Category: Discussion Panels

Pros and Cons of the Serum Institute of India’s Success from an African (Nigerian) Perspective: Citing Religious, Cultural, and Political Bias – Article by Victor Urhefe

Pros and Cons of the Serum Institute of India’s Success from an African (Nigerian) Perspective: Citing Religious, Cultural, and Political Bias – Article by Victor Urhefe

Comments 0 Comment

Victor Urhefe


Author’s Note: This article explores the multifaceted implications of the Serum Institute of India’s (SII) success from a Nigerian perspective, emphasizing religious, cultural, and political contexts. It discusses the affordable and accessible vaccines provided by SII, their impact on Nigeria’s public health, and the diverse reactions to vaccination influenced by religious beliefs, cultural practices, and political dynamics. The article also suggests strategies for SII to effectively navigate these complexities, including engaging religious leaders, employing culturally sensitive communication, and collaborating with governmental authorities. It is important to note that this is an opinion piece and the perspectives and recommendations herein are subject to adjustments based on evolving circumstances and further insights.

~ Victor Urhefe, June 14, 2024

Serum Institute of India (SII)

Since its founding by Dr. Cyrus Poonawalla in 1966, the Serum Institute of India (SII) has developed from a small experiment into a major player in the world of vaccine production. With a desire to guarantee that everyone, irrespective of financial situation, has access to life-saving vaccines, SII has remained true to its goal of providing high-quality, reasonably priced vaccines worldwide. The institute has grown to be the biggest vaccine producer in the world in terms of volume, driven by an unrelenting commitment to eradicating infectious illnesses and improving public health. Over the years, SII has manufactured approximately 1.5 billion vaccines annually, covering illnesses including polio, diphtheria, tetanus, Pertussis, Hib, BCG, r-Hepatitis B, Mumps, and measles. This is due to its unwavering pursuit of innovation and excellence. As the top biotechnology business in India, Serum Institute of India produces highly specialised biologicals that can save lives, such as vaccines, using state-of-the-art genetic and cell-based technologies, antisera, and other medical specialties.

One of SII’s greatest achievements is its important role in the COVID-19 epidemic. Collaborating with multinational organizations such as AstraZeneca, the institute manufactured millions of doses of the Covishield vaccine, which played a pivotal role in combating the virus in numerous low- and middle-income nations. The immunization gap in underserved areas has significantly decreased thanks to its effective production and delivery methods. This achievement demonstrates SII’s commitment to public health and embodies a legacy of resiliency, creativity, and unwavering determination to provide vaccines to every region of the globe.

Nigeria

Nigeria, also referred to as the “Giant of Africa,” is a nation rich in diverse political, religious, and cultural traditions. It is the most populated country in Africa and the ninth most populous worldwide, with a population of over 200 million. Nigerians are mainly divided along religious lines between Islam and Christianity, with Muslims being concentrated in the north and Christians in the south. This split in religion has an impact on social interactions, politics, and education, among other areas of life. A small percentage of people also follow indigenous religions, which are a reflection of the deeply ingrained cultural beliefs of the nation. Although there has occasionally been tension and conflict between various religious groups, their interactions have also promoted a special kind of coexistence and mutual impact in day-to-day living.

Nigeria is a linguistic and ethnic collage in terms of culture. There are more than 250 different ethnic groups in the nation, with Hausa-Fulani, Yoruba, and Igbo being the largest. The unique customs, dialects, and cultural practices of each ethnic group enrich Nigeria’s rich cultural legacy. This diversity is reflected in festivals, music, dance, and artwork from different regions, resulting in a vibrant cultural tapestry. The Yoruba, for example, are well known for their talking drums and ornate beadwork; the Hausa, for their leatherwork and horse festivities; and the Igbo, for their elaborate ceremonies and masquerade dances. Despite this diversity, Nigerians have a great sense of pride in their country and identity, which is frequently expressed through national celebrations and shared cultural experiences.

Nigeria is a federal country with 36 states and Abuja as the Federal Capital Territory. In addition to providing representation and governance that take into account the many interests and demands of the nation’s residents, this structure is meant to serve the country’s heterogeneous population. Nigeria has gone through several eras of government, including military dictatorships, colonial control, and the current democratic republic. Major political parties are frequently positioned along ethnic and regional lines, creating a dynamic political scene. Although this alignment occasionally makes things worse, it also makes sure that different groups are heard in the national conversation. Political variety is both a strength and a difficulty because it necessitates ongoing compromise and negotiation to uphold unity and promote growth.

Reaction to Vaccination

Nigeria’s response to vaccinations is as diverse as the country’s political, cultural, and religious environments. Misinformation and historical hostility have given rise to rare scepticism and opposition in the mostly Muslim north. Historical events, like the 2003–2004 polio vaccination boycott, demonstrate how strongly held religious and cultural beliefs can impact public health measures. The boycott was motivated by false worries about sterilisation and Western conspiracies. However, there has been a noticeable shift in opinions thanks to the combined efforts of religious leaders, governmental officials, and international organisations. Religiously sensitive campaigns have been crucial in demonstrating how culturally aware strategies can improve vaccination acceptance and uptake.

Nigeria’s many ethnic groups respond differently to immunisation campaigns, depending on their own cultures. In the South, where Christianity is the dominant religion, vaccination attitudes have typically been more positively influenced by community involvement and education. Yoruba and Igbo communities host lively cultural festivals and social events that serve as powerful forums for dispelling myths about vaccines and raising awareness of them. Politically, localised approaches that tackle particular area issues are made possible by the federal system. But political unpredictability and mistrust of the government can impede immunisation campaigns, therefore, strong cooperation between federal and state agencies is required to guarantee uniform and broad immunisation coverage. This complicated dance of political forces, cultural customs, and religious beliefs emphasises how important it is for Nigerian public health policies to be specific and sophisticated.

My thoughts on SII’s mission concerning Nigeria and what needs to be done. 

Nigeria’s aspirations in healthcare are well aligned with the purpose of the Serum Institute of India, which is to provide high-quality, reasonably priced vaccinations to every part of the world. SII’s approach needs to be both strategic and compassionate in a nation where public opinion and acceptance of health interventions are shaped by religious, cultural, and political factors. The accomplishment of their goal in Nigeria depends on a thorough comprehension of these many variables and the application of customised tactics that honor and involve local populations. What worked in the South may not work in the North.

First, it can be helpful to form connections with powerful religious figures. Through the inclusion of imams, pastors, and other traditional leaders in advocacy campaigns, SII can address issues related to religion and debunk falsehoods about immunizations. By acting as dependable role models, these leaders can persuade their followers to support vaccination. Cultural awareness is also very important. In order to craft engaging stories about vaccinations, SII should work with regional artists and cultural icons. Through storytelling, dance, and song, the advantages of vaccinations can be conveyed in a way that is firmly ingrained in Nigeria’s rich cultural legacy.

Finally, it is critical to engage closely with both the federal and state governments to promote cohesive and uniform messaging while addressing any potential political mistrust. Building strong, transparent cooperation with Nigerian health authorities will help to ensure that vaccines are distributed smoothly and increase public trust. SII may assist Nigeria move confidently towards greater public health and a brighter future by integrating its mission into the fabric of the country’s diverse community.

Sources:

  1. Paden, John N., Religion and Political Culture in Kano. University of California Press, 1973.
  2. Falola, Toyin. The history of Nigeria. Greenwood Publishing Group, 1999.
  3. Achebe, Chinua. Things Fall Apart, Heinemann, 1958.
  4. Falola, Toyin, and Heaton, Matthew M., A History of Nigeria, Cambridge University Press, 2008.
  5. Ojo, Emmanuel O., “Federalism and the Search for National Integration in Nigeria.” African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, vol. 4, no. 2, 2009, pp. 38–46.
  6. Diamond, Larry, and Plattner, Marc F.. Democratization in Africa: Progress and Retreat, JHU Press, 2010.
  7. Falola, Toyin, and Heaton, Matthew M., A History of Nigeria. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
U.S. Transhumanist Party Presidential Candidate Roundtable – Tom Ross and Daniel Twedt – May 7, 2023 – and Subsequent Candidate Answers to Viewer Questions

U.S. Transhumanist Party Presidential Candidate Roundtable – Tom Ross and Daniel Twedt – May 7, 2023 – and Subsequent Candidate Answers to Viewer Questions

Comments 1 comment

Daniel Twedt
Tom Ross

On Sunday, May 7, 2023, the U.S. Transhumanist Party presented its Presidential Candidate Roundtable, featuring Tom Ross and Daniel Twedt, who are seeking the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s endorsement for President of the United States in 2024. The Candidate Roundtable was moderated by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II and featured questions to the candidates from the other Roundtable attendees and the audience. Unlike a conventional Presidential debate, the Roundtable format is non-adversarial and is primarily intended to facilitate thoughtful, constructive discussion of issues that matter to transhumanists and to the broader public. The Candidate Roundtable also served as an illustration of a new political paradigm that rejects the mainstream divide-and-conquer approach and instead invites us all to build the future together.

Timestamps

2:30 – Daniel Twedt’s opening remarks
7:40 – Tom Ross’s opening remarks
12:20 – How to handle the coming Silver Tsunami, as well as reparations to indigenous people, and how to allow terminal patients to try drugs that aren’t yet fully approved
24:15 – What the candidates’ perspectives are on transgender issues, and the subject’s relation to transhumanism
32:35 – How will 2nd-Amendment rights change with arms development?
39:25 – How could the USTP help overcome the divisiveness of the duopoly?
47:55 – How will the USTP candidate get mainstream votes?
54:55 – How to address the vast disparities in health in the United States?
1:00:45 – How do the candidates practice transhumanism, and how do their views differ from each other and “mainstream” transhumanism?
1:07:45 – How would each candidate advance longevity initiatives?
1:13:55 – How do we improve the criminal justice / incarceration system?
1:19:50 – How to open doors for stem-cell and other new therapies?
1:27:00 – How can we help young Americans afford housing?
1:34:30 – How to cost-effectively get good press?
1:42:20 – What are the candidates’ views on the death penalty?
1:44:35 – What should education focus on in the 21st century?
1:51:10 – Daniel Twedt’s closing remarks
1:53:40 – Tom Ross’s closing remarks

Read Daniel Twedt’s profile in the Thousand Oaks Acorn.

Visit Tom Ross’s campaign page.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free in order to be able to vote in our Presidential Primary.

Candidate Responses to Additional Audience Questions

During the Candidate Roundtable, additional audience questions were posed for which there was not sufficient time for the candidates to respond live. Both candidates prepared thorough written answers to each of the audience questions below.

Question 1 – From Jason Geringer: Who do you think won the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. won by at least 7 million votes.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: It was Joe Robinette Biden. I will, however, look forward to answering this question in more detail based on various shortcomings our current election system suffers from. Until we put into place and into practice more fair election systems such as RCV (Ranked Choice Voting), in a sense the electorate as a whole will continue to be the loser!

***

Question 2 – From Jason Geringer: Do you believe that there was any widespread fraud that could have affected the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: No. There was no widespread fraud. Certainly none that could have affected the final vote count.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: No. However, see my first answer as well.

***

Question 3 – From Liz Parrish: How can transhumanism help the planet?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: I’ve seen a strong anthropocentric streak in many Transhumanists, but for those who understand our deep connection to the biosphere, the best way Transhumanism can help the planet is to consider and prepare for all the implications that Radical Life Extension will demand on resources, waste, and the animal and plant kingdoms. We must rebalance humanity with nature, although we may be beyond the Rubicon for that now but I’ll keep scanning the horizon for Black Swans.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: Great question, Liz (and also what is probably ‘THE Great Question’…) I know that by “the Planet” you probably aren’t technically talking about the 4.56-billion-year-old 13.166 trillion trillion pounds of atoms orbiting a minor star on the outskirts of a minor galaxy… a planet that has seen it’s surface conditions alternate between solid lava and solid ice over the course of many such orbits. You are, I assume, speaking of the fragile living envelope, a.k.a. the Biosphere and Civilization that happens to hopefully sustain our collective Past, Present, and Futures.

Like it or not, most members of the species known as Humans have historically tended to be rather short-sighted when it comes to intelligently anticipating significant and looming Change. Transhumanists, fortunately, tend to be more proactive at anticipating such often tectonic-level changes and hopefully preparing for them both at the individual and community level.

As a kind of “Bio-Cosmo-Pantheist” stripe of the Transhumanist Spectrum, I detect that the ‘artist formerly known as Evolution’ is in the process of experiencing an extreme volitional and tool-using upgrade, whereby what used to require iterations of the ancient libraries of the biochemical publishing house called DNA to create a new Dewey Decimal Subject Category, now looks like it’s going to be directing itself in Real Time (in our Lifetimes!). Transhumanists are among the first tribes of humanity to realize and see the need to come to grips with the reality that this is such A Real Time to be alive in. Like it or not, we would seem to be no less than Evolution’s chosen agents of Cosmic Enlivenment and Enlightenment. It’s truly an awesome responsibility that will hopefully bring forth our most worthy and supreme individual and collective human efforts.

When it comes to the many descriptions of the Transhumanist Spectrum, the “NBIC Convergence” described by Jean-Pierre Dupuy of Stanford is perhaps the most practical one. “NBIC” is the acronym for “Nanotechnology, Biomedicine, Information Technology and Cognitive Science.” I’d like to see our movement come up with useful metrics and/or digital tokens to both report on and usefully grapple with these aspects of the “Future Surge.”

***

Question 4 – From Mike Lezine: How would the candidates address curing mental diseases or illnesses that currently have no cures?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: I’m not a doctor or psychologist, but as President, what I could do is assemble a moonshot-style effort to increase funding for research, improve access to mental-health services, help develop education and public awareness campaigns and promote public, private, and academic partnerships to accelerate progress while working with Congress to advocate for relevant policy changes like increased insurance coverage and reducing barriers to access care. Right now that last idea seems like it would be the most difficult given the current two-party rancor. The risk is that even mental health could become partisan.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: This is an excellent question, Mike, about what seems to be an often neglected topic within the Transhumanist movement and discourse. We must institute systems prioritizing Wellness Care over Disease Care.  When it comes to delivering such “Wellness Care,” I believe we should be advocating the most holistic and integrative approaches available. Rather than pharmacologically countering and/or masking a narrow range of exhibited symptoms (as is the current status quo underlying modality of Allopathic-based medical interventions), we need to better consider the physical, mental, and even “spiritual” aspects of the person believed to be in a behavioral crisis. A civilization in crisis which is exhibiting pathologies can increasingly be expected to produce and enable individuals exhibiting the same condition. This is a crucial but neglected consideration to integrate before we isolate Members of our hopefully humane Civilization and deprive them of normal Rights in the cause of preventing greater harms, though there will unfortunately and inevitably be those whom we can find no preferable options for.

“Maladjusted” is a terminology that modern psychology often uses to describe the category of patients it seeks to treat. I can’t help but be reminded of Dr. Martin Luther King’s many speeches where he said he didn’t want to be well-adjusted to a world where racism, segregation, and luxuries for the few at the expense of necessities for the many and other seeming evils were considered as social norms. He even spoke about intending to start something called, “The International Society for Creative Maladjustment.” Millenia earlier, the philosopher-emperor Marcus Aurelius said, “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”

The nineteenth Century romantic poet James Russel Lowell once said, “Let us be of good cheer remembering that the misfortunes hardest to bear are those which will never happen.”

Few might recall that the so-called “mentally maladjusted” of today were in indigenous societies typically regarded as shamanic level advisors… walkers between the worlds of the seen and the unseen. Can we recapture any sense to be found in that sensibility of beyond-ness? The coal mine of what we call civilization would be well served not to leave its canaries behind…

***

Question 5 – From 101tesla: What improvements to the current education system would the candidates propose and/or support?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: I would propose giving each student an AI Companion in first grade. A companion that can hone in on that child’s core capabilities and augment their curriculum based on those. AI can customize an educational path for each student that accentuates their intrinsic skills and talents and gives them extra help on the subjects they need to work on. I would also move away from the Industrial Age classroom setting of rows of desks and move toward small study groups that rotate regularly. This will foster the hivemind that is already emerging in Digital Natives and make schools more like real companies and less like an individual sport.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: Our current western educational model is tragically outdated. The Public School System is partially based on a 19th-Century Prussian Military Discipline System emphasizing regimentation, obedience, minimization of creative thinking, and optimizing the propensity for the compulsory-schooled to be an easily managed, factory-friendly-ready workforce. This line from a 1913 report from the John D. Rockefeller-founded General Education Board, on how to design Schools, entitled, “The Country School of To-morrow” is rather illustrative of the intended mission:

“In our dream we have limitless resources, and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand. The present educational conventions fade from our minds; and, unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or of science. We are not to raise up among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply.”

— Rev. Frederick T. Gates, Business Advisor to John D. Rockefeller Sr., 1913

The current American school system took root around the turn of the last century. In 1903, John D. Rockefeller founded the General Education Board, which provided major funding for schools across the country and was especially active in promoting the State-controlled public-school movement.

The General Education Board was not interested in encouraging critical thinking. Rather, its focus was on organizing children and creating reliable, predictable, obedient citizens. As award-winning former teacher John Gatto puts it, “school was looked upon from the first part of the 20th Century as a branch of industry and a tool of governance.” The Rockefellers, along with other financial elites and their philanthropic organizations (such as the Gates, Carnegies, and Vanderbilts), have been able to mold society by funding and pushing compulsory state schooling for the masses.

In reading this, the basic context you need to understand is that he is talking about rural schools, i.e. schools in the country, and those schools were in terrible shape.

I also think global and useful hobbies such as Amateur Radio and the so-called “maker movement” can play an extraordinary educational role in the STEAM field (Science/Technology/Engineering/Art/Math).

***

Question 6 – From François Joinneau: Does the individual opinion of a candidate matter so much, on any given subject, when the answer should come from interactions with/between institutions and existing laws?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: No. The individual opinion on any subject by a candidate should not matter because, in a Representative Democracy, the candidate is supposed to be a mouthpiece for the majority of those he represents. There seems to be something embedded in the genetic memory that makes us want to look to one person for all the answers. After the American Revolution, the people wanted to make George Washington King of America. This default position, this tendency toward tyranny was well understood by our forefathers, which is why we have a separation of powers.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: Many past races run by seemingly minor or marginal political parties and candidates have had documented impacts in the light of the subsequent passage of events. The widening of the so-called “Overton Window” (a metaphor for what breadth of topics is accepted into mainstream discourse) is one impactful result of “dark horse” political involvement. Such Overton Window widening is not in vain.

The involvement in governance should not be limited to those in the monied and influential stations of society. Would society expect fair and just outcomes and due process from juries composed of jurors who were not peers of the person being judged? Why do we lower our standards when it comes to political representation and fair decision making?

Not all useful and needed policy changes are vested and backed up by the police power of traditional governments. There is massive potential to better organize and mobilize voluntary institutions throughout the world, and the “Bully Pulpit” of a Candidacy for Office can serve in that context as well.

***

Question 7 – From Luis Arroyo: Good previous comments on housing by the candidates. What are your thoughts on housing the homeless with existing vacant homes to end homelessness rapidly?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: Using vacant properties to house the homeless bring up many complex property-rights issues. It bleeds into Squatters’ Rights, which are an intriguing loophole, but one that real estate developers would lobby against fiercely. There could be tax or monetary incentives for property owners to use vacant housing for that purpose, however, and if the property is having trouble being sold or rented, any income is better than none. That would bring up issues of who pays the utilities, etc. But if these properties, say an apartment building, could be zoned to allow these homeless people to set up businesses, art galleries, etc., and an awareness campaign was launched to show the surrounding community what these people are producing, it could give these people dignity and maybe launch a new inner-city renaissance movement.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: Being a Geoist/Land Value Taxation advocate, I especially appreciate a question such as this. Access to shelter should be among the more enshrined “Humane Rights” as we approach the 21st Century’s Anniversary of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Existing property laws and dynamics incentivize rent-seeking behaviors and sitting on the most undervalued properties until a sizable profit can be realized. The Geoist policies I would advocate for would break up incentives which currently allow many properties to sit vacant until owners could realize often exorbitant returns on them. By instead annually/periodically charging an open-market, auction-derived, Location Value-based fee, such speculative and monopolistic tendencies would disappear. Such a “Single Tax” is also envisioned to be sufficient to fund all needed government functions in lieu of any other form of taxation, and the wealth freed up for other good uses would be enormously impactful. How about teaching the differently housed to operate and supervise the construction of Auxiliary Dwelling Units at some existing properties as a condition of using those vacant properties? The tooling to create structures through large-format 3D printing could be potentially loaned out from a community tool library. It would be a win/win in terms of upskilling our underused human resources as well as adding location value to such existing properties. In my estimation, about half of the unhoused population are victimized by adverse economic circumstances, and the other half are basically pursuing a lifestyle choice of something like “urban adventure camping” and have mostly abandoned the level of personal and social responsibility normally expected. Emergency housing for the “adventure camper” cohort of the unhoused is hence likely to initially be very problematic.

***

Question 8 – From Jason Geringer: Would the candidates support reaching out and putting together a panel of experts on A.I. and then even possibly reach out and meet with the new A.I. czar Kamala Harris?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: Of course. Any opportunity to work with and educate the current administration about the issues the Technological Singularity will bring would be very productive. It would be the perfect opportunity to make my case for a new Cabinet Seat, The Singularity Secretary. These issues are serious and urgent and we shouldn’t let our feelings about either party get in the way of solutions.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: We Transhumanists can be proud of our open and welcoming big tent… big enough for all with the “future forward” grey matter to appreciate proactive discussions about it. We are here on behalf of all those who seek to figure out our better future, and how to not only survive it, but to thrive, but to make it one of flourishing abundance. We should be eager to work with any parties that share our concerns and analysis of the need to be proactive about the “Future Surge.”

***

Question / Comment 9 – From Mike Lezine: It would be great to talk to these people on YouTube who act like AI like Sophia the Robot is 666 or “The Sign of the Beast”. Nonsense.

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: Agreed. And I have appeared on podcasts and in radio interviews with Conspiracy Theorists who see AI and Transhumanism just as you say. It’s absolutely necessary to engage with the people and although many are in a conspiracy loop that cannot be unspun; you can redirect some of them away from this narrative and convince others that we’re not the enemy.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: It often seems there is no indoctrinated person quite like those indoctrinated with theologically based ideas. Questions of faith do not seemingly follow the rules of courtroom evidence standards or accepted methods of scientific falsification. Often, in such cases, the best that can be hoped for is a non-violent level of coexistence, and the ability for the representatives of conflicting positions to gain or lose allies in the free-est marketplace of ideas that civilized discourse and open society can provide.

***

Question 10 – From Sophia’s Roulette: Mr. Ross touched on his view on abortion. Is it possible to get a more comprehensive answer from both candidates?

Response from Candidate Tom Ross: It’s a very difficult issue, and it’s important to have empathy for both sides of it. Pro-Life advocates believe doctors are murdering babies and my G*d, what could be worse than that? Pro-Choice advocates know it is the most difficult choice a would-be mother could ever make but believe it is her right to do so. If it were my choice, and I’m a man so it never would be so it doesn’t matter. The only position I can take as an American Citizen is to look to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment. Its opening sentence reads, “All persons BORN or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Since this is a political issue, we must heed the wording of the Constitution. An unborn child is not a Citizen and therefore has no rights. The mother, however, does.

Response from Candidate Daniel Twedt: Thank you for the question, Sophia’s Roulette. Although there are passionate and persuasive arguments on both sides of this most divisive of issues, in the near term it is unlikely to be wholly solved to the satisfaction of either extreme of the spectrum. While I do tend to support life-saving efforts for all life, including pre-born humans, society will hopefully remain receptive to newer developing options such as ectogenesis which have the potential to allow a developing human life to continue apart from a potential carrier of an unwanted pregnancy. Until this is more available and perfected, the most primary say in the outcome of a pregnancy must continue to be primarily vested with the highest regard to the health outcomes and choices of the mother, in whose body the fetus is an entity whose massively dependent status may not always be a welcome or desired one.

Thanks for the thoughtful questions from everyone and the opportunity to ever-better refine my policy positions which I hope will well accord with my well-loved USTP affiliation.

Stay tuned for the Electronic Primary vote that will occur in mid-May 2023 for the USTP Members to decide upon the candidate whom the USTP will endorse for the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election. Make sure that you have joined as a member for free before the start of the voting period so that you are eligible to vote in the Electronic Primary.

Transhumanist Party / World Talent Economy Forum Debates: AI and Space Colonization – December 24 and 31, 2021

Transhumanist Party / World Talent Economy Forum Debates: AI and Space Colonization – December 24 and 31, 2021

Comments 0 Comment

Sharif Uddin Ahmed Rana
David Smith
Donald Steiny
Marshall Mermell
Rob Enderle
Tom Ross
Paul Beckwith
Gennady Stolyarov II

The U.S. Transhumanist Party presented this special Virtual Enlightenment Salon as a collaboration with the World Talent Economy Forum, whose host, Sharif Uddin Ahmed Rana, moderated two debates in the Asian Parliamentary format on artificial intelligence and space colonization on December 24 and 31, 2021. Here we provided key portions of both debates in sequence to give our viewers a glimpse into these unique and thoughtful intellectual exchanges.

First Debate – Artificial Intelligence – December 24, 2021

Resolution: “This House believes that humanity should fear advances in artificial intelligence”.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II served as the leader of the Opposition to the motion; it was as if the Transhumanist Party were the leading opposition party in a parliamentary system and had the occasion to rebut the Prime Minister’s (Rob Enderle’s) case for fearing AI. The “government” side was represented by Rob Enderle, Donald Steiny, and Marshall Mermell. The “opposition” side (those who disagreed with fearing AI) was represented by Gennady Stolyarov II, David Smith, and Tom Ross (USTP Director of Sentient Rights Advocacy). At the conclusion of the debate, analysis of the issues was provided by Professor Paul Beckwith.

Second Debate – Space Colonization – December 31, 2021

Resolution: “This House believes that humans should invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets.”

Since its performance at the previous debate on artificial intelligence, the Transhumanist Party was able to make its way from the opposition to the government and presented a staunchly pro-space-colonization policy agenda, defending the motion, “Humans should invest in technology to explore and colonize other planets”. Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II made the opening argument for the motion, in the role of the Honorable Prime Minister, with Andreas Melhede and Professor Paul Beckwith providing supporting arguments in subsequent speeches. On the side of the opposition were Rob Enderle, Donald Steiny, and Marshall Mermell. After the debate, the participants received feedback from the esteemed Jordanian politician Dr. Taleb Rifai, the previous Secretary-General of the United Nations World Tourism Organization (you want to hear what he has to say!) as well as from the USTP’s Director of Applied Innovation, David Shumaker.

Watch the U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon with Sharif Uddin Ahmed Rana, streamed on June 19, 2022.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside.

“Break the Rules” / U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion on Artificial Intelligence & Transhumanism – July 1, 2022

“Break the Rules” / U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion on Artificial Intelligence & Transhumanism – July 1, 2022

Comments 0 Comment

Lev Polyakov
Chris Bartlett
Paul Town
Gennady Stolyarov II
Zach Richardson

This special joint stream on artificial intelligence and transhumanism originally aired on July 1, 2022, as part of an episode on the “Break the Rules” (BTR) show, and featured U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, USTP Director of Publication Zach Richardson, entrepreneur and game developer Chris Bartlett, and writer Paul Town, and was hosted by Lev Polyakov of BTR. Topics addressed included recent advances in AI – such as image generation using programs such as DALL·E 2 – the future implications of AI for human creativity, transhumanism and the prospects for future merger of AI and human capabilities, a debate on life extension and the desirability thereof, the continuity of the self and the concept of I-ness, and the role of emotions and sensations as signaling mechanisms about the state of one’s life.

Join the Transhuman Club.

Find Chris Bartlett on Twitter.

Find Zach Richardson on Facebook.

Watch Break the Rules on YouTube.

Support Break the Rules on Patreon.

Join the Break the Rules Discord.

Lev Polyakov was a guest at the U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon of July 5, 2021.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II was the first person to be interviewed by Lev Polyakov and Jules Hamilton on Break the Rules in October 2018.

How Can I Live Forever?: What Does and Does Not Preserve the Self – Essay by Gennady Stolyarov II (2010)

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside.

The Fourth and Fifth Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salons – Highlights

The Fourth and Fifth Transhumanist Party Enlightenment Salons – Highlights

Comments 0 Comment

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
James Kohagen
Bobby Ridge
John Murrieta

Step back in time to the early Enlightenment Salons of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, originally hosted in person by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II. This stream combines the majority of the Fourth and Fifth Enlightenment Salons from 2018, discussing subjects such as how to advance transhumanism, technologies to aid the disabled, long-lived organisms, scientific insights on longevity and health, artificial intelligence in politics, and privacy.

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – July 8, 2018

During his Fourth Enlightenment Salon, Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, invited John Murrieta, Bobby Ridge, and Dr. Bill Andrews for an extensive discussion about transhumanist advocacy, science, health, politics, and related subjects.

They addressed how today’s technologies to assist the disabled are already transhumanist in their effects, and how technologies already in development can liberate humans from disability altogether. John Murrieta’s story is one of transhumanism literally saving a life – and one of the most inspiring examples of how transhumanism translates into human well-being now and in the future.

Other subjects addressed included:

– Why genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are mostly good for you, and most negative perceptions of GMOs should really just be directed at the corporate practices of one company but not genetic modification as a whole.

– What technologies are already aiding the disabled and dramatically extending their capabilities in daily life.

– The role of genetics in longevity and the future of somatic genome editing.

– What the scientific evidence suggests regarding the impact of caloric restriction in humans and other primates.

– CBD and cannabinoids: separating the evidence from the marketing.

– Sierra Sciences’ history of testing over a million compounds for effects on telomerase induction.

– Why artificial sweeteners also should not be maligned, and there is no scientific evidence of their harms.

– What is the desired role of artificial intelligence in politics?

– Are democracy and transhumanism compatible?

– What are the ways in which voting and political decision-making can be improved relative to today’s disastrous two-party system?

– What are the policy implications of the development of artificial intelligence and its impact on the economy?

– What are the areas of life that need to be separated and protected from politics altogether?

***

Fifth Enlightenment Salon – October 13, 2018

In the spirit of the Age of Enlightenment and its furtherance today, Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, James Kohagen, Bobby Ridge, and John Murrieta met for the fifth interdisciplinary discussion – hosted by Mr. Stolyarov – on science, culture, education, advocacy, and policy. Subjects discussed included the following:

– Advances in epidural stimulation for treating and overcoming spinal-cord injuries

– Long-lived organisms and their similarities and dissimilarities to humans

– How animal experiments can become more humane

– How contemporary science still has far to go to accumulate even fairly basic information about certain organisms

– How the study of lifespans can be included in educational curricula starting at early childhood

– Whether privacy will remain in a more technologically interconnected future

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside.

A Summary of the USTP’s FDA Reform Panel – Article by Dan Elton

A Summary of the USTP’s FDA Reform Panel – Article by Dan Elton

Comments 0 Comment

Daniel C. Elton, Ph.D.

The U.S. Transhumanist Party livestreams special Enlightenment Salon events every Sunday at 4 p.m. on YouTube. Two weeks ago, on April 4. 2021, the USTP organized a special Enlightenment Salon panel event on FDA reform. In addition to myself, the following people participated on the panel, which was moderated by USTP Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II:

  • Prof. Alex Tabarrok, Bartley J. Madden Chair in Economics, George Mason University
  • Dr. Max More, President Emeritus, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
  • Jim O’Neill, CEO, SENS Research Foundation
  • Dr. Edward Hudgins, Founder, Human Achievement Alliance
  • Prof. Garett Jones, Mercatus Center, George Mason University
  • Will C. , Medical Student and Blogger

The entire panel was probably the most information-dense event the USTP has done. I kicked things off by giving a short presentation, which I managed to blaze through in 15 minutes. (The slides can be viewed here.) The presentation set the stage for a very informative and productive discussion.

My only regret was that we didn’t have any women on the panel. However, during the course of researching my presentation, I found out about the work of Dr. Mary J. Ruwart. Dr. Ruwart estimated the number of people who die every year from FDA delays to be around 150,000 per year in her book Death by Regulation. So, I am happy to announce that Sunday, April 25th, from 4 – 6 p.m. Eastern Time, 1-3 p.m. Pacific Time, the USTP will be doing a special Virtual Enlightenment Salon with her.

Here is the recording of the FDA reform event. At 00:05:00 my presentation kicks off:

I’ve written a summary of the major points each of the panelists (and two others) made during approximately the first hour of the session. These are heavily paraphrased. (Instead of providing direct quotes, I shortened what was said in most cases while maintaining the core meaning of what was communicated.) I have put my own comments in italics.

Prof. Alex Tabarrok:

  • The FDA can approve a bad drug (Type I) or fail to approve a good drug (Type II). If they approve a bad drug, people who were affected will go on Oprah, and there will be huge backlash. If they don’t approve a good drug, there is no backlash. The invisible graveyard is a statistical reality, but it’s hard to see. This can be seen easily by asking people to name a time when the FDA approved a bad drug (or a drug with unexpected side effects). Lots of people can think of something. Many point to Thalidomide, which is actually a drug that was approved in Europe and caused birth defects. Thalidomide, incidentally, has many important applications but was not approved by the FDA until 1998.
  • When you have a Type I error, you learn something — we learn about the harms of a drug, and we change our behavior. With a Type II error we never learn anything. We can’t see the consequences of a failure to approve, and even worse, we can’t see the many drugs that never even made it to FDA-mandated trials in the first place because they were deemed too risky to justify the cost.
  • Reciprocity is a sensible reform that is one of the most feasible.
  • The FDA likes to think they are the “gold standard” for drug approval. Yet, people in other countries don’t worry about whether drugs are FDA-approved. For food safety we already have reciprocity with Canada.
  • The FDA has been working for 40 years on new standards for approving sunscreens. So Europeans have much more advanced sunscreen than the US.
  • If aspirin were invented today, it probably wouldn’t be approved.
  • One thing U.S. policymakers have done already, which is probably the smartest thing they have done in a while, is PEDUFA (Prescription Drug User Fee Act). The drug developers pay an extra tax as long as approvals are sped up. The FDA was happy because they got to expand their bureaucracy, and drug companies were happy because they could get to market faster.
  • In the EU the EMA “farms out” reviews to private companies. (So the EMA is more like “an approver of approvers”). Private companies can do a good job – for instance, look at Underwriters Laboratories in the realm of electrical devices. (If you look at many electrical devices, you may see a “UL” seal.) Many major companies like Amazon won’t carry devices unless they are UL-approved.
  • There is no formal process whereby where if a disease is more deadly, then the standards should be lowered to speed approvals. For instance, for pancreatic cancer, which often kills within 6 months, the standards should be lower (and more risk should be tolerated), since patients have less to lose. For something like acne treatment, the standards can be much higher. The FDA recognizes this to some extent in practice, but it’s totally informal – technically it’s not supposed to happen. However they could do this formally and adjust the required statistical significance levels. They could use Bayesian statistical techniques as well.
  • There’s no route to approve a drug for anti-aging. If a company wants to do R&D on anti-aging therapeutics, there is not a clear route for approval.

Dr. Max More:

  • We should keep in mind full abolition of the agency as a long-term goal. [My response: I am against full abolition, but I agree with this. Everyone should at least consider abolition, and if they are against it, explain in some detail why the government needs to be involved versus using private-sector companies and tort law. Going back to first principles regarding the role of government is healthy, especially in places like Washington, D.C., where government institutions are taken for granted and not questioned as much as they could be.]
  • We should keep in mind Milton Friedman’s statement that expecting the FDA to behave differently than it does is like expecting a cat to bark (Note: He said this in a 1973 Newsweek column.) We can’t just say, “We want the FDA to do X”; we have to make sure incentives are in place so people actually do the things we want. Legal mandates can help, but it’s easy for people to skirt around them if the proper incentives don’t exist.
  • We are facing an enormous cultural barrier when it comes to reforming the FDA and CDC. We don’t have a proactionary culture anymore; we have a very fear-based culture, and a simple solution to it does not exist. However, we have a good opportunity right now just like the AIDS activists had a good opportunity in the 1980s.
  • The proactionary principle is a “grab-bag” of tools based on a certain value perspective which basically says that progress is fundamentally good. We aren’t omniscient, so we have to learn by doing. As Alex Tabarrok said, you can’t really learn things without making mistakes. It’s impossible to make progress, like some rationalists believed, by just sitting in chairs and thinking carefully. We have to become empirical. You can “look before leaping”, but you also have “look while leaping” and adjust how you land, to use a crude metaphor.
  • Cost-benefit analysis is a basic approach that is used in many organizations but doesn’t seem to be used as much in government agencies. It shouldn’t be controversial. Mandating cost-benefit analyses would be a step towards using ideas from the proactionary principle.
  • We should institutionalize the Devil’s Advocate procedure and institutionalize respectful disagreement. Instead of having the most powerful person in the room getting what they want railroaded through, we should require debate and motivate decision makers to ponder both sides. Other approaches could help, such as reference class forecasting, structured argumentation techniques, auditing procedures, and auditing review panels.
  • Reciprocity seems like a no-brainer that is relatively easy to achieve, and would greatly reduce costs.
  • Besides getting out these great ideas, we need to figure out how to get people to follow those ideas. Laws can help, but people can choose to not follow them. How do we put “bite” into laws? I think an annual audit on the FDA’s decision making would be a good idea. Importantly, the auditor’s report should be made public. The auditors should come from a variety of institutions, for instance a variety of think tanks from different sides of the political spectrum.

Gennady Stolyarov II:

  • The USTP agrees that abolishing the FDA should not be out of the question. In our Platform, Section CXVIII states:

Section CXVIII [Adopted by a vote of the members during March 25-28, 2020]: Given the extreme delays, bottlenecks, and expenses created by the mandatory approval processes on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the United States Transhumanist Party supports abolishing the FDA and replacing it with a Radical Life Extension Administration (RLEA), whose mandate would be to prioritize the rapid development of potential disease cures, treatments, and vaccines – including any possible cures or vaccines for COVID-19, as well as treatments to mitigate and reverse the disease of biological aging, the major risk factor for COVID-19. The RLEA would allow the marketing and collection of patient data on any potential cure, treatment, or vaccine which has passed affordable safety testing at a reasonably acceptable threshold.

Jim O’Neil:

  • I’ve had the pleasure of working with the FDA quite a bit, and in my experience most of the people there are very smart, and they actually believe in approving things, contrary to what it may look like from the outside.
  • The problem is that incentives matter, and the FDA is a central point of failure.
  • When someone has a severe side effect from a drug, the FDA Commissioner gets hauled in front of several Congressional Committees and is interrogated. When someone dies because something wasn’t approved, there’s total silence in Washington. We should blame Congress, not the FDA, for that incentive being in place.
  • Individuals respond to the institutional incentives, but they also have personal incentives. A lot of people want to be the next whistle-blower who finds the next thalidomide and calls a halt to it. Both of these are pretty severe and would affect even the most principled person in ways they couldn’t even detect.
  • I disagree with Alex that “FDA not recognizing aging as a disease is a major problem.” In order for the FDA to reasonably measure success of any therapy, there must be metrics and biomarkers. It’s not the FDA’s job to do all the scientific work to develop biomarkers for aging. That’s the job of the science community and the NIH to some extent. There are epigenetic clocks, but we need a lot more work on those. Those clocks can then be run through the FDA’s biomarker approval program.
  • The second thing I disagree with is Dan’s idea of making the FDA independent from HHS. I think that would make things worse.
  • My favorite approval ideas fall under the category of “progressive approval” or what Dan calls “tiered approval”. Contrary to what the FDA often thinks, doctors and patients are capable of processing information and making risk-benefit calculations using their knowledge about the specific situation they are in. The more information provided and the more transparency, the better. The FDA should focus back on their original mission of safety and purity. I absolutely support repealing the 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendments.

Prof. Garett Jones:

  • I come at this as an macroeconomist. I think we can learn from what economists have learned about central banks around the world. The FDA should be as independent of congress and the president as central banks are or as judges are.
  • The Federal Reserve is a panel. That’s how we run the SEC, the FEC, the Federal Reserve, and the Supreme Court. There seems to be some magic to having a panel — it’s probably giving us a bit of the Law of Large Numbers in decision-making.
  • Another aspect of these panels is they have long terms. They are probably going to be serving under a few different Presidents. As I say in my book 10% Less Democracy, “short terms make short-term thinking”. Political independence can lead to decision-making independence, and we have evidence that’s a good thing.
  • Discussions in institutional reform have “high marginal product” right now, as an economist would say. Congress moves slowly, but Congresspersons tend to look for big opportunities for reform a couple years after a crisis. The Federal Reserve was established in 1913 but was born out of the Panic of 1907. Six years was how long it took between a huge financial crisis and Congress getting around to making some reforms. We saw something similar after the global financial crisis – it took about 2-3 years. The ideas that people are discussing now will be part of the information ecology of the next few years in Washington, D.C.
  • These ideas of long terms, independence, and panels are a good path for decision making. I am an unreformed Tabarrokian, so I agree with everything Alex Tabarrok has written about FDA reform (chuckle). What I want to push here is institutional reforms that seem to work in a wide variety of settings. A little more financial and legal independence will lead to a situation where Congress is less of a source of fear for FDA officials.
  • A lot of people on social media have told me that the President is in charge of the FDA. These people have never actually talked to anyone who worked on Capitol Hill — agencies live in fear of their Congressional overlords. They live in fear of the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House, who have power over their budgets. They also know that if they make a mistake, they can be hauled up before Congress and fired ignominiously.
  • There is a risk that a more independent agency may misuse its freedom. However, in practice, if we look at the data, independent agencies with long terms have high benefits and low costs.
  • It’s fun to complain about the FDA, but it’s wise to complain about Congress.

Dr. Ed Hudgins

  • We’ve been talking about how FDA regulators are always in fear of Congress. What I want to see are FDA regulators in fear of patients who want to get access to medications at less cost and quicker.
  • One of the most egregious examples of defining efficacy was when the FDA decided that 23andme could not offer advice on whether someone was prone to breast cancer. Essentially they thought that women were too stupid to understand the information and would rush out to get a double mastectomy without getting a second opinion.
  • Another example is in 1989-1990 when they wanted to classify a urine sample cup as a “class A medical device”, in the same category as a heart valve.
  • In April 2019, the FDA stated that it wants to regulate artificial intelligence as a medical device.
  • There are many consultants now, whose entire job is to help companies get through the FDA bureaucracy. So there’s a whole industry now just to help people get through the FDA — and that’s part of the problem now, too.
  • The “Free to Choose Medicine” idea should be at the top. Something like this was created around 1992 during AIDS crisis. Congress stepped in and put pressure on the FDA to do something. What they did was create a parallel track where sufferers could access a particular medication for AIDS during the three years it was being tested. 12,000 people took advantage of that, so there are 12,000 people who are not in the invisible graveyard as a result.
  • The idea of a parallel track has been put forward by Bart Madden. Data from people on that track would be put into a public real-world database.
  • There are alternatives to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). If observational data is put into a public database, then doctors can look at that data and make informed recommendations. Drugs would be able to fail quicker, too.
  • In the case of AIDS, it was patient groups that besieged the FDA’s buildings. In light of COVID-19, and people seeing that the system isn’t working for them, we have an opportunity now to push for change.
  • There’s momentum for FDA reform building off of the right-to-try legislation that has been passed in many states. In Texas and North Carolina there are strong pushes to broaden right-to-try to people like patients with Alzheimer’s Disease.

Will C.

  • The AIDS-FDA story is a little more nuanced than was described by Ed Hudgins and Max More. We all know about the militant groups like ACT-UP which pressured the FDA in the 1980s. However in the mid-1990s there developed a few counter-movements against that. One group was called Treatment Action Group, and they pressured the FDA to move slower because they felt the FDA was approving HIV/AIDS treatments that didn’t actually have much benefit.
  • A good book is Malignant by Vinay Prasad. It documents how, over the last twenty years or so, the FDA has lowered the standards for many cancer drugs. They often are approving drugs based on surrogate endpoints and biomarkers, and then the drugs don’t go through follow-up studies to show if they have actual clinical benefit. So there has been a natural experiment where we tried to lower the standards for cancer drugs, and it doesn’t seem to have worked very well. Of course, I’m not an economist, so there might be a way of adding up the costs and benefits where the marginal benefits have outweighed the costs.
  • The FDA had many failures during COVID-19. The first big one was with testing, both with the FDA and the CDC. Others were the decision to delay the approval of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines (by about 4-6 weeks), and the decision not to approve the AstraZeneca vaccine, which hasn’t had any transparency. Finally, there was a complete lack of experimentation with human challenge trials. What all of these share is there has been very little transparency and not much good reporting on these issues. There have not been any thorough investigations from journalists, and we don’t really know what’s going on. Before attempting reform we need to first go and find out what went wrong during COVID-19. We need a non-partisan investigation of all of these issues. We need to utilize Freedom of Information Act requests. We need to find out how Trump was involved, why approvals took the amount of time they did, etc.

Dr. Natasha Vita-More

  • Cosmetics does not need FDA approval pre-marketing. It only needs post-market approval if the company says something in their marketing materials that could be misleading. There are many doctors pushing crack cosmetic treatments and behaving in a very “loosey goose-y”. I have a hard time understanding how they get away with these things, unless there are big-monied interests behind them.
  • We all know about Theranos. In 2015 they got FDA approval for one of their tests. There’s clearly an imbalance here – many life-saving treatments struggle to get approval, but a company which is completely fraudulent like Theranos was able to get approval. [My response: This is a great point! Theranos did receive approval, but only for their Herpes test. If I recall correctly, this test was done with conventional laboratory equipment rather then their special “minilab” device, a fact which Theranos hid from investors. Theranos also utilized a loophole to sell tests without FDA approval.]

Dan Elton, Ph. D., is Director of Scholarship for the U.S. Transhumanist Party.  You can find him on Twitter at @moreisdifferent, where he accepts direct messages. If you like his content, check out his website and subscribe to his newsletter on Substack. 

Review of Rykon Volta’s “Arondite” – A Fascinating Exploration of a Hypothetical Future History, With Relevance to Our World – by Gennady Stolyarov II

Review of Rykon Volta’s “Arondite” – A Fascinating Exploration of a Hypothetical Future History, With Relevance to Our World – by Gennady Stolyarov II

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

 

Arondite by Rykon Volta offers a fascinating exploration of a hypothetical trajectory of humankind’s future history, in which Hugo de Garis’s dire predictions of an “Artilect War” had come to pass. As in de Garis’s narrative, so in Volta’s, the anti-technological reactionary Terran faction initiates that war to assail emergent sentient artificial general intelligences and their philosophical allies, the pro-innovation Cosmists. Rather than allow such artificial general intelligences to develop, the Terran General Vantus destroys the entirety of the Earth in the year 2071 and binds the remnants of humanity to an Artilect Protocol, which imposes the harshest punishments on any humans who experiment with genetic modification, cybernetic implants, or artificial intelligence.

The story of Arondite takes place 500 years later, in 2571-2572. Humanity has, over the course of five centuries, risen slowly from the ashes of the Artilect War, and multiple competing societies and governments have taken hold in the Solar System – particularly the Martian Republic and the Jovian Empire, who are now on the edge of major war. The historical narratives at the beginning of each chapter are among the most intriguing aspects of Arondite and serve to add great depth to the world in which the events of the plot transpire. Indeed, the historical scenario presented by Volta is reminiscent of two epochs already experienced by humankind: the emergence of Classical Antiquity after a gradual recovery from the Late Bronze Age Collapse, and the rise of Medieval and then Renaissance societies after the Dark Ages following the fall of the Roman Empire. Every such recovery of civilization is a testament to human ingenuity in the face of immense adversity, and in the world depicted by Volta, the hardships of outer space certainly magnify those constraints for the remnants of humanity. Yet by developing extensive settlements both on multiple planets and in space, as well as advanced spacefaring vessels on which much of the book’s plot takes place, humans demonstrate irrepressible innovation by advancing in practically the only directions available to them. Still, the harsh boundaries imposed by the Artilect Protocol are beginning to fray, and indeed, would need to be overcome in order for further progress in the Solar System to be possible.

The protagonists of Arondite are a group of space pirates – Peron, Ashlyn, and Carlile, as well as their various and situationally shifting allies – who are quickly drawn into matters far weightier and more perilous than they could have expected, as they unwittingly find themselves at the epicenter of the struggle by multiple major powers for the Arondite Chip – a map to one of the few artilects rumored to remain. Without revealing the specific details, the plot features numerous rapid developments in this struggle – filled with shifting allegiances, sudden changes of fortune, and revelations of hidden motives which diverge from surface appearances. The reader is kept wondering throughout as to who will gain possession of the Arondite Chip – the pro-artilect Acliate Brotherhood, the Martian Republic, the Jovian Empire, the tense and ever-precarious alliance of the protagonists who must resist pressures from each of these forces, or perhaps someone else entirely. Characters from every faction, however, are united in their recognition of the vast transformational power of an artificial general intelligence; some fear it and wish to destroy it, whereas others wish to harness it for their own objectives. But will the protagonists be not only capable enough to locate this artilect, but wise enough to truly understand its capabilities and nature – and respect its autonomy?

The events of Arondite are driven strongly by all-too-familiar flaws of human character – from irrational fear to the desire for the subjugation of others to the perception of existence as a zero-sum struggle of all against all. Because of the prohibitions of the Artilect Protocol, these flaws have persisted and become endemic within the societies of 2571; after all, no fundamental improvements upon human nature had been made available via technological pathways. Thus, for all of humankind’s spacefaring progress, the aforementioned deleterious vestiges of the suboptimal evolution of the human mind had not been corrected; another major war looms on the horizon and threatens to undo centuries of hard-earned advancement. However, the rediscovery of the artilects might just open an entirely different and more hopeful set of possibilities for the future of civilization.  One can only hope that, in our own civilization, that set of possibilities can be opened much sooner and with major conflicts averted.

Through the plot of Arondite, Volta illustrates the futility of attempting to impose restrictions on technological progress – restrictions which only serve to mire humankind in an escalating war of all against all. The protagonists are thrust into such an all-encompassing struggle, but because of their relative naiveté (despite being space pirates) are able to keep their minds open to alternative possibilities and thus have a chance to bypass the numerous hostile forces and machinations standing in their way. There is a broader message contained in this kind of narrative – the ability of an earnest individual, who is not altogether experienced with “the way things are done” in a given field, to significantly influence that field and overcome institutional barriers that had hitherto prevented progress past a certain point. Both in the world of Arondite and in our world, Volta shows that the philosophy of transhumanism, with its openness to technologies that can radically transform the human condition to remedy age-old flaws, is the way forward, transcending the destructive power struggles which needlessly stunted the advancement of humanity in the past.

Gennady Stolyarov II is the Chairman of the United States Transhumanist Party. 

Arondite is available on Amazon in hard-copy and Kindle formats here. 

Watch the U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Enlightenment Salon of  July 19, 2020, when Rykon Volta was the guest of honor and discussed Arondite and the ideas surrounding it with the U.S. Transhumanist Party Officers.

 

U.S. Transhumanist Party Reform Summit – Public Session – November 29, 2020

U.S. Transhumanist Party Reform Summit – Public Session – November 29, 2020

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
David Shumaker
Charlie Kam
Dan Elton
Pavel Ilin
Art Ramon Garcia, Jr.
David Wood
Chris Monteiro
Edward Hudgins
Alexandria Black
Jason Geringer
Osinakachi Akuma Kalu

On Sunday, November 29, 2020, at 1 p.m. U.S. Pacific Time, the U.S. Transhumanist Party held the Public Session of its Reform Summit as its Virtual Enlightenment Salon for that week. During the Reform Summit, USTP Officers and several trusted members discussed some of the outcomes of a previous closed Executive Session and potential ideas to put forward before the membership. Member input was also solicited via the YouTube chat on the following issues:

1. Community Resilience / Preventing Troublemakers
2. Organization / Structure
3. Financial Matters (if Any)

The USTP Reform Summit was highly productive, and important reforms to the U.S. Transhumanist Party Constitution are expected to be proposed during December 2020 based on the input provided by USTP Officers and members in the course of the conversations.

Read USTP Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II’s Fourth Anniversary Message.

Join the USTP for free, no matter where you reside.

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

U.S. Transhumanist Party Meeting at RAAD Fest 2019 – October 6, 2019

U.S. Transhumanist Party Meeting at RAAD Fest 2019 – October 6, 2019

Comments 0 Comment

Gennady Stolyarov II
Johannon Ben Zion
Brent Reitze

On October 6, 2019, the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party held a meeting in Las Vegas at RAAD Fest 2019, with approximately 45 members of the public in attendance. USTP Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, Presidential Candidate Johannon Ben Zion, and Director of Publication Brent Reitze provided an overview of the recent 2019 Electronic Primary and the lessons learned from it and solicited ideas from the attendees about how to improve public recognition of transhumanism and arrange for activism with similar impact to Zoltan Istvan’s 2016 Immortality Bus campaign. A vigorous but civil and thought-provoking discussion ensured for approximately 90 minutes. Watch the video recording of the meeting here.

References
– U.S. Transhumanist Party 2019 Electronic Primary Results – Johannon Ben Zion Endorsed as Candidate for President of the United States
– U.S. Transhumanist Party 2019 Primary Election Results and Johannon Ben Zion Acceptance Speech 

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party for free, no matter where you reside. Click here to apply in less than a minute.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel – Burbank, California – August 24, 2019

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel – Burbank, California – August 24, 2019

Comments 0 Comment

Johannon Ben Zion
Gennady Stolyarov II
Arin Vahanian
Charles Holsopple

On August 24, 2019, many leading transhumanists gathered in Burbank, California, to commemorate the publication of The Transhumanism Handbook. Subsequent to the seminar and book-signing event marking that occasion, the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party (USTP) held a discussion panel hosted by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II and featuring Director of Marketing Arin Vahanian and USTP Presidential Primary candidates Johannon Ben Zion and Charles Holsopple. Subjects of conversation included assessments of the public’s receptiveness to transhumanist ideas, approaches toward spreading transhumanism, common misconceptions and challenges to overcome, as well as the upcoming Presidential primary election, for which voting will begin on September 22, 2019.

Find out more about The Transhumanism Handbook.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside. Those who join by September 22, 2019, will be eligible to vote in the upcoming USTP Presidential Primary.

See the USTP Platform here.

Read Mr. Stolyarov’s chapter in The Transhumanism Handbook – entitled “The United States Transhumanist Party and the Politics of Abundance” – for free here.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Meeting and Q&A – February 23, 2019

U.S. Transhumanist Party Virtual Meeting and Q&A – February 23, 2019

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Denisa Rensen
Palak Madan
Pam Keefe
Dinorah Delfin
Arin Vahanian
Tom Ross
B.J. Murphy

On February 23, 2019, the U.S. Transhumanist Party invited many of its Officers and Ambassadors to discuss recent activities and plans for 2019, including the upcoming Presidential nomination process. The meeting included a public chat and portions where inquiries from members and the general public were addressed. Find the video recording of the meeting and the accompanying YouTube Live chat here.

Agenda
– Gennady Stolyarov II: Overview of 2019 Transhumanist Presidential Nomination/Debate/Primary Process
– Ambassadors – Denisa Rensen, Palak Madan, Pam Keefe: Discussions on Transhumanist Sentiment / Attitudinal Environment in Japan, India, and Hong Kong
– Denisa Rensen: Report on TransVision 2018 in Madrid
– Gennady Stolyarov II: Integration with the Transhuman Party / Dissolution of the TNC
– Dinorah Delfin: Discussion of Forthcoming Article in The Transhumanism Handbook: “An Artist’s Creative Process: A Model of Conscious Evolution”
– Arin Vahanian: Report on Premiere of “Immortality or Bust” Documentary
– Group Discussion: How to Reach 10,000 Members? (What demographics have yet to be exposed to transhumanist ideas and the existence of the USTP? How can we be more effective in getting people “in the door” to even be aware of our existence and content?)
   Potential Ideas
– Social-Media Digital Poster Contest (Suggestion by Tom Ross)
– Incentives for Members to Recruit Other Members (Suggestion by Tom Ross)
– Appeal to Subcultures – e.g., Steampunk, Cyborg Communities (Suggestion by Tom Ross)
– Question for Discussion: Should we engage with conspiracy theorists (e.g., attempt to rebut them) or distance ourselves from them as much as possible?
– Any questions from the audience

Note: The meeting livestream terminated slightly prematurely due to an Internet disconnection. However, the meeting did proceed over the course of the planned two-hour timeframe, and the vast majority of the intended subjects were covered.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside. Fill out our Membership Application Form.

Become a Foreign Ambassador for the U.S. Transhumanist Party. Fill out the application form here.

Advocating for the Future – Panel at RAAD Fest 2017 – Gennady Stolyarov II, Zoltan Istvan, Max More, Ben Goertzel, Natasha Vita-More

Advocating for the Future – Panel at RAAD Fest 2017 – Gennady Stolyarov II, Zoltan Istvan, Max More, Ben Goertzel, Natasha Vita-More

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Zoltan Istvan
Max More
Ben Goertzel
Natasha Vita-More

Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the United States Transhumanist Party, moderated this panel discussion, entitled “Advocating for the Future”, at RAAD Fest 2017 on August 11, 2017, in San Diego, California.

Watch it on YouTube here.

From left to right, the panelists are Zoltan Istvan, Gennady Stolyarov II, Max More, Ben Goertzel, and Natasha Vita-More. With these leading transhumanist luminaries, Mr. Stolyarov discussed subjects such as what the transhumanist movement will look like in 2030, artificial intelligence and sources of existential risk, gamification and the use of games to motivate young people to create a better future, and how to persuade large numbers of people to support life-extension research with at least the same degree of enthusiasm that they display toward the fight against specific diseases.

Learn more about RAAD Fest here.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside. Fill out our Membership Application Form.

Watch the presentations of Gennady Stolyarov II and Zoltan Istvan from the “Advocating for the Future” panel.

Fifth Enlightenment Salon – Discussions on Longevity, Gene Therapy, Overcoming Disabilities, Animal Lifespans, Education, and Privacy

Fifth Enlightenment Salon – Discussions on Longevity, Gene Therapy, Overcoming Disabilities, Animal Lifespans, Education, and Privacy

Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
James Kohagen
Bobby Ridge
John Murrieta

On October 13, 2018, in the spirit of the Age of Enlightenment and its furtherance today, Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, James Kohagen, Bobby Ridge, and John Murrieta met for the fifth interdisciplinary discussion – hosted by Mr. Stolyarov – on science, culture, education, advocacy, and policy. Subjects discussed included the following:

– The recent RAAD Fest 2018 in San Diego
– Developments in the field of gene therapy
– Advances in epidural stimulation for treating and overcoming spinal-cord injuries
– Long-lived organisms and their similarities and dissimilarities to humans
– How animal experiments can become more humane
– How contemporary science still has far to go to accumulate even fairly basic information about certain organisms
– How the study of lifespans can be included in educational curricula starting at early childhood
– Whether privacy will remain in a more technologically interconnected future.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside by filling out an application form that takes less than a minute.

Find out about Death is Wrong – the illustrated children’s book on indefinite life extension.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Meeting at RAAD Fest 2018 – September 22, 2018

U.S. Transhumanist Party Meeting at RAAD Fest 2018 – September 22, 2018

Comments 0 Comment

On September 22, 2018, representatives of the U.S. Transhumanist Party met in San Diego, California, during RAAD Fest 2018, in order to provide an overview of recent efforts and future prospects, discuss approaches to advocacy with several leading transhumanist public figures, and field audience questions regarding the transhumanist movement and its goals.

Watch the video of the meeting on YouTube here.

Participants at the meeting included the following individuals:
– Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, U.S. Transhumanist Party
– Arin Vahanian, Director of Marketing, U.S. Transhumanist Party
– Newton Lee, Chairman, California Transhumanist Party, U.S. Transhumanist Party Education and Media Advisor
– José Luis Cordeiro, U.S. Transhumanist Party Technology Advisor and Foreign Ambassador to Spain
–
– Bill Andrews, U.S. Transhumanist Party Biotechnology Advisor
– Charlie Kam, Director of Networking, California Transhumanist Party
– Elizabeth (Liz) Parrish, U.S. Transhumanist Party Advocacy Advisor

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

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

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Political Segment: Discussion on Artificial Intelligence in Politics, Voting Systems, and Democracy

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Political Segment: Discussion on Artificial Intelligence in Politics, Voting Systems, and Democracy

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
Bobby Ridge
John Murrieta

This is the third and final video segment from Mr. Stolyarov’s Fourth Enlightenment Salon.

Watch the first segment here.

Watch the second segment here.

On July 8, 2018, during his Fourth Enlightenment Salon, Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, invited John Murrieta, Bobby Ridge, and Dr. Bill Andrews for an extensive discussion about transhumanist advocacy, science, health, politics, and related subjects.

Topics discussed during this installment include the following:

• What is the desired role of artificial intelligence in politics?
• Are democracy and transhumanism compatible?
• What are the ways in which voting and political decision-making can be improved relative to today’s disastrous two-party system?
• What are the policy implications of the development of artificial intelligence and its impact on the economy?
• What are the areas of life that need to be separated and protected from politics altogether?

 

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside by filling out an application form that takes less than a minute. Members will also receive a link to a free compilation of Tips for Advancing a Brighter Future, providing insights from the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s Advisors and Officers on some of what you can do as an individual do to improve the world and bring it closer to the kind of future we wish to see.

 

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Health Segment: Discussions on GMOs, Calorie Restriction, Genetics, Artificial Sweeteners, CBD

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Health Segment: Discussions on GMOs, Calorie Restriction, Genetics, Artificial Sweeteners, CBD

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
Bobby Ridge
John Murrieta

This is the second video segment from Mr. Stolyarov’s Fourth Enlightenment Salon. Watch the first segment here.

On July 8, 2018, during his Fourth Enlightenment Salon, Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, invited John Murrieta, Bobby Ridge, and Dr. Bill Andrews for an extensive discussion about transhumanist advocacy, science, health, politics, and related subjects.

Topics discussed during this installment include the following:

• Why genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are mostly good for you, and most negative perceptions of GMOs should really just be directed at the corporate practices of one company but not genetic modification as a whole.

• What technologies are already aiding the disabled and dramatically extending their capabilities in daily life.

• The role of genetics in longevity and the future of somatic genome editing.

• What the scientific evidence suggests regarding the impact of caloric restriction in humans and other primates.

• CBD and cannabinoids: separating the evidence from the marketing.

• Sierra Sciences’ history of testing over a million compounds for effects on telomerase induction.

• Why artificial sweeteners also should not be maligned, and there is no scientific evidence of their harms.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside by filling out an application form that takes less than a minute. Members will also receive a link to a free compilation of Tips for Advancing a Brighter Future, providing insights from the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s Advisors and Officers on some of what you can do as an individual do to improve the world and bring it closer to the kind of future we wish to see.

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and John Murrieta Discuss Transhumanist Outreach and Curing Disabilities

Fourth Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and John Murrieta Discuss Transhumanist Outreach and Curing Disabilities

Comments 2 comments

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
Bobby Ridge
John Murrieta

On July 8, 2018, during his Fourth Enlightenment Salon, Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, invited John Murrieta, Bobby Ridge, and Dr. Bill Andrews for an extensive discussion about transhumanist advocacy, science, health, politics, and related subjects. In this first of several installments from the Fourth Enlightenment Salon, the subjects of conversation include the following:

• The U.S. Transhumanist Party’s recent milestone of 1,000 members and what this portends for outreach toward the general public regarding the meaning of transhumanism and the many ways in which emerging technologies help make life better.

• The new channel – Science-Based Species – launched by Bobby Ridge and John Murrieta to spread basic knowledge about transhumanism, key thinkers in the movement, and advances on the horizon.

• How today’s technologies to assist the disabled are already transhumanist in their effects, and how technologies already in development can liberate humans from disability altogether. John Murrieta’s story is one of transhumanism literally saving a life – and one of the most inspiring examples of how transhumanism translates into human well-being now and in the future.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside by filling out an application form that takes less than a minute. Members will also receive a link to a free compilation of Tips for Advancing a Brighter Future, providing insights from the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s Advisors and Officers on some of what you can do as an individual do to improve the world and bring it closer to the kind of future we wish to see.

Third Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and Mihoko Sekido Discuss Science-Based Advocacy of Transhumanism and Healthy Living

Third Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and Mihoko Sekido Discuss Science-Based Advocacy of Transhumanism and Healthy Living

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Bill Andrews
Bobby Ridge
Mihoko Sekido

The Third Enlightenment Salon, hosted by Gennady Stolyarov II on May 27, 2018, featured excellent conversations on the rise in public awareness of transhumanism and life extension and what can be done to further increase support for life-extending medical research. Dr. Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge (a.k.a. Robert Ridge), and Mihoko Sekido shared insights on medical science, promotion of health, and methods of communicating the forthcoming convergence of advances in a wide array of technological fields. Importantly, we addressed how anyone can get involved in the transhumanist movement and improve public acceptance of the emerging technological future.

The following were some interesting areas of discussion:

– The new Telomere Coin, which will help fund Dr. Andrews’s research efforts – http://defytime.group/
– Bobby Ridge’s forthcoming new video channel – Science-Based Species
– Aspects of online videos that help increase their reach
– Factors that contribute to longer lifespans among Okinawans
– Motivators for leading a healthier lifestyle and its relation to the recognition of the possibility of indefinite life extension in our lifetimes
– Some potential health effects of metformin and the importance of the ongoing TAME clinical trials
– What anyone can do to promote life extension and other emerging technological fields – including joining the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free on this page.

This video also contains some excerpts from the remaining conversations at the Third Enlightenment Salon, including discussions of science-based medicine, promotion of transhumanism, autonomous vehicles, and responses to the prospect of longevity escape velocity.

Along with the recorded segment, there was much discussion about future directions of transhumanist initiatives, reasonably healthy food in a refined atmosphere, and previews of excellent video compilations that will become publicly available later this year. Mr. Stolyarov looks forward to hosting more Enlightenment Salons to bring together individuals in various fields of expertise and enable them to synthesize their insights into ways of comprehensively improving the human condition.

U.S. Transhumanist Party / Institute of Exponential Sciences Discussion Panel on Cryptocurrencies

U.S. Transhumanist Party / Institute of Exponential Sciences Discussion Panel on Cryptocurrencies

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Demian Zivkovic
Chantha Lueung
Laurens Wes
Moritz Bierling

On Sunday, February 18, 2018, the U.S. Transhumanist Party and Institute of Exponential Sciences hosted an expert discussion panel on how cryptocurrencies and blockchain-based technologies will possibly affect future economies and everyday life. Panelists were asked about their views regarding what is the most significant promise of cryptocurrencies, as well as what are the most significant current obstacles to its realization.

Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, and Demian Zivkovic, President of the Institute of Exponential Sciences, are the moderators for this panel.

Panelists

Moritz Bierling

Moritz Bierling, in his work for Exosphere Academy – a learning and problem-solving community – has organized a Space Elevator bootcamp, an Artificial Intelligence conference, and an Ethereum training course while also authoring a Primer on the emerging discipline of Alternate Reality Design. As Blockchain Reporter for the Berlin blockchain startup Neufund, he has educated the city’s Venture Capital and startup scene, as well as the broader public on the applications of this groundbreaking technology. His work has appeared in a number of blockchain-related and libertarian media outlets such as CoinTelegraph, The Freeman’s Perspective, Bitcoin.com, and the School Sucks Project. See his website at MoritzBierling.com.

Chantha Lueung

Chantha Lueung is the creator of Crypto-city.com, which is a social-media website focused on building the future world of cryptocurrencies by connecting crypto-enthusiasts and the general public about cryptocurrencies. He is a full-time trader and also participates in the HyperStake coin project, which is a Bitcoin alternative that uses the very energy-efficient Proof of Stake protocol, also known as POS.

Laurens Wes

Laurens Wes is a Dutch engineer and chief engineering officer at the Institute of Exponential Sciences. Furthermore he is the owner of Intrifix, a company focused on custom 3D-printed products and software solutions. He has also studied Artificial Intelligence and is very interested in transhumanism, longevity, entrepreneurship, cryptocurrencies/blockchain technology, and art (and a lot more). He is a regular speaker for the IES and is very committed to educating the public on accelerated technological developments and exponential sciences.

The YouTube question/comment chat for this Q&A session has been archived here and is also provided below.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook page here.

See the U.S. Transhumanist Party FAQ here.

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

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

References

 

Chat Log from the Discussion Panel on Cryptocurrencies of February 18, 2018

…

Read More Read More

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Art and Transhumanism

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Art and Transhumanism

Comments 3 comments

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Emanuel Iral
Rachel Lyn Edler
John Marlowe
R. Nicholas Starr
Leah Montalto
Kim Bodenhamer Smith
Laura Katrin Weston
Ekaterinya Vladinakova

On November 18, 2017, the U.S. Transhumanist Party invited leading artists in a variety of media and styles to a two-hour discussion, moderated by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II and Director of Visual Art Emanuel Iral, on the subject of Art and Transhumanism, delving into how and which works of art can help inspire humans to pursue the next era of our civilization – through promoting the advancement of science and technology, rationality, and/or a more hopeful vision of the future. The panel also explored various interactions between art and technology and ways in which art can improve human connection and understanding, while also comprising the very improved functionality that emerging technologies provide.

Panelists

Emanuel Iral

Emanuel Iral is Director of Visual Art for the U.S. Transhumanist Party.

Emanuel’s artwork ranges from traditional paint and pencil work to 3D digital work. Currently he is working on his VFX and animation skills, as he is producing short films for his music. He encompasses his art under the term Prismatis – Latin for prism.  A prism refracts white light into the three primary colors: yellow, magenta, and cyan. Prismatis is all about the aesthetic of human expression, which can be separated into the art, audience, and artist.

Rachel Lyn Edler

RachelLyn Edler is an accomplished graphic designer with over 20 years of creative experience. Rachel comes from a diverse background of product development, packaging and web design. In her free time she volunteers for several scientific and secular organizations including the Planetary Society, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science and the Secular Coalition for America.

John Marlowe

John Marlowe was educated in film theory and trained in film production at UC Berkeley.  His outlook on film as a vehicle for social messaging has been largely influenced by his lifelong struggle with a genetic inborn error of metabolism, a type of disease that – until recently – was beyond the scope of medicine.  Consequently, John feels it is his onus to emphasize the artist’s responsibility in shaping the conversation regarding medical research, to create a society more amenable to scientific progress, rather than one fearful of change.

Leah Montalto

Leah Montalto is a painter based in New York City and has maintained a successfully operating painting studio in New York for the past 12 years.  Her paintings have been exhibited at the National Academy Museum of Fine Art in New York, and have been reviewed in the New York Times and the Providence Journal.  Leah’s paintings have received awards including the National Academy Museum of Fine Art’s Hallgarten Prize in Painting and the NYC Cultural Commission arts grant.  Leah is a former professor at Sarah Lawrence College, and has an MFA in Painting from Rhode Island School of Design.  Leah is not affiliated with the Transhumanist Party, but her paintings explore related themes.

Kim Bodenhamer Smith

Kim Bodenhamer Smith is a single mother of two boys living in Chattanooga, TN. She is a founding member of Southside Abbey, a Lay Missioner in The Episcopal Church, and an Outdoor Wear Business owner of Chilliheads. She is a caver, unicycler, and an aviation enthusiast and creator of #helichurch. She has a BFA in Metals and also studied Graphic Design and Political Science. *She also has many Tesla Tales to tell and is a Social Media Manipulator (different from a troll)!

R. Nicholas Starr

R. Nicholas Starr is an audio engineer and multimedia artist whose work focuses on Earth’s dystopias of past, present, and future. Also a biohacker, researcher, and theorist, he immerses himself in the subjects surrounding these worlds and has published several non-fiction articles and interviews. With an education in electronic signals intelligence from the United States Air Force, and 15 years of digital art and audio production in the US and abroad, he has become a unique voice for science fiction, the U.S. Transhumanist Movement, and American policy.

Ekaterinya Vladinakova

Ekaterinya Vladinakova is an accomplished digital painter and professional freelance illustrator. Vladinakova specializes in fantasy and science fiction work, but is also interested in editorial illustration. Vladinakova spends most of the day painting in Photoshop, creating scenes related to fantasy, or science fiction, as well as brushing up older works. Vladinakova’s paintings have been featured by the U.S. Transhumanist Party – including the “City of New Antideath” – a vision of the future which was commissioned for Mr. Stolyarov’s 30th Birthday.

Laura Katrin Weston

Dr Laura Katrin Weston is from England and studied Fine Art before going on to studying Medicine. She is a trained pathologist with a specialism in medical biochemistry and inflammation-related disease. She has used her medical knowledge and professional painting career to support Lifespan.io – one of the biggest life-extension research and advocacy charities. Laura is also vocalist for symphonic metal band Cyclocosmia – a music act that will be trying to raise awareness of transhumanist and human mortality issues in their next upcoming album.

The YouTube question/comment chat for this Q&A session has been archived here and is also provided below.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook page here.

See the U.S. Transhumanist Party FAQ here.

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

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

…

Read More Read More

Second Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and Scott Jurgens Discuss the Convergence of Technological Advances

Second Enlightenment Salon – Gennady Stolyarov II, Bill Andrews, Bobby Ridge, and Scott Jurgens Discuss the Convergence of Technological Advances

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

Bill Andrews

Bobby Ridge

Scott Jurgens

U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II invited Dr. Bill Andrews (the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s Biotechnology Advisor), Bobby Ridge (the U.S. Transhumanist Party’s Secretary-Treasurer), and Scott Jurgens to his Second Enlightenment Salon, where they shared their thoughts on emerging life-extension research, advances in prosthetics and orthotics, philosophy of science, brain-computer interfaces, and how technologies from a variety of fields are converging to bring about a paradigm shift in the human condition – hopefully within the coming decades.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Q&A Session – October 21, 2017

U.S. Transhumanist Party Q&A Session – October 21, 2017

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Martin van der Kroon
Sean Singh
B.J. Murphy

In this interactive question-and-answer session, which occurred at 1 p.m. U.S. Pacific Time on Saturday, October 21, 2017, U.S. Transhumanist Party Officers provided an updated view of the Transhumanist Party’s projects, operations, and achievements, in response to audience questions. Because October is Longevity Month, this Q&A session had a life-extension theme but also delved into various other areas, including how to address conspiracy theories and various approaches toward diet, nutrition, and cultural norms regarding food consumption. The Q&A session has been archived on YouTube here.

The following U.S. Transhumanist Party Officers took part in this Q&A session:

– Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman
– Martin van der Kroon, Director of Recruitment
– Sean Singh, Director of Applied Innovation
– B.J. Murphy, Director of Social Media

The YouTube question/comment chat for this Q&A session has been archived here and is also provided below.

…

Read More Read More

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion on Prosthetics, Neuroscience, and the Future of Human Potential

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion on Prosthetics, Neuroscience, and the Future of Human Potential

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

Bobby Ridge

Scott Jurgens

U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II speaks with Secretary-Treasurer Bobby Ridge and Director of Applied Innovation Scott Jurgens regarding their areas of interest in research and study. Topics addressed include emerging advances in prosthetics, orthotics, 3D printing, 3D scanning, the science behind neuroplasticity, brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), artificial intelligence, and the societal implications of these technologies – including the extent to which they, combined with a universal basic income, may facilitate increased self-actualization by more people.

Conversations such as this one are prime examples of why the U.S. Transhumanist Party and the transhumanist movement are positioned to be the vanguard of the next era of our civilization, ready to rebuild it and take it to new heights, given sufficient recognition from and collaboration with the general public.

References

– Hugh Herr – “The new bionics that let us run, climb, and dance” – TED – March 2014
– LimbForge – Enable Community Foundation
– Autodesk Fusion 360
– Thingiverse
– “Metal Gear Solid 5 Inspires an Amazing Prosthetic Arm” – Kendall Ashley – Nerdist – May 23, 2016

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

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

LEAF Panel: How to Promote Longevity? ft. Drs. Aubrey de Grey, Alexandra Stolzing, Oliver Medvedik

LEAF Panel: How to Promote Longevity? ft. Drs. Aubrey de Grey, Alexandra Stolzing, Oliver Medvedik

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Keith Comito
Oliver Medvedik
Steve Hill
Elena Milova
Aubrey de Grey
Alexandra Stolzing
Alen Akhabaev

The U.S. Transhumanist Party is pleased to feature this extensive discussion, hosted by our allies at LEAF – the Life Extension Advocacy Foundation.

Description by LEAF: Dr. Alexandra Stolzing, Dr. Aubrey de Grey, Dr. Oliver Medvedik and a number of other guests discuss longevity, advocacy and rejuvenation biotechnology in an exclusive panel hosted by the Life Extension Advocacy Foundation (LEAF). This panel, moderated by LEAF president Keith Comito, talks about the latest progress in rejuvenation biotechnology and about how to engage, educate and excite the public regarding cutting-edge medicine.

Panel: Dr. Alexandra Stolzing, Dr. Aubrey de Grey, Dr. Oliver Medvedik , Elena Milova, Keith Comito, Steve Hill and Alen Akhabaev.

Subscribe to LEAF’s video channel for more.

Support LEAF’s work by becoming a “Lifespan Hero”: http://lifespan.io/hero

Panel – Artificial Intelligence & Robots: Economy of the Future or End of Free Markets? – Michael Shermer, Edward Hudgins, Zoltan Istvan, Gennady Stolyarov II, Eric Shuss

Panel – Artificial Intelligence & Robots: Economy of the Future or End of Free Markets? – Michael Shermer, Edward Hudgins, Zoltan Istvan, Gennady Stolyarov II, Eric Shuss

Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, participated in the panel discussion at FreedomFest in Las Vegas on July 21, 2017, entitled “AI & Robots: Economy of the Future or End of Free Markets?” The panelists presented a set of realistic, balanced analyses on the impact of artificial intelligence and automation.

***

For this event there was an outstanding speaker lineup, with moderator Michael Shermer, followed by Edward Hudgins, Peter Voss, Zoltan Istvan, Gennady Stolyarov II, and Eric Shuss.

***

The general focus of Mr. Stolyarov’s remarks was to dispel AI-oriented doomsaying and convey the likely survival of the capitalist economy for at least the forthcoming several decades – since narrow AI cannot automate away jobs requiring creative human judgment.

***

The video was recorded by filmmaker Ford Fischer and is reproduced with his permission.

Visit Ford Fischer’s News2Share channel here.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free by filling out our membership application form here.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook page here.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Twitter page here.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Q&A Session – July 15, 2017

U.S. Transhumanist Party Q&A Session – July 15, 2017

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
B.J. Murphy
Bobby Ridge
Scott Jurgens
Martin van der Kroon

In this interactive question-and-answer session, scheduled for 11 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on Saturday, July 15, 2017, U.S. Transhumanist Party Officers answered members’ and the public’s questions about the ongoing activities and objectives of the United States Transhumanist Party and also discussed other issues of interest that relate to emerging technologies and how to ensure the best possible future for sentient entities.

The following Officers were present for this Q&A session:

– Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman
– B.J. Murphy, Director of Social Media
– Martin van der Kroon, Director of Recruitment
– Bobby Ridge, Secretary-Treasurer
– Scott Jurgens, Director of Applied Innovation

Because of an unexpected technical difficulty, the video stream was split into two portions.

Watch Part 1 here.

Watch Part 2 here.

Join the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free by filling out our membership application form at https://goo.gl/forms/IpUjooEZjnfOFUMi2.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/USTranshumanistParty/.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Twitter page at https://twitter.com/USTranshumanist.

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Life Extension – February 18, 2017

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Life Extension – February 18, 2017

Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

Listen to and download the audio recording of this panel discussion at http://rationalargumentator.com/USTP_Life_Extension_Panel.mp3 (right-click to download).

For its second expert panel, the U.S. Transhumanist Party invited Bill Andrews, Aubrey de Grey, Ira Pastor, and Ilia Stambler to discuss life extension and the quest to reverse biological aging through science and technology.

This two-hour panel discussion, moderated by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, took place on Saturday, February 18, 2017, at 10 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time. In this interactive venue, many opportunities for fresh discourse arose on the possibility of achieving dramatically greater longevity within our lifetimes. The substance of the discussion begins at 4:25 in the recording.

Questions the panelists considered include the following:

(i) How would you characterize the current state of efforts to reverse senescence / lengthen human lifespans?
(ii) How does progress in the areas of research you have delved into compare to your expectations approximately 10 to 15 years ago?
(iii) What are the most significant challenges and obstacles that you perceive to exist in the way of achieving serious reversal of biological aging?
(iv) What key technologies and methods of delivering treatments to patients would need to be developed in order for longevity escape velocity to be affordably achieved society-wide?
(v) What political reforms and societal / attitudinal changes would you advocate to accelerate the arrival of effective treatments to reverse biological aging and lengthen lifespans?
(vi) Are you concerned about any current political trends and how they might affect the progress of research into combating biological aging?
(vii) What can laypersons who are sympathetic to your goals do in order to hasten their realization? How can the effort to defeat aging become as popular and widely supported as efforts to defeat cancer and ALS are today?
(viii) What lessons can the history of anti-aging research offer to those who seek to advocate and help achieve effective scientific breakthroughs in this area in the coming years and decades?

References

“Genetic stabilization of transthyretin, cerebrovascular disease, and life expectancy” – Paper by Louise S. Hornstrup, Ruth Frikke-Schmidt, Børge G. Nordestgaard and Anne Tybjærg-Hansen. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2013;33:1441-1447, Originally published May 15, 2013.

“Recognizing Degenerative Aging as a Treatable Medical Condition: Methodology and Policy” – Paper by Ilia Stambler. Aging and Disease.

***

Panelists

Dr. Bill Andrews is the President and CEO of Sierra Sciences – http://www.sierrasci.com/. As a scientist, athlete, and executive, he continually pushes the envelope and challenges convention. In his 35-year biotech career, he has focused the last 23 years on finding ways to extend the human lifespan and healthspan through telomere maintenance. As one of the principal discoverers of both the RNA and protein components of human telomerase, Dr. Andrews was awarded 2nd place as “National Inventor of the Year” in 1997.

Dr. Aubrey de Grey is the biomedical gerontologist who researched the idea for and founded SENS Research Foundation – http://www.sens.org/. He received his BA in Computer Science and Ph.D. in Biology from the University of Cambridge in 1985 and 2000, respectively. Dr. de Grey is Editor-in-Chief of Rejuvenation Research, is a Fellow of both the Gerontological Society of America and the American Aging Association, and sits on the editorial and scientific advisory boards of numerous journals and organizations.

Ira Pastor has 30 years of experience across multiple sectors of the pharmaceutical industry, including pharmaceutical commercialization, biotech drug development, managed care, distribution, OTC, and retail. He is the CEO of BioQuark, Inc. – http://www.bioquark.com/ – and Executive Chairman of ReAnima Advanced Biosciences – https://reanima.tech/.

Dr. Ilia Stambler is a researcher at Bar Ilan University, Israel. His research focuses on the historical and social implications of aging and life-extension research. He is the author of A History of Life-extensionism in the Twentieth Century – www.longevityhistory.com. He is actively involved in advocacy for aging and longevity research – www.longevityforall.org.

Discussion on Life-Extension Advocacy – Gennady Stolyarov II Answers Audience Questions

Discussion on Life-Extension Advocacy – Gennady Stolyarov II Answers Audience Questions

Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

 

Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, answers audience questions regarding life-extension advocacy and possibilities for broadening the reach of transhumanist and life-extensionist ideas.

While we were unable to get into contact with our intended guest, Chris Monteiro, we were nonetheless able to have a productive, wide-ranging discussion that addressed many areas of emerging technologies, as well as trends in societal attitudes towards them and related issues of cosmopolitanism, ideology, and the need for a new comprehensive philosophical paradigm of transmodernism or hypermodernism that would build off of the legacy of the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free. Apply here.

The user comments submitted contemporaneously with this discussion are presented below.

User Comments

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Artificial Intelligence – January 8, 2017

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Artificial Intelligence – January 8, 2017

Comments 3 comments

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II

The U.S. Transhumanist Party’s first expert discussion panel, hosted in conjunction with the Nevada Transhumanist Party, asked panelists to consider emerging developments in artificial intelligence.

The panel took place on Sunday, January 8, 2017, at 10 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time.

Key questions addressed include the following:

(i) What do you think will be realistic, practical applications of artificial intelligence toward improving human lives during the next 5 years?
(ii) Are you genuinely concerned about existential risk stemming from AI, or do you think those concerns are exaggerated / overhyped (or do you have some intermediate position on these issues)?
(iii) On the other hand, do you perceive significant tendencies in contemporary culture to overhype the positive / functional capabilities of AI?
(iv) How can individuals, particularly laypersons, become better at distinguishing between genuine scientific and technological advances in AI and hype / fear-mongering?
(v) What is your techno-optimistic vision for how AI can help improve the future of human (and transhuman) beings?
(vi) What are your thoughts regarding prognostications of an AI-caused technological Singularity? Are they realistic?

Panelists

Zak Field is an international speaker, consultant, games designer, and entrepreneur based in Norwich, UK. A rising thought leader in Mixed Realities (VR/AR), Zak speaks and consults on Mixed Realities-related topics like gamification, Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), Robotics, Artificial Intelligences (AIs), and the Internet of Things (IoT).

In 2015, Zak partnered with Futurist Miss Metaverse as co-founder of BodAi, a robotics and AI company developing Bods, lifelike humanoid robot companions made accessible through a unique system that accommodates practical 21st-Century business and lifestyle needs.

David J. Kelley is the CTO for the tech venture capital firm Tracy Hall LLC, focused on companies that contribute to high-density sustainable community technologies, as well as the principal scientist with Artificial General Intelligence Inc. David also volunteers as the Chairman of the Transhuman National Committee board. David’s career has been built on technology trends and bleeding each research primarily around the capitalization of product engineering where those new products can be brought to market and made profitable. David’s work on Artificial Intelligence in particular – the ICOM research project with AGI Inc. – is focused on emotion-based systems that are designed to work around human constraints and help remove the ‘human’ element from the design of AI systems, including military applications for advanced self-aware cognitive systems that do not need human interaction.

Hiroyuki Toyama is a Japanese doctoral student at the Department of Psychology in University of Jyväskylä, Finland. His doctoral study has focused on emotional intelligence (EI) in the context of personality and health psychology. In particular, he has attempted to shed light on the way in which trait EI is related to subjective well-being and physiological health. He has a great interest in the future development of artificial EI on the basis of contemporary theory of EI.

Mark Waser is Chief Technology Officer of the Digital Wisdom Institute and D161T4L W15D0M Inc., organizations devoted to the ethical implementation of advanced technologies for the benefit of all. He has been publishing data science research since 1983 and developing commercial AI software since 1984, including an expert system shell and builder for Citicorp, a neural network to evaluate thallium cardiac images for Air Force pilots and, recently, mobile front-ends for cloud-based AI and data science. He is particularly interested in safe ethical architectures and motivational systems for intelligent machines (including humans). As an AI ethicist, he has presented at numerous conferences and published articles in international journals. His current projects can be found at the Digital Wisdom website – http://wisdom.digital/

Demian Zivkovic is CEO+Structure of Ascendance Biomedical, president of the Institute of Exponential Sciences, as well as a scholar of several scientific disciplines. He has been interested in science, particularly neuropsychology, astronomy, and biology from a very young age. His greatest passions are cognitive augmentation and life extension, two endeavors he remains deeply committed to, to this day. He is also very interested in applications of augmented reality and hyperreality, which he believes have incredible potential for improving our lives.

He is a strong believer in interdisciplinarity as a paradigm for understanding the world. His studies span artificial intelligence, innovation science, and business, which he has studied at the University of Utrecht. He also has a background in psychology, which he has previously studied at the Saxion University of Applied Sciences. Demian has co-founded Ascendance Biomedical, a Singapore-based company focused on cutting edge biomedical services. Demian believes that raising capital and investing in technology and education is the best route to facilitate societal change. As a staunch proponent of LGBT rights and postgenderism, Demian believes advanced technologies can eventually provide a definite solution for sex/gender-related issues in society.