Philosophy for Humanity 2.0

Abstract

How do you prepare for life in a state-of-being that might be reasonably called ‘Humanity 2.0’? The question was bound to be asked, given the aspirations of ‘Humanity 1.0’, my name for the sort of being that laws in contemporary democratic societies are designed to empower and protect — namely, someone licensed to explore his or her capacities but without preventing others from doing likewise. It is common to speak of such societies as liberal but I believe that republican is more appropriate because republicanism implies a sense of collective identity, the definition, protection and possible extension of which provides the common material and ideational basis for the relevant individuals — typically called ‘citizens’ — to pursue their individually diverse lives (cf. Fuller 2000a: chap. 1). Whereas the protection of liberal freedom tends to target the sort of mutual interference normally associated with crime and discrimination, the protection of republican freedom is more focused on threats to the security of the citizenry as a whole, such as natural disasters, resource scarcity, foreign aggression and epidemics. But why fuss over this nuance in political theory?