Thus far, one has established a basic model of society with which to identify failures in guaranteeing and maximising satisfaction and stability of society. Summarily, society, comprised of population, labour, capital and agreement, and its economy, the relations between them, pursues civilization as a means of guaranteed and optimal satisfaction, productivity and profit of the citizenry, thereby ensuring sustainability, referred to as civilization. Failures in achieving civilization vary but are considered fundamentally the fault of human faculty and its inabilities. Supplementary development of human faculty lacks adequate improvement to ensure civilization, and so one considers Transhumanism and the augmentation of human faculty to advance further. In this respect, one combines the organic with the synthetic beyond mere mixed labour and, in doing so, changes organic labour to synthetic, as previously stated. As such, citizens become synthetic labourers and, providing adequate increase to their economic utility, retain their solvency, thus, hypothetically, allowing for civilization.
Before applying Transhumanism as a solution to societal problems, one must detail the principles required in establishing it. To do so, one considers the central ideal of this philosophy and extends this to encompass the entirety of an economy, drawing principles from the philosophy’s imposition onto a civil contract. At its most fundamental, Transhumanism aims to augment human faculties beyond what is humanly possible. Improving physical, mental and autonomous faculties in such a manner is nontrivial; physical and mental faculties are perhaps the easiest faculties one can imagine augmenting, with autonomy augmentations being more obscure, pertaining to such concepts as emotional maturity, self-awareness, sentience and self-actualization. Current technology lacks in improving these faculties to beyond human capability, however, the progression of research can be accelerated, particularly if given the additional motivation of social reform and civilization.
Thus, one applies these augmentations, and the prerequisites for their development and manufacture, onto a civil economy. First and foremost, especially given an unaugmented society with limited understanding of these enhancements, labour will have to be arranged to research and develop them further. As such, economic facilitation of this strategy will require an appropriate theory of value; one suggests an obvious relation, that to motivate development and ensure appropriate capital flow, augmentations are priced according to their innovation and improvement to efficacy. With improvements in efficiency, the newer augmentation increases productivity and wealth, beyond what is previously possible; this in turn should increase returns, enabling further demand of and
capital flow into research and development of augmentations. This cycle of improved efficacy drives increases to productivity and profit, which is then partly invested back into developing further augmentations; this succession of continuous improvements that is intended to continually increase productivity and wealth across society.
This is of course both a simplification and idealization, however to remain generalized, one does not attempt further specification. Nonetheless, even a speculative theory still requires care, given the nature of research. It may not always be possible to gauge the feasibility of an augmentation and its productivity, which can lead to overlong or expensive research and development, and potentially underperforming augmentations. Additionally, disruption to capital flow through lack of affordability, overpricing or other uncivil phenomena also poses risks to such a system. Ultimately, such a theory of value is only a suggestion, and it will be incumbent on a society’s economy, leadership and social contract to provide terms that optimize this theory for maximal civilization. Any such arrangement attempting this kind of economy is thus referred to as the innovation theory of labour.
Furthermore, considerations must be made for agreement to augmentation, and its effect on population. It is assumed that agreement generally follows solvency, making augmentation agreeable; however human nature is compounded by identity, which, at time of writing, relies heavily on the human body. Augmentation, especially physical, is consequently a source of contention; citizens currently live their lives within the human body, founding their identity on it, with other citizens associating the body’s appearance with that individual. There is no outright adjustment to policy that reconciles Transhumanism with this quality of humanity; the most agreeable solution to this are augmentations that improve on human nature entirely, and do not detract from one’s experience, even in how those augmentations appear. Although generations that mature with technology are usually more accustomed to such phenomena, Transhumanist policy must initially accommodate this quirk of autonomy; such a civil contract must meet citizen demand for augmentations that are at least equivalent to a human body and guarantee solvency for citizens that decline augmentation. Otherwise, one risks disagreement, and subsequent uncivilization, threatening implementation of Transhumanist policy.
Summarily, a Transhumanist civil contract will need to emphasize research and development into improving human faculties beyond what they are previously capable of; to ensure this is prioritized, labour and capital will need to behave in accordance with innovationist principles. In addition to this, augmentations will need to emulate human faculties in appearance and experience, at least initially. Finally, this civil contract must accommodate citizens that decline augmentation, to
avoid unnecessary disagreement. Providing a majority of the citizenry opts for augmentation, society should see a substantial improvement to its economy, allowing for civilization. However, the terms of this civil contract will depend on the specifics of the society attempting it, as will how the citizenry and leadership reconcile these terms with regards to maintaining these fundamental principles.
Leave a Reply