[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7urZe6r5CGU 600 400] References
Ford, P. (2008) Hacking the Mind: Existential Enhancement in the Ghost in the Shell” In Shapshay, S. (Ed) Bioethics Through Film, Johns Hopkins University Press.
Viewing entries in
Bioethics
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRqMLNrZtg4 600 400] References
Cox White, B. & Jollimore, T. (2008) Multiplicity: A Study of Cloning and Personal Identity” In Shapshay, S. (Ed) Bioethics Through Film, Johns Hopkins University Press.
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLlHerOMXSI 600 400] References
Coleman, S. & Hanley, R. (2008) Homo Sapiens, Robots and Persons in I Robot and Bicentennial Man” In Shapshay, S. (Ed) Bioethics Through Film, Johns Hopkins University Press.
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxJr09u10co 600 400] References
Arp, R. (2008) “‘I Give Them What they Want—Either an Orphan or an Abortion’: The Cider House Rules and the Abortion Issue” In Shapshay, S. (Ed) Bioethics Through Film, Johns Hopkins University Press.
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfMSU3uK38A&feature=related 600 400]
Transhuman minds? Is cognitive enhancement a human right? Tuesday 11th March 2008, 3-6pm
The Royal Society of Medicine, London W1G 0AE
The development of cognitive enhancement has meant the phrase "give your brain a boost" now brings with it a range of connotations which have never been experienced thus far in human history. The convergence of nano-, bio- and information technology with cognitive science promises many interesting forms of cognitive enhancement. Neurobiology is expanding our understanding of how the brain works in association with neural systems and information technology is providing vastly improved signal processing capabilities for use in neurobiological research. Accompanying such advances, cognitive neuroscience is pushing back the traditional boundaries of cognitive psychology to broaden understanding with regard to the interaction between brain structure, function and cognition.
The prospect of being able to enhance human cognition presents a nexus of questions associated with future ambitions, hopes and concerns. Should individuals be allowed the freedom and the right to decide for themselves how best to use enhancement technologies? Is government intervention and regulation required in order for both individuals and society to thrive through the use of enhancement technologies? Or does the very notion of human essence prohibit enhancement in all its forms?
BioCentre invites you to an assessment of what cognitive enhancement promises and how best to harness its potential informed by leading specialists in the field.
Speakers will include:
Professor Ruud ter Meulen Professor of Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol
Dr. Anders Sandberg James Martin Research Fellow, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University
Dr. Daniela Cerqui Social and Cultural anthropologist, University of Lausanne, Switzerland
Dr. Donald Fitzmaurice (tbc) Director of ePlanet Ventures, former Professor of Nanotechnology, University College Dublin
The discussion will be chaired by Professor Nigel M de S Cameron, Executive Chairman of BioCentre: Centre for Bioethics & Public Policy.
RSVPs are required. Please include your name and the organisation that you represent in your response. There is no charge for the event.
To RSVP:
e: info@bioethics.ac.uk / t: 0207 227 4706
A new site to archive the online clips that are about issues in Bioethics, broadly conceived. http://www.bioethicsport.org.uk
I think I'll soon need help with this one.
Today, I attended FACT's seminar for artists and professionals, based around their Human Futures exhibition. The conversations were broadly about the practice of art processes and how we should proceed with artistic undertakings. One of the most interesting conversations I had was with Olivier Goulet who indicated he was very interested in my view. He immediaely reminded me of Alfredo, of Irene and Alfredo. I want to hook them up together, for Irene to sell his clothes in her 'sustainable clothing' shop in Barcelona.
We talked a lot about his work and I was very interested in how his clothing made from synthetic human skin were received by audiences. He explained that the removal of the word 'human' from publicity led to quite different responses, all of which were really fascinating. The clothes he makes are beautiful; incredibly stylish, trendy and wearable. He's performing tomorrow night and we'll hope to see him, but here's SkinBag: http://www.skinbag.net/
my kind of event, why aren't i going!?
SciBarCamp
Table of contents
SciBarCamp is a gathering of scientists, artists, and technologists for a weekend of talks and discussions. It will take place at Hart House at the University of Toronto on the weekend of March 15-16, with an opening reception on the evening of March 14. The goal is to create connections between science, entrepreneurs and local businesses, and arts and culture. The themes are:
- The edge of science (eg, synthetic biology, quantum gravity, cognitive science)
- The edge of technology (eg, mobile web, ambient computing, nanotechnology, web 2.0)
- Science 2.0 (open access, changing models of publication and collaboration, scientific software)
- Scientific literacy and public engagement (eg, one laptop per child project, policy and science, technology as legislation, enfranchising the poor, the young, the old)
- The interactions of science, art and culture: Scientists and artists as partners in the continuing evolution of the culture.
In the tradition of BarCamps, otherwise known as "unconferences", (see BarCamp.org for more information), the program is decided by the participants at the beginning of the meeting, in the opening reception. Presentations and discussion topics can be proposed here or on the opening night. SciBarCamp will require active participation; while not everybody will present or lead a discussion, everybody will be expected to contribute substantially - this will help make it a really creative event.
The talks will be informal and interactive; to encourage this, speakers who wish to give PowerPoint presentations will have ten minutes to present, while those without will have twenty minutes. Around half of the time will be dedicated to small group discussions on topics suggested by the participants. The social events and meals will make it easy to meet people from different fields and industries. Our venue, Hart House, is a congenial space with plenty of informal areas to work or talk, and there will be free wireless access throughout.
Our goals are:
- Igniting new projects, collaborations, business opportunities, and further events.
- Intellectual stimulation and good conversation.
- Integrating science into Toronto's cultural, entrepreneurial, and intellectual activities.
- Prototyping a model that can be easily duplicated elsewhere.
Attendance is free, but there is only space for around 100 people, so please register by sending an email to Jen Dodd (dodd.jen@gmail.com) with your name and contact details. Please include a link to your blog or your organization's webpage that we can display with your name on the participants list at www.SciBarCamp.org.
Sponsorship
Thanks to our sponsors so far!
- Hart House
- Microsoft
- Mindtouch
- Scimatic Software
We're looking for sponsorship for SciBarCamp. If you're interested in sponsoring, please contact Jen Dodd (dodd.jen@gmail.com, +1 (519) 572 2275).
Knowledge politics delineates the field of activities designed and Implemented for the purpose of monitoring, regulating or even controlling the Production and application of new knowledge gained through science and technology. Such activities are not new but have gained importance in the course of the 1990s with the rise of biotechnology and life sciences more generally. In view of its promise to enhance human performance through even greater interventions in the body, mind, and environment, converging technologies promises to become another virulent field of knowledge politics. Knowledge politics with respect to converging technologies is evidently One of those fields that is difficult to engage in - even as a researcher - without becoming enthralled in normative argumentation. The argument in favour of knowledge politics is that contemporary (and future) knowledge is intrinsically different from knowledge of earlier times because it will enable us to manipulate not only the human and built environment but also ourselves and fellow human beings. Therefore, new knowledge entails a potential for physical and social engineering that can be neither dismissed nor relayed to ad-hoc regulatory procedures, but rather calls for the development of new processes and tools. Those arguing against knowledge politics point to the latter's inextricable tendency towards the policing of science and research, thus threatening to arrest progress, discovery and learning. At the symbolic level, knowledge politics represents the modern version of an existentialist quest for the meaning of life. As a social fact, it represents the contemporary edition of the conflict about the role, extent and scope of social regulation.
The aim of this workshop is twofold: to reflect on the meaning and Implications of knowledge politics in general; and to draw out theoretical Conclusions about how knowledge politics in the field of life sciences and converging Technologies can be expected to impact on science and research, on the one hand, and on democratic deliberative institutional practices, on the other hand. Some of the thematic areas to be explored are:
• Forms of governance and regulation for converging technologies (principles of governance; regulatory frameworks; deliberative processes) • Social and political contexts of knowledge politics (social, economic and political conditions; anticipatory governance; scope of influence; ethical considerations) • Science, industry and political interfaces (knowledge transfer; public-private ventures; economic infrastructure) • Practicing knowledge politics (risk assessment of converging technologies; the role of expert committees; engaging civil society; democratizing science)
Theoretical papers and papers based on empirical research are welcome From academics working in the field and practitioners from civil society, industry and public policy. Comparisons of knowledge policies and politics across scientific fields or countries are encouraged.
Submission Details: Abstracts should be at least 500 words in length and Be submitted by the 25th January, 2008 electronically at info@converging-technologies.org. Authors should indicate their name(s) and the title of their paper and include a short biographical note (75 words) with coordinates (institutional affiliation, telephone, fax, and e-mail). Full papers (at least 6,000 words in length) of selected participants will be due by the 15th April, 2008. Publication of the conference proceedings is foreseen. Financial assistance for travel expenditures will be available in select cases.
The RSA event last week was a whirlwind through so many different technologcical futures that tying everything together was quite a challenge. We roved from Web 2.0 to artificially intelligent robot soldiers in a matter of hours.
This week, Craig Venter has been working the UK media to its fullest in what seems a whistlestop tour over to convey his work in the area of synthetic biology. In the UK, news about this broke first in the Guardian on Saturday 6th October. Venter's website promptly indicated that the newspaper was slightly ahead of itself by announcing this work, stressing that publications are not yet in place. It seems now that they were only 3 weeks ahead of themselves as Venter has clearly broken the news on this in the fullest sense. While he still stresses that this work is futuristic and unlikely to give rise to any new life forms within his lifetime, the rhetoric of promise is interesting. Last night on BBC's Hard Talk and on Newsnight earlier in the week, he emphasised the importance of the research for environmental sustainability. This cannot be coincidental, but appears as a decisive, partial rebranding of gentic science. So, here we have a clear handling of the media taking place drawing on persuasive rhetorics about the long-term benefit of experimental science. He talked about modifying humans to ensure they can survive in climates where greater carbonis in the atmosphere. Nice idea. It's all plausible, but we should still be wary of this utilization of discourses to co-opt political support for science.
I'm sure Venter's work over this period will be the subject of many studies on science communication. Things seem much more sophisticated than they were 10 years ago, when the Human Genome was nearing completion. The ante has been upped, so to speak. Now the scientists are much more in tune with how to get the message out. I could not help but feel that the Guardian story was a first litmus test for public opinion. We've not seen the last of this yet.
The launch of the ENSN takes place in London next month on 12th and 13th November. I'll be there as will Alex Mauron who's speaking in the final plenary. [Alex and I have written a couple of papers together with Bengt Kayser.]
Programme:
Neurosocieties: the rise and impact of the new brain sciences November 12 & 13, 2007 Regent’s College Conference Centre, Inner Circle, Regent’s Park, London Monday, November 12, 2007 9.00 – 9.30 Conference Registration (Regent’s College Conference Centre, Main Lobby) 9.30-10.00 (Room D06) Welcome: Neurosocieties: the rise and impact of the new brain sciences Professor Nikolas Rose, Director, BIOS Centre for the study of Bioscience, Biomedicine, Biotechnology and Society, London School of Economics 10.00-12.00 (Room D06) Plenary One – Public health and the politics of the neurosciences Professor Kent Woods, CEO, Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency “Regulation of medicines in a changing world: the challenges of neuropharmacology” Professor Matilde Leonardi, Neurological Institute Carlo Besta, Italy “Neurosciences and neuropolitics: the challenge of brain disorders” 12.00– 1.00 (Room D05) Lunch 1.00-3.00 (Room D06) Plenary Two – Neuroeconomies: markets, choice and the distribution of neurotechnologies Zack Lynch, Executive Director, Neurotechnology Industry Organization “The Global Neurotechnology Industry 2007 and Beyond” Dr. Philippe Pignarre, University of Paris; Publisher, Les Empêcheurs de penser en rond “The birth of neuroeconomy” 3.00 to 3.30 Coffee Break 3.30 to 5.30 (Room D06) Plenary Three - Sources of the neurochemical self: consciousness, personhood and difference Professor Alexandre Mauron, University of Geneva Dr. Ilina Singh, BIOS Centre, LSE 5.30 Wine Reception & Conference Dinner Herringham Hall, Regent’s Conference Centre Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9.30 – 10.00 Coffee and Tea 10.00-11.00 Workshop One: Public health and the politics of the neurosciences (Room D05) Discussants: Dr. Andreas Roepstorff, University of Aarhus Dr. Joao Arriscado Nunes, University of Coimbra, Portugal Workshop Two: Neuroeconomies: markets, choice and the distribution of neurotechnologies (Room D06) Discussants: Dr. Paul Martin, University of Nottingham Dr. Ilpo Helen, University of Helsinki 11.00-12.00 Workshop Three: Sources of the neurochemical self: consciousness, personhood and difference (Room D05) Discussants: Professor Kenneth Hugdahl, University of Bergen Dr. Cordula Nitsch, University of Basel Workshop Four: Neuroscience and Society: Future Directions in Europe (Room D06) Discussants: Professor Trudy Dehue, University of Groningen Professor Ilse Kryspin-Exner, University of Vienna 12.00-1.00 Lunch 1.0 to 3.00 (Room D06) Plenary Four – Neuroscience and Society: Future Directions in Europe Professor Steven Rose, Open University “Future Directions in Neuroscience: a twenty year timescale” Professor Alain Ehrenberg “Brain, Mind and Society: the Threefold cord” 3.00-3.30 Closing Remarks Tea and Coffee served
After having met Jim McVeigh and Michael Evans-Brown in Aarhus a month or so back, I'm now substituting for Julian Savulescu at their meet on Friday. looks like an interesting conference.... http://pied-conference.net/
"A one-day symposium about creative visual practices at the frontiersof biomedicine organised by the Medical Museion at the University of Copenhagen in partnership with The Schools of Visual Arts, The Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts."
http://www.ku.dk/Satsning/BioCampus/artandbiomedicine/index.asp
This week, I've arranged to give a session at the IoN in Stirling during the first week of August. Earlier this year, I met its CEO Ottilia Saxl, as part of the NanoBio-RAISE project. I also anticipate that the work of the new PhD studentship we advertized will be closely connected to the IoN. It's a fascinating enterprise and I look forward to being there to talk about all that is new media and public engagement.
I just discovered the new book series titled 'Critical Posthumanisms' published by the Dutch company Rodopi. The forthcoming volumes look very interesting. More information here: ISSN 1872-0943
General Editors: Ivan Callus, University of Malta Stefan Herbrechter, Trinity and All Saints, University of Leeds
Editorial Board: Neil Badmington, Cardiff University Timothy Bhati Manuela Rossini, University of Amsterdam Joanna Zylinska, University of London
‘Posthumanism’ may be understood as the paradigm that succeeds humanism, but also as the study of what might follow humanity's ends. After prompting an initial sense of novelty and shock, posthumanism has become a discourse whose unsettling anticipations of the future and timely critiques of the present have firmly established themselves within the academy. Posthumanism’s concerns—typically relating to the impacts of bio- and digital technology on body, mind, culture, and epistemology—are now part of mainstream debate within the humanities and within interdisciplinary explorations of the integrity of the human.
Critical Posthumanisms is a new series focusing on the exciting rise of posthumanism and its probable directions. It makes available studies by scholars whose perspectives on the posthuman vary in important and interesting ways, and should serve as a crucial point of reference for anybody working within the field.
Books within the series provide:
(a) analyses of the histories, idioms, and canons of different “posthumanisms”; (b) discussion of the main thinkers and trends of posthumanism; (b) alternative formulations of posthumanism, which downplay the centrality of technology; (c) philosophical and political critiques of the "prosthesization" of the human; (d) cross-disciplinary takes on posthumanism, particularly those allowing the humanities to engage with areas like Artificial Intelligence, Biotechnology, Virtual Reality, etc.
Editorial Address: Dr Ivan Callus Department of English Faculty of Arts University of Malta Msida MSD06 Malta
Email: ivan.callus@um.edu.mt
Dr Stefan Herbrechter Department of Media, Film and Culture Trinity and All Saints Brownberrie Lane Horsforth LEEDS LS18 5HD UK
Email : s.herbrechter@leedstrinity.ac.uk
---------------------------- Forthcoming volumes:
Volume 1. Stefan Herbrechter and Ivan Callus. Critical Posthumanisms: An Introduction.
Volume 2. Gloria Lauri-Lucente. Mutatas Formas: Posthumanism and Transembodiment in Ovid, Dante, and Petrarch.
Volume 3. Thorsten Botz-Bornstein. Virtual Reality: The Last Human Narrative?
The editors are also looking to commission further monographs in the areas described above.
Ralph Miliband Programme Global Risks and Politics in the 21st Century lectureGlobalisation, Biotechnology and Democracy Date: Tuesday 5 June 2007 Time: 6.30-8pm Venue: Old Theatre, Old Building Speakers: Professor Hilary Rose, Professor Steven Rose Chair: Professor David Held
Biotechnology, globalisation and democracy are power charged. Biotechnology promoted by giant corporations within neo-liberal globalisation makes possible the manipulation of life itself. Democracy and the governance of science face a new dilemma, as new social movements envision different relations between society, science and nature. This lecture explores an alternative to the current world order.
Hilary Rose is a visiting professor at City University. Steven Rose is a neurobiologist, professor and chair of the Department of Biology, and director of Brain and Behaviour Research Group at the Open University.
This event is free and open to all with no ticket required. Entry is on a first come, first served basis.
For more information email events@lse.ac.uk or call 020 7955 6043.
For more information about the Ralph Miliband Programme: www.lse.ac.uk/collections/miliband/
Project meeting where I spoke about the ethics of genetic testing and selecting for enhancement. This work develops ideas that have arisen from a number of recent projects, including the paper I wrote with Emma Rich and my Master degree dissertation in Medical Law. The title of this presentation was 'Is Genetic Selection for Sport a Good idea?'
A link to the presentation powerpoint.