Posterity and Embodiment

W. Edmundson
{"title":"Posterity and Embodiment","authors":"W. Edmundson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1144116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our concern for the future and our conception of human nature have both a philosophical dimension and a public policy dimension. Which would be the better way to spend our next dollar: on life-extension or on artificial intelligence? Manned space-exploration or robotic space-exploration? Answering such public-policy questions involves confronting some deep philosophical mysteries. If you were only concerned for your own survival, would you prefer to have your brain transplanted into another body, or have your brain scanned and its information realized in the hardware of a durable, Turing-testable robot? Would it be better to live one long life without offspring, or a short life leaving generations of descendants? If personal superlongevity and normal fertility would lead to overcrowding, which should we choose? Does considering \"existential threats\" change how we should answer? This article explores the conceptual and empirical interdependencies of these seemingly disjoint questions.","PeriodicalId":431450,"journal":{"name":"Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy","volume":"106 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1144116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our concern for the future and our conception of human nature have both a philosophical dimension and a public policy dimension. Which would be the better way to spend our next dollar: on life-extension or on artificial intelligence? Manned space-exploration or robotic space-exploration? Answering such public-policy questions involves confronting some deep philosophical mysteries. If you were only concerned for your own survival, would you prefer to have your brain transplanted into another body, or have your brain scanned and its information realized in the hardware of a durable, Turing-testable robot? Would it be better to live one long life without offspring, or a short life leaving generations of descendants? If personal superlongevity and normal fertility would lead to overcrowding, which should we choose? Does considering "existential threats" change how we should answer? This article explores the conceptual and empirical interdependencies of these seemingly disjoint questions.
后代与化身
我们对未来的关注和我们对人性的概念既有哲学层面的,也有公共政策层面的。把我们的下一美元花在延长寿命和人工智能上,哪个更好?载人太空探索还是机器人太空探索?回答这样的公共政策问题需要面对一些深奥的哲学奥秘。如果你只关心你自己的生存,你是愿意把你的大脑移植到另一个身体上,还是愿意扫描你的大脑,把它的信息存储在一个耐用的、图灵测试机器人的硬件里?是活得长而无子嗣好,还是活得短而有后代好?如果个人超长寿命和正常生育能力会导致过度拥挤,我们应该选择哪一个?考虑“生存威胁”会改变我们应该如何回答吗?本文探讨了这些看似脱节的问题在概念上和经验上的相互依存关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信