Cosmism was originated in Russia more than a hundred years ago. That was an esoteric futuristic philosophy about post-humanity, technological immortality, resurrection and cosmic expansion. Early cosmists proposed the idea of decompaction (lightweighting) of the human body, that eventually wouldn’t need an atmosphere and would be powered directly by solar energy. They call it “radiant humanity” – a perfect society of highly moral and super-conscious beings merging and colonizing the whole Universe.
Modern Cosmism brings to the original doctrine the ontological foundation, a scientific structure and a deeper comprehension of possible technology aims to create in the future a new synthetic reality where the concepts of truth, consciousness, freedom and happiness will be deeply revised.
The conference will review the critical question about a meeting with advanced extraterrestrial civilizations and suggest few hypothesis about their “eerie silence”. We will touch some related problems in cosmology, and astrophysics such as the shape and future of the Universe, black hole information paradox, multidimensional space, dark energy and interpretation of quantum mechanics. Are they a separate arrow of time? Are there exceptions to the principle of causality?
Like no other area of philosophy and technology before, Modern Cosmism raises fundamental questions about the post human nature and how it will be connected to the reality. Is the structure of reality included the consciousness? Is a non biological hardware can support the consciousness? How we can define Cosmic Evolution and what is the role of intelligent life?
The conference will address important philosophical issues that arise with the future design of artificial consciousness, mind uploading and cyber-immortality. How will our concepts of subjectivity, perception, and morality change, if we will live in virtual reality of mega-consciousness environment where individuals can experience multiple presence, personality and have no gender. Will we be able to create super intelligent agents with consciousness and feelings? What are the limits of artificial capacities or functional simulations we should create? Could we enhance our own humanity by genetically redesign our nature?
Our keynote and plenary speakers are well-known international protagonists of Cosmism, Transhumanism and interdisciplinary researchers. Their lectures will discuss the most important current issues of Modern Cosmism from the point of view of philosophy, technology, ethics, robotics, psychology, and anthropology.
Ben Goertzel Ph.D. is the author of “Cosmists Manifesto”. He is Chief Scientist of financial prediction firm Aidyia Holdings; Chairman of AI software company Novamente LLC, which is a privately held software company, and bioinformatics company Biomind LLC, which is a company that provides advanced AI for bioinformatic data analysis (especially microarray and SNP data); Chairman of the Artificial General Intelligence Society and the OpenCog Foundation; Vice Chairman of futurist nonprofit Humanity+; Scientific Advisor of biopharma firm Genescient Corp.; Advisor to the Singularity University; Research Professor in the Fujian Key Lab for Brain-Like Intelligent Systems at Xiamen University, China; and general Chair of the Artificial General Intelligence conference series.
Giulio Prisco is former senior manager in the European Space Agency, Prisco is a physicist and computer scientist. He served as a member on the board of directors of World Transhumanist Association, of which he was temporarily executive director, and continues to serve as a member on the board of directors of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies and of the Associazione Italiana Transumanisti. He is also a founding member of the Order of Cosmic Engineers, and the Turing Church, fledgling organizations which claim that the benefits of a technological singularity, which would come from accelerating change, should or would be viable alternatives to the promises of major religious groups.
James J. Hughes Ph.D. served as the executive director of the World Transhumanist Association (which has since changed its name to Humanity+) from 2004 to 2006, and currently serves as the executive director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, which he founded with Nick Bostrom. He also produces the syndicated weekly public affairs radio talk show program Changesurfer Radio and contributed to the Cyborg Democracy blog. Hughes’ book Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future was published by Westview Press in November 2004
This symposium is conceived and designed to explore Nietzsche’s ideas on science and technology. While critiquing modern science and its foundation in Greek thought, Nietzsche envisions a new way of ‘knowing’ and doing science, which can be found in such notions as ‘gay science.’ Notions such as the will to power and eternal recurrence have been developed partly in response to contemporary science. Some of the proposed topics to explore are: Socratic rationality, modern science and objectivity, Nietzsche’s study of sciences in his own times, intuitive thinking vs. abstract thinking, art vs. science, cognitive knowing vs. knowing in general (Erkennen vs. Wissen), Nietzsche on mostly scientific schools of philosophy such as atomism, materialism and positivism, Nietzsche’s influence on science and scientists, and gai saber as a new way of knowing.
Call for Papers: See details here (30 September deadline)
|
When
|
Saturday, November 7, 2015, 2:00-6:00 PM |
|
Where
|
Babbio Center, Room 122 Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, New Jersey |
|
RSVP
|
Registration and further info: Please contact by sending an email to Luke Trusso at trussol@nietzschecircle.com |
Theorizing the Web 2015
April 15–16 in New York City
Venue: the Museum of the Moving Image, in Queens
Abstract submission deadline: 11:59 pm (EST), January 24, 2016
Theorizing the Web is an annual event featuring critical, conceptual discussions about technology and society. We began in 2011 to advance a different kind of conversation about the Web, one which recognizes that to theorize technology is also to theorize the self and the social world. Given that technology is inseparable from society, the ideas and approaches that have historically been used to describe social reality must not be abandoned. Instead, these historical approaches must be applied, reworked, and reassessed in light of the developing digitization of social life.
We are now seeking presentations for our sixth annual event, which will take place on April 15 and 16 at the Museum of the Moving Image in New York City. We invite submissions that engage with issues of social power, inequality, vulnerability, and justice from a diverse range of perspectives. Theorizing the Web is not an event just for academics or “tech” thinkers: activists, journalists, technologists, writers, artists, and folks who don’t identify as any of the above are all encouraged to submit a presentation abstract.
We are looking for abstracts that feature clear conceptual arguments and that avoid jargon in favor of more broadly accessible critical insight. Submissions on any topic are welcome, but some specific topics we’d like to address this year include:
- moving images, gifs, video, live streaming, copcams
- social photography, filters, selfies, posing
- race, racism, race posturing, ethnicity, #BlackLivesMatter
- sex, gender, feminism, queer and trans* politics
- sexuality, sexting, sex work, consent
- mental health, illness, neurodiversity
- (dis)ability and ableism
- non-Western Web(s), language barriers, hegemony, globalization
- social movements, protest, revolution, social control, censorship
- hate, harassment, intimidation, trolling, bullying, resistance
- pain, sickness, loss, death and dying
- parenting, birth, life course
- bodies, cyborgs, wearables, trans/post-humanism, bots
- the self, identity, subjectivity, (in)authenticity, impression management
- privacy, publicity, surveillance
- encryption, anonymity, pseudonymity
- presence, proximity, face-to-face, (dis)connection, loneliness
- capitalism, Silicon Valley, venture capital
- crowd funding, micro currencies, crypto currencies, blockchains
- work, labor, “gig” or “sharing” economy, “Uber for”, exploitation
- transportation, self-driving cars, drones, cities
- code, affordances, infrastructure, critical design
- knowledge, “big” data, data science, algorithms, positivism
- memes, virality, metrics, (micro-)celebrity, fame, attention, click-baiting
- underground markets, child porn, revenge porn, the extra-legal web
- fiction, literature, visual narratives, storytelling, self-publishing, fandoms
- time, (a)temporality, ephemerality, history, memory, right to forget
- games, gaming, gamification, free-to-play, fantasy sports, gambling
- elections, campaigns, presidential politics
Successful abstracts will address intersections of gender, race, class, age, sexual orientation, disability, and other forms of inequality as they pertain to any of the topics above.
Abstract submissions should be 300 to 500 words (only the first 500 words will be reviewed). Arguments should be scaled to fit 12-minute panel presentations, and titles should appeal to a general audience. Your submission should not only describe your topic and question but also summarize your thinking and your conclusions. Good abstracts will provide a specific, original argument with clear stakes. Please do not ask questions in your abstract without answering them, or state “I will make an argument about X” without making the argument.
Note that, because Theorizing the Web deeply values public engagement, we expect all TtW16 presentations to be both comprehensible and rewarding to people from outside the presenter’s specific areas of expertise.
Abstract submissions are due by 11:59 EST on January 24, 2016, and can be submitted through our form located at theorizingtheweb.org/submit. The TtW16 selection committee will blindly review all submissions. Space is limited, and selection is competitive. Our acceptance rate is typically 20% to 35%.
Please note that we have a separate submissions process for art and alternative-format presentations. If you would like to participate in some way that isn’t giving a spoken presentation (e.g., displaying a piece of art; giving a performance; doing something else entirely), please use this separate submission form.
Registration for Theorizing the Web remains “pay what you can,” and we ask that you donate whatever amount you deem fair or can afford (minimum $1). More information (including the registration form) can be found at theorizingtheweb.tumblr.com/2016/registration.
Stay tuned to theorizingtheweb.org for announcements about invited panels, and mail us at theorizingtheweb@gmail.com if you would like to help out with our all-volunteer event in any way.
The conference hashtag is #TtW16.
<3
This week will explore Robot Ethics, sound strange? Not really, when you consider how we treat ‘human’ looking robots might influence how we treat each other. Things get even more interesting when we remember that some robots will be designed to be consciousness. What that means is still to be determined, but the technology is move fast.
Instead of reading, this week we’ll list to a Podcast by Sam Harris.
Please remember to bring $3 for the Setauket Neighborhood house.
New technologies increasingly mediate our interactions with each other and the institutions on which we depend. What special moral problems do these new technologies pose? Are existing moral categories and practices up to the task? For the April edition of Philosophy in the Library, three philosophers–Joanna Smolenski, Tony Doyle, and Samir Chopra–present short talks on the ethics of ongoing developments in genetic engineering, big data, and artificial intelligence, followed by a Q&A with the audience.
Part 1: Editing the Genome–How CRISPR/CAS9 is Changing the Game
Joanna Smolenski of CUNY Graduate Center discusses CRISPR technology, and how it can be used to modify both somatic cells and the germline (i.e., reproductive cells). Our talk will consider the pros and cons of such modification, as well as unique ethical challenges it could present. For instance, could we ever legitimately consent to the editing of our germlines? Ultimately, it would seem that our existing consent protocols are inadequate to ensure robust informed consent to germline editing, and so we should hold off on such interventions until we have a better understanding of their downstream impacts.
Part 2: Big Data & the Future of Privacy
Tony Doyle of Hunter College considers how big data, with its massive collection, thorough aggregation, predictive analysis, and lightning dissemination of personal information has produced previously unfathomable benefits and insights. Analysis is replacing intuition; the gut is yielding to algorithm. However, as our digital wake ripples out, big data is putting privacy on the run with unnerving inferences about our preferences, commitments, aspirations, and vulnerabilities. How we are sorted by big data’s analytics can determine the opportunities that come our way: a reasonable mortgage, a good job, or a decent apartment. Privacy matters because it promotes autonomy, that is, our ability to make choices, free of coercion or manipulation, in the light of our considered conception of the good life. But ultimately, is privacy doomed to be a lost cause?
Part 3: Artifacts & Agency
Samir Chopra of Brooklyn College considers how thinking about the agency–both moral and legal–of artifacts can be helpful in thinking about the puzzles that artificial intelligence creates for us. Thinking about agency lets us think about actions and powers and ends–the kinds of things we should be thinking of, in considering how to ‘fit’ AI into our world.
https://www.facebook.com/events/207736016496883/
There are numerous books about the philosophy of science, but relatively few focus on the philosophy of engineering. Why has the philosophy of engineering been undeveloped in contrast to science? While many engineers prefer to build new things rather than philosophize, a key explanation for the neglect of engineering is an unjustified misconception about the importance of abstract theoretical and scientific knowledge versus engineering knowledge.
The speaker will talk about his experiences in engineering and policy, to show how these philosophical ideas shape engineering, which in turn shapes the world around us. Philosophical claims about engineering date back to at least Socrates, who argued for the value of abstract, theoretical knowledge. The history of U.S. science policy based its post-World War II funding policies off of the linear model of innovation, where advances in engineering are assumed to be traceable to earlier advances in science. Historians and philosophers have shown many of these philosophical views are wrong-headed. In particular, Vincenti’s What Engineers Know and How They Know It illuminates the richness of engineering knowledge, showing that it is not merely applied science. After reviewing how these philosophical ideas manifest in the real world of engineering, the presentation will show how a better understanding of what engineers know also offers a way to better push engineering towards more ethical ends.
Zachary Pirtle recently co-chaired the 2018 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering and Technology. He has worked as an engineer to support exploration systems for human space flight, and was previously a Fulbright scholar to Mexico and a Mirzayan science and technology policy graduate fellow at the National Academy of Engineering.
Co-presented with Brooklyn Public Philosophers.
In Philosophy in the Library, philosophers from around the world tackle the big questions. In February, we hear from Ethan Hallerman.
None of us today can avoid reflecting on the way our thoughts and habits relate to the tools we use, but interest in how technologies reshape us is both older and broader than contemporary concerns around privacy, distraction, addiction, and isolation. For the past hundred years, scholars have investigated the historical role of everyday technologies in making new forms of experience and senses of selfhood possible, from at least as early as the invention of writing. In recent years, philosophers have considered how our understanding of agency and mental states should be revised in light of the role that the technical environment plays in our basic activities. Here, we will look at how some models of the mind illuminate the results of the philosophy of technology to clarify the relationship between technology and the self.
Ethan Hallerman is a doctoral student in philosophy at Stony Brook University. He lives in New York where he prowls the sewers at night, looking for his father.