1,720,964 research outputs found
Ethics for Humanity That May Not Perish
No full textThis work is an English translation of the book “Metsubousurukamosirenai Junrui no tameno Rinrigaku[Ethics for Humanity That May Perish: LongTermism, Transhumanism, and Space Exploration]” by author, Shin-ichiro Inaba, himself. The original Japanese version was written for introducing Longtermism, Existential Risk Theory and related topics to Japanese general readrers. Chapters One and Two trace the origins of longtermism as a theoretical framework and philosophy. Chapter 3 briefly summarizes the theoretical core of what longtermism is and introduces accelerationism and effective accelerationism as adjacent movements that also concern humanity in the super-future. Chapter 4 points out that animal ethics can become a stumbling block for longtermism—giving rise to a peculiar puzzle. Chapters Five and Six examine the difficult problems in intergenerational ethics raised by Parfit, keeping the context of longtermism in mind. Chapter Five focuses on the "repugnant conclusion," while Chapter Six centers on the "non-identity problem." Chapter 7 points out that the "Singleton", according to Bostrom, deemed essential for humanity to survive and develop long-term by overcoming "existential risks," could itself be a source of such risks. Chapter 8 introduces the "Fermi Paradox" – the puzzle of why, despite the vast number of celestial bodies in the universe, extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI) remains undiscovered – and demonstrates its deep structural and substantive connection to the theory of existential risks. Chapters 9 and 10 discuss the possibility and desirability of humanity's space exploration. In closing this book, we will briefly touch upon the "eschatological" aspects of these arguments
Ethics for Humanity That May Not Perish
Get PDFThis work is an English translation of the book “Metsubousurukamosirenai Junrui no tameno Rinrigaku[Ethics for Humanity That May Perish: LongTermism, Transhumanism, and Space Exploration]” by author, Shin-ichiro Inaba, himself. The original Japanese version was written for introducing Longtermism, Existential Risk Theory and related topics to Japanese general readrers. Chapters One and Two trace the origins of longtermism as a theoretical framework and philosophy. Chapter 3 briefly summarizes the theoretical core of what longtermism is and introduces accelerationism and effective accelerationism as adjacent movements that also concern humanity in the super-future. Chapter 4 points out that animal ethics can become a stumbling block for longtermism—giving rise to a peculiar puzzle. Chapters Five and Six examine the difficult problems in intergenerational ethics raised by Parfit, keeping the context of longtermism in mind. Chapter Five focuses on the "repugnant conclusion," while Chapter Six centers on the "non-identity problem." Chapter 7 points out that the "Singleton", according to Bostrom, deemed essential for humanity to survive and develop long-term by overcoming "existential risks," could itself be a source of such risks. Chapter 8 introduces the "Fermi Paradox" – the puzzle of why, despite the vast number of celestial bodies in the universe, extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI) remains undiscovered – and demonstrates its deep structural and substantive connection to the theory of existential risks. Chapters 9 and 10 discuss the possibility and desirability of humanity's space exploration. In closing this book, we will briefly touch upon the "eschatological" aspects of these arguments
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
On “Benevolent Totalitarianism”
Get PDFSince the last days of 20th century, namely after September 11 of 2001, we have got some cautions about the coming of a new kind of totalitarianism in advanced societies. (e.g. Sheldon Wolin on “Inverted Totalitarianism”.) Shozo Fujita, one of the early prophets of new totalitarianism, formulates such new totalitarianism as “totalitarianism toward ”, inspired by Hannah Arendt. This type of totalitarianism might, in contrast to classical totalitarianism, need no explicit tyranny or despotism, but only liberal institutions of property rights and free market economy. While realizing welfare of its people through capitalistic mass consumption, it decomposes and renders unnecessary the public reason of them, without any explicit violence and oppression. For Fujita himself, just like Arendt, remembering Rosa Luxemburg, the reason why we have to criticize this “totalitarianism” is clear. It is because, even in such “totalitarianism”, capitalism couldn’t survive without exploitation of “the outside”, namely, non-capitalist communities and natural environment. But what if such capitalist development is possible without such exploitation and, at least, explicit violence? On what foundation can we criticize such “benevolent totalitarianism”? If we found the reason for criticizing it in the degradation of public reason and civic virtue, such a critique couldn’t avoid the danger of petitio prinpicii. In this essay, I try to find some ways to criticize such “benevolent totalitarianism”, avoiding petitio prinpicii. Because, in a certain sense, “benevolent totalitarianism” could be seen as a version of perfect utilitarian politics, I would try to make such criticism from within a utilitarian perspective as possible.Articledepartmental bulletin pape
An Institutionalist Approach to Liberaliam (1)
No full textThe aim of this paper is to present a new way of theorizing liberalist political / social doctrines. Formerly, most supporters of liberalism have constructed their political / social theories on the base of "methodological
individualism". But here I try to found a discriptive / normative theory of liberal societies on the ground ofa sort of "wholism". A main idea of this paper is to conceptualize "personhood" as one type of institutions. I define "institution" as a expected pattern of actions, or a system of rules of conducts, and see "person" as the special type of institution, the institution enacted by one physical humane individual. And I make a thoretical modell of liberal society as a band of different types of institutions. In this modell, "person" is not a sort of "social atom",
but have a very specific functioning
Isaac Asimov and the Current State of Space Science Fiction : In the Light of Space Ethics
No full text- …
