1 Stance 2 Contrasting stance 3 List of notable techno-progressive social critics 4 Controversy 5 See also 6 References 7 External links
This article may require cleanup to meet's quality
standards. The specific problem is: This section should move to
Main article: Bioconservatism Bioconservatism (a portmanteau word combining "biology" and "conservatism") is a stance of hesitancy about technological development especially if it is perceived to threaten a given social order. Strong bioconservative positions include opposition to genetic modification of food crops, the cloning and genetic engineering of livestock and pets, and, most prominently, rejection of the genetic, prosthetic, and cognitive modification of human beings to overcome what are broadly perceived as current human biological and cultural limitations. Bioconservatives range in political perspective from right-leaning religious and cultural conservatives to left-leaning environmentalists and technology critics. What unifies bioconservatives is skepticism about medical and other biotechnological transformations of the living world. Typically less sweeping as a critique of technological society than bioluddism, the bioconservative perspective is characterized by its defense of the natural, deployed as a moral category. Although techno-progressivism is the stance which contrasts with bioconservatism in the biopolitical spectrum, both techno-progressivism and bioconservatism, in their more moderate expressions, share an opposition to unsafe, unfair, undemocratic forms of technological development, and both recognize that such developmental modes can facilitate unacceptable recklessness and exploitation, exacerbate injustice and incubate dangerous social discontent. List of notable techno-progressive social critics
Dale Carrico with his accounts of techno-progressivism
Controversy Technocritic Dale Carrico, an academic known for using term "techno-progressive" as a shorthand to describe progressive politics that emphasize technoscientific issues, has expressed concern that some "transhumanists" are using the term to describe themselves, with the consequence of possibly misleading the public regarding their actual cultural, social and political views, which may or may not be compatible with critical techno-progressivism. See also
Free software movement
^ a b c d Carrico, Dale (2004). "The Trouble with "Transhumanism":
Part Two". Retrieved 2007-01-28.
^ a b c d e f Carrico, Dale (2005). "Technoprogressivism Beyond
Technophilia and Technophobia". Retrieved 2007-01-28.
^ Carrico, Dale (2006). "The Politics of Morphological Freedom".
^ Technoprogressive Declaration - Transvision 2014, Institute for
Ethics and Emerging Technologies
^ Huesemann, Michael H., and Joyce A. Huesemann (2011). Technofix: Why
Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment, New Society Publishers,
Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada, ISBN 0865717044, 464
^ Mander, Jerry (1991). ‘’In the Absence of the Sacred: The
Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations,’’,
Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, California.
^ Rifkin, Jeremy (1998). ‘’The Biotech Century: Harnessing the
Gene and Remaking the World,’’ Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam, New York,
^ Shiva, Vandana (2000). ‘’Stolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the
Global Food Supply,’’ South End Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
^ Haraway, Donna (1991). "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and
Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century". Archived from the
original on 2012-02-14. Retrieved 2007-01-28.
^ ""Open Source Reality":
Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies Overv