Other Terasem Journals

Employing Geoethics to Avoid Negative Nanotechnology Scenarios in Developing Countries

Guido David Núñez-Mujica

page 4 of 4

How do we avoid such environmental tragedies? How do we deal with rogue or deceitful states? A compelling ethical, economic and ecological framework must be built to ensure that an orderly, rational and safe distribution of nanotechnology and its products is attained worldwide. In the next section, several measures for facing these dilemmas and meeting requirements of safety and welfare will be proposed.

Suggestions for Nanotech Management
The Guidelines of the Foresight Institute offer an excellent approach to nanotechnology regulation, but they are not suited for dealing with the environmental dangers posed in this paper and for avoiding the economic collapse of developing economies. Still, the necessary measures for that goal can be contemplated Mujica within these guidelines. The measures that can be applied in the case of this scenario becoming reality must be a trade-off between avoiding a catastrophe in the developing world and safety, as many of these societies are not democratic or lack the ability for a proper management of nanotechnology (non-transparent governments, extended corruption that could sell nanotechnology to independent actors or use of it as a weapon in inner conflicts). Geoethical principles should be considered when designing these measures.

Some of the possible measures that could be taken are:

Do not give the technology away without the supervision of trained personnel from the West to instruct on its use. The training of the local personnel should be conducted overseas in a Western developed country by people from all around the world. This training would not only concern technical, but also ethical issues. This would expose the people in charge to a Western ethics model of world-unity and abundance.
The use of inherently safe replicators must be regarded as a priority and remain as one of the main technical measures to prevent misuse of nanotechnology.[1]
Any rogue states or nations could have the products distributed to them, but not the assembler. Thus, nanofactories near them would provide the necessary commodities to the population of these states, but distribution would be carefully planned to avoid the oppression of ethnic or political factions by totalitarian rulers. This distribution could take place in international waters or via a nearby friendly country.
Giving away assemblers incapable of certain actions and satellites controlled by an international organization. If the link is broken or hacked, the assembler will destroy itself and send signals to the regulatory organizations.
Trading nanoassemblers for improving human rights, women’s conditions and democracy could lead to a more sound global society grounded on western values, therefore lessening the current threats of terrorism and the current global dissatisfaction with the governments of developed countries concerning international help. However, this approach could be used only with countries with no negotiation capacities, powerful countries with weapons could not be enforced in this way despite the situation of its population due to the collapse of their economy. Signing international treaties for the destruction of atomic weapons and transcontinental missiles in exchange for the products of replicators or the replicators themselves seems a plausible option.

The forenamed regulatory actions are grounded in geoethics and therefore must be discussed with those who will be potentially affected to achieve truly agreed-upon effective measures to cope with the possible environmental disaster. It is a priority to check the true plausibility of this scenario and discuss it widely, and to incorporate this scenario into the mainstream discussed issues about risks of nanotechnology. We suggest that the measures developed for dealing with the proposed scenario, proposed ones or otherwise, be developed by experts in the field and incorporated into the main set of measures proposed to cope with the risk of nanotechnology, such as the Foresight Institute Guidelines, et al.

Footnotes
1. Drexler, K. Engines of Creation. The coming era of nanotechnology. Anchor Books, Doubleday, New York, 1986 (back to top)

Guido Núñez-Mujica is an undergraduate Student of Biology and Computational Physics at the Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, Venezuela. In 2001, Núñez-Mujica became the founder of the AREV, the first and only skeptical association of Venezuela, devoted to spreading critical thinking and rationalistic views. Núñez-Mujica is an active transhumanist and has become a speaker about Transhumanism in a course on Bioethics in the Faculty of Sciences at the Universidad de Los Andes. He is currently trying to create a transhumanist group in Mérida.

<previous page 1 2 3 4
Back to Current Issue Contents

The Terasem Pledge

We pledge allegiance to the flag of the collective consciousness of Terasem, and to the principles for which it stands, education, persistently, with diversity, unity, and joyful immortality everywhere.

TerasemJournal.com Home | Journal of Geoethical Nanotechnology | Journal of Personal Cyberconsciousness
Submission Guidelines | Editors and Sponsorship | Contact