by Joseph P. Farrell
So many people sent me versions of this important and significant
development that it was simply a kind of moral imperative that I alert
readers here to it, and say something about it. In this case, there are four different articles, each of which reveals, almost immediately, what the new concern is:
Is Biotech Seeking Ways to Make People Suffer Eternally?
Should Biotech Make Life Hellish for Criminals?
Enhanced Punishment: Can Technology Make Life Sentences Longer?
Within the transhumanist “vision” there is a common underlying theme, regardless of whether or not one accepts the “heaven scenarios” of such advocates like Ray Kurzweil, or the more sobering assessments of transhumanist researchers like Joel Garreau and their “hell scenarios”, for in both cases, the favored transhumanist “GRIN” technologies – genetics, robotics, information processing, and nano-technologies – open both favorable and horrific vistas of the future.
In this case, we are concerned with the horrific ones, for as
the articles suggest, what if such technologies made life extension
possible as a matter of judicial punishment? This unpleasant prospect, as the articles aver, is actually being not only entertained but its advocacy is even being implied in some circles. What if, in addition to this, other technologies are super-added to life extension, technologies of the “androgynous
and alchemical fusion” of man and machine, to implant criminals with
chips, to subject them to forms of “virtual torture” and suffering? Some transhumanists have envisioned the downloading
and uploading of individual’s personal memories as a technique of
virtual life extension. But what if such technologies could recover the
memories of victims of crimes? Would criminals then be punished by making them relive in some sort of “virtual reality” the horrors of the crimes they committed on their victims? Could criminals of the future be sentenced to “life extension and ‘hard reliving’ of their crimes from the victim’s point of view” for “x” number of years, without hope of parole or reprieve? While such questions sound like science fiction, as the above articles point out, they are already being entertained, and they are being entertained, because the technologies impelling them are already under development.
Indeed, one can envision a state of development where such
technologies were so advanced that a sentence of life in prison with “at
hard virtual labor” would be so horrific, that the death penalty, far
from being a thing to be avoided by defendants, might become a thing sought.
But there are yet other possibilities as well, possibilities that were, in fact, explored in the television science fiction series Babylon Five in the 1990s: the “death of personality.” In that series, convicted murderers are subjected to a kind of “death of the ego”: the erasure of the personality, memories, and emotions of the perpetrator.
While some may view all of this favorably, and argue that it is “ethical,” I incline to the other opinion, and hold that it is barbaric, and a measure of the dehumanizing that such philosophies and technologies are inevitably bringing with them. I submit that such punishments are indeed “cruel and unusual” and little other than a form of torture.
But whatever one’s opinion may be, the cultural transformation of culture and society that the transhumanists are championing or, in a few cases, decrying, are indeed hurtling down the tracks toward us and will force each of us to deal with the types of questions these articles are pointing out.
See you on the flip side.
The article first appeared here.