of Article D – Limited Retention Period for Data Archived Without Consent

If Article D on privacy rights is adopted, shall one of the following sentences be appended after the base text of the article?

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option D-Add-NO. Do not add any sentence of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXIII. Article E – Online Access

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option E-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXIV. Article F – Sousveillance

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option F-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXV. Article G – Non-Discrimination Based on Physical Form

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option G-2. Enhanced or augmented sentient entities have the right to live free from ridicule, discrimination, abuse, or enslavement by any person, group, entity, or government.

☐ Option G-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXVI. Additional Text of Article G. Prohibition on Digital Intelligences Owning More Property Than the Richest Human

If Article G is adopted, shall the following sentence be appended to the article?

“However, digital intelligences should not be permitted to own property in excess of the property owned by the richest human.”

Select one of the following options.

☐ Yes.

☐ No.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXVII. Article H – Supporting Science and Valuable Human Endeavors

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option H-1. All legitimate science and valuable human endeavors should be supported as keys to the future.

☐ Option H-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXVIII. Article I – Reproductive Freedom

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option I-3. Any sentient entity is entitled to procreate, clone, and form to its full sentient potential.

☐ Option I-4. Any sentient entity is entitled to procreate, clone, and adapt form.

☐ Option I-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXIX. Article J – Right of Self-Defense

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option J-1. All advanced sapient life forms have the right to defend themselves from attack, in both physical and virtual worlds.

☐ Option J-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXX. Article K – Penalties for Lying for Political Gain

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option K-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXXI. Article L – Equal Rights for All Sentient Entities

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option L-1. An entity in any form deemed sentient shall be granted the same universal rights to life as homo sapiens.

☐ Option L-2. All advanced sentient beings shall be granted equal and total access to any universal rights to life.

☐ Option L-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option Q-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXXVII. Article R – Non-Exhaustiveness of Rights (9^th-Amendment-Like Clause)

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option R-1. The enumeration in this Transhumanist Bill of Rights of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage any other rights retained by advanced sapient beings.

☐ Option R-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

Question XXXVIII. Article S – United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

If you choose “Abstain”, then do not rank-order any options, as you will be considered to have skipped this question.

☐ Option S-NO. No Article of this sort.

☐ Abstain.

30-Day Exposure Period for the Transhumanist Bill of Rights – November 24 – December 24, 2016

November 24, 2016 Gennady Stolyarov II Comments 102 comments

logo_bg
Gennady Stolyarov II

Having rapidly reached over 136 members, the U.S. Transhumanist Party is poised to take its first steps toward more democratic decision-making. The first area of focus for membership involvement will be matters of policy advocacy, beginning with the basic rights that transhumanists would wish to be instantiated in a desirable future world.

In December 2015, Zoltan Istvan delivered his Transhumanist Bill of Rights to the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. You can read his article about it here.

Now it is time to expose the Transhumanist Bill of Rights for consideration by and input from the membership of the Transhumanist Party.

During the next 30 days, until 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 25, 2016, members of the Transhumanist Party will be able to offer input regarding the Transhumanist Bill of Rights. Please offer your honest feedback regarding what you like about the original version, what you dislike, and any revisions or additions you would favor. Please feel free to advocate your individual viewpoint – as all reasonable (serious, non-egregious, benevolently motivated) suggestions will be considered in the voting process.

After the exposure period, a 7-day electronic voting period will occur from 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on December 25, 2016, to 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on January 1, 2017. Instructions for electronic voting will be sent to members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party via e-mail. All individuals who are members of the U.S. Transhumanist Party as of the end of the exposure period and who have expressed agreement with its three Core Ideals will be eligible to vote thereafter. You can still vote if you become a member during the exposure period, so please apply here if you are interested. During the 7-day electronic voting period, you will still be able to become a member – but you will only be able to vote in subsequent elections, since we seek for voting on any given issue to be done by those members who have had an opportunity to thoroughly consider that issue and be involved in deliberations regarding it.

Electronic voting will be conducted by a ranked-preference method. Members will be able to rank-order their preferred selections on each individual Article of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights, including any new Articles that might be proposed during the exposure period. The original text of each Article will be available for selection, as well as any reasonable amendments proposed by any member. Leadership of the Transhumanist Party reserves the right to edit any proposed amendment for correctness of spelling and grammar only – but not with regard to the substance, unless the person proposing the amendment requests or consents to a substantive edit. “No Article of this sort” will also be a choice, and any Article where a majority of votes favors this option will be removed from the final adopted version of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights. Members will also be able to abstain from voting on any given article.

The Transhumanist Party encourages all members to participate in this process and for other transhumanists to sign up for membership during the exposure period. This is an opportunity to demonstrate collaborative and democratic decision-making within the transhumanist movement and to teach the rest of the American political system an important lesson about how technology and rational voting systems can be used to produce truly representative outcomes.

The Transhumanist Bill of Rights – Version 1

(Authored by Zoltan Istvan – December 21, 2015)

Preamble: Whereas science and technology are now radically changing human beings and may also create future forms of advanced sapient and sentient life, transhumanists establish this TRANSHUMANIST BILL OF RIGHTS to help guide and enact sensible policies in the pursuit of life, liberty, security of person, and happiness.

Article 1. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms are entitled to universal rights of ending involuntary suffering, making personhood improvements, and achieving an indefinite lifespan via science and technology.

Article 2. Under penalty of law, no cultural, ethnic, or religious perspectives influencing government policy can impede life extension science, the health of the public, or the possible maximum amount of life hours citizens possess.

Article 3. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms agree to uphold morphological freedom—the right to do with one’s physical attributes or intelligence (dead, alive, conscious, or unconscious) whatever one wants so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else.

Article 4. Human beings, sentient artificial intelligences, cyborgs, and other advanced sapient life forms will take every reasonable precaution to prevent existential risk, including those of rogue artificial intelligence, asteroids, plagues, weapons of mass destruction, bioterrorism, war, and global warming, among others.

Article 5. All nations and their governments will take all reasonable measures to embrace and fund space travel, not only for the spirit of adventure and to gain knowledge by exploring the universe, but as an ultimate safeguard to its citizens and transhumanity should planet Earth become uninhabitable or be destroyed.

Article 6. Involuntary aging shall be classified as a disease. All nations and their governments will actively seek to dramatically extend the lives and improve the health of its citizens by offering them scientific and medical technologies to overcome involuntary aging.

Help us develop a Version 2.0 of the Transhumanist Bill of Rights that is broadly representative of perspectives and aspirations within the transhumanist movement! We welcome your feedback in the comments below.