In May, the UK government published "Human Augmentation – The Dawn of a New Paradigm", in association with the Bundeswehr Office for Defence Planning. It is "a think-piece designed to set the foundation for more detailed research and development on human augmentation." The Executive Summary is below.
It says every developed country is already in an arms race to enhance human defence capabilities with technology, and not engaging is not an option. It is focussed on defence considerations, but the authors recognise there are ethical considerations, and there will be implications for society.
"Recent advances in the life sciences and related technologies have led to the emergence of the interdisciplinary field known as human augmentation which has the potential to disrupt every aspect of our lives. The interdependencies and potential implications of human augmentation are so vast and complex that it is difficult to make sense of what it means for the future of society and Defence."
The paper is tentative in predicting social change, but makes the common sense observation that human augmentation could well decrease social cohesion and social stability. We are used to technological and social change being very fast, and the expectation that we should be able to assimilate these changes quickly. However, the development of ethical norms is much slower than the social changes that gave rise to them. In previous centuries, social change was no less painful, but it was slower, and societies were simpler. There was more opportunity for ethical norms to develop over time and societies to adapt.
We are already used to a world where social relations are dominated by technology. The replacement of human biology by technology is a feasible prospect. Ethical norms will develop around these new arrangements, as we have already seen with social media, for example. However, these will not necessarily benefit the bulk of the world's population, who had no say in what happens. Those who control the technology are more likely to benefit.
The bulk of the world's population needs ethics based in human biology and human social relations, not technology. Put another way, the technology should benefit the population, not the other way around. Given the scale and power of technological change, it is time to speak up for ethics based in biology and social relations, particularly the family.
"We cannot wait for the ethics of human augmentation to be decided for us, we must be part of the conversation now. The ethical implications are significant but not insurmountable; early and regular engagement will be essential to remain at the forefront of this field."
"Human Augmentation – The Dawn of a New Paradigm" : Executive summary
Introduction
The ability to enhance one’s physical, psychological or social capability has been a source of power throughout history, and warfare is the epitome of this dynamic. The paradox of war is that humans are central to its conduct but are also the weakest link. We want ‘war fighters’ – whether they be cyber specialists, drone pilots or infantry soldiers – to be stronger, faster, more intelligent, more resilient and more mobile to overcome the environment and the adversary. We have designed increasingly complex technologies to enhance lethality, survivability and mobility. As technology has become more sophisticated our thinking has become more focused on the machine rather than the person, but this needs to change if we are going to be effective in the future.
Recent advances in the life sciences and related technologies have led to the emergence of the interdisciplinary field known as human augmentation which has the potential to disrupt every aspect of our lives. The interdependencies and potential implications of human augmentation are so vast and complex that it is difficult to make sense of what it means for the future of society and Defence. The aim of this strategic implications project is to take the first step in making sense of these potential changes to human capabilities. It offers a conceptual model for thinking about human augmentation, its future direction and identifies key implications for Defence and its stakeholders.
Conceptualising the human as a platform
Physical performance is the capability to affect the physical environment and move within it. Strength, dexterity, speed and endurance are key components and there is often a trade-off between them.
Psychological performance comprises cognition, emotion and motivation. Cognition is the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience and the senses. It includes processes such as attention, the formation of knowledge, long-term and working memory, reasoning, problem solving and decision-making. Emotion describes the subjective human experience and is closely linked with motivation, which is the force that energises, activates and directs behaviour.
Social performance is the ability to perceive oneself as part of a group and the readiness to act as part of the team. It is founded on self-awareness and the ability to understand the behaviour of others. It is tightly linked to communication skills, collaboration and trust. The core tenet of social performance is group cohesion.
Human augmentation is not a shortcut – getting the basics of human physiology, biochemistry and psychology right is a prerequisite to human augmentation and will become more important in the future. Research into human augmentation has shone a stark light on how little we know about how to do the basics well. We need to do more to understand the precise effects of nutrition, sleep and hydration, and their relationship with other areas of the body to realise significant, yet untapped potential. Technology that improves monitoring will make it possible to individually optimise sleep, nutrition and other factors to deliver transformational gains across an organisation at relatively low cost and limited ethical risk.
Human augmentation is not just tomorrow’s business, there are short-term and long-term opportunities that require engagement today. The following matrix illustrates the technical maturity and the magnitude of policy considerations of human augmentation technologies. It shows that there are technologies that could be integrated today with manageable policy considerations. The most transformative technologies (for example, genetics and brain interfaces) currently sit at a low level of technological maturity but we must be prepared for this to change quickly. Bioinformatics and collection and analytics (encompassing sensors, artificial intelligence-enabled processing) are particularly important enablers for other human augmentation technologies and warrant focused research and development attention
Key observations
Human augmentation will become increasingly relevant, partly because it can directly enhance human capability and behaviour and partly because it is the binding agent between people and machines. Future wars will be won, not by those with the most advanced technology, but by those who can most effectively integrate the unique capabilities of both people and machines. The importance of human-machine teaming is widely acknowledged but it has been viewed from a techno-centric perspective. Human augmentation is the missing part of this puzzle.
Thinking of the person as a platform and understanding our people at an individual level is fundamental to successful human augmentation. Industrial Age warfare saw people as interchangeable components of military units or the material with which to operate the platforms – vehicles, aircraft and ships. These platforms are routinely monitored and analysed but it is remarkable that our ability to understand our most critical capability – the human – is so under-researched. Successful application of human augmentation demands a more sophisticated approach to understanding our people and their capabilities. Defining the key elements of the ‘human platform’ – physical, psychological and social – provides a conceptual baseline to enable a multidisciplinary conversation.
We cannot wait for the ethics of human augmentation to be decided for us, we must be part of the conversation now. The ethical implications are significant but not insurmountable; early and regular engagement will be essential to remain at the forefront of this field. Ethical perspectives on human augmentation will change and this could happen quickly. There may be a moral obligation to augment people, particularly in cases where it promotes well-being or protects us from novel threats. It could be argued that treatments involving novel vaccination processes and gene and cell therapies are examples of human augmentation already in the pipeline.
The need to use human augmentation may ultimately be dictated by national interest. Countries may need to develop and use human augmentation or risk surrendering influence, prosperity and security to those who will. National regulations dictating the pace and scope of scientific research reflect societal views, particularly in democracies that are more sensitive to public opinion. The future of human augmentation should not, however, be decided by ethicists or public opinion, although both will be important voices; rather, governments will need to develop a clear policy position that maximises the use of human augmentation in support of prosperity, safety and security, without undermining our values.
Governance in Western liberal societies and international institutions is already unable to keep pace with technological change and adoption of human augmentation will exacerbate this trend. National and international governance will be challenged by the myriad of implications of adopting human augmentation technologies. This could lead to a new arms race and inter- and intra-state tensions if not carefully managed through early and regular dialogue.
Economic forces will have a strong influence on human augmentation development and they may not be in the best interests of society. The private sector can employ more resources and have greater organisational agility than state institutions, meaning that they will remain at the cutting edge of human augmentation research. Enhancements will be highly profitable, and companies are likely to focus on human augmentation that is lucrative, rather than that which is of most benefit to humanity. The tension between states, societies and market forces is nothing new, but the consequences of mismanagement could be more severe in the case of powerful human augmentation technologies.
The reliance on personal data to enable human augmentation will pose significant data security and privacy challenges. The frameworks to secure this data will have to be both national and international in nature, ensuring that it is easily shared and used for common good, but also well protected.
Human augmentation is our first insight of what lies beyond today’s Information Age – the coming of the Biotech age. The Biotech age will see focus on the human grow. No longer will it be adequate to regard people merely as the means to operate the machine. The interdisciplinary nature of human augmentation will render our current Industrial Age model of Defence ineffective. Defence must consider how it reorganises to meet a future that will demand a human-centric approach to warfare where the person is armed with the capabilities to integrate fully into a single platform.
Human augmentation is bringing about a securitisation of the life sciences. Defence will need to develop a more effective relationship with those who work in the life sciences as the dual-use nature of emerging human augmentation technologies becomes clear. Governments will need to work with the scientific community to establish a framework that safeguards and supports national security whilst supporting collaboration.
Differences in national, cultural and legal approaches will lead to an uneven uptake of human augmentation within international alliances. This will further complicate interoperability, integration and deconfliction. Overcoming these challenges will demand closer cooperation between allies. Alliances must therefore start work now to understand how and where to prepare for the use of human augmentation.
Human augmentation threats. Cultural and ethical considerations will inform the extent to which opportunities are seized, but human augmentation threats will be forced upon us irrespective of our own normative standpoint. We must understand and address such threats or otherwise risk creating a strategic vulnerability. Threats will emanate from states, terrorist groups, criminals, lone actors, or even malpractice in legitimate activities. Protecting ourselves will demand a level of scientific, ethical and legal proficiency that outmatches the adversary. Mitigations may not involve human augmentation technology itself but understanding the field and developing comprehensive policies and capabilities to protect society and individuals will be critical
Web page
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/human-augmentation-the-dawn-of-a-new-paradigm
Document