Skip to main content

Proactionary and Precautionary Principles and Welfare State 2.0

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Knowing Humanity in the Social World
  • 270 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter is on proactionary versus precautionary principles. The proactionary principle stresses risk-taking, while the precautionary principle stresses the need to conserve nature. Fuller explores the futures of the human condition, which includes “transhumanism” and “posthumanism.” Starting with the emerging challenges posed by so-called human enhancement sciences and technologies, Fuller has explored alternative futures under three rubrics: the ecological, the biomedical, and the cybernetic. These attempts to re-engineer both our bodies and the environment require substantial re-definitions of social justice and economics productivity, all envisioned within new political orders of Welfare State 2.0 as opposed to Welfare State 1.0.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelburgh, M. (2013). Human Beings @ Risk. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collin, F. (2013). Two Kinds of Social Epistemology. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 2(8), 79–104. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-Ul

  • Elliott, C. (2014, September 3). More or Less than Human? New Scientist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2002). On the Intrinsic Value of Information Objects and the Infosphere. Ethics and Information Technology, 4(4), 287–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R. (2015). Anti-Fuller: Transhumanism and the Proactionary Imperative. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 4(4), 38–43. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-1Zr

  • Fuller, S. (2006). The New Sociological Imagination. London: Sage Publications, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S. (2011). The Posthuman Challenge to Ecological Correctness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_lzFSnxYZA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQJ_mWC4dpc

  • Fuller, S. (2013). Preparing for Life in Humanity 2.0. New York/Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S. (2014). Towards a Proactionary Welfare State. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 3(5), 82–84. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-1sx

  • Fuller, S. (2016). The Academic Caesar: University Leadership Is Hard. London: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S., & Lipinska, V. (2014). The Proactionary Imperative: A Foundation for Transhumanism. New York/Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, S., Chioti, R., & Ernstsons, K. (2017). Connecting with the Divine and the Sacred and Becoming Cosmically Conscious. In R. Armstrong (Ed.), Star Ark. New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzweil, R. (2005). The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. New York: Penguin Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg, B. (2001). The Skeptical Environmentalist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg, B. (2010). Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • More, M. (2005). The Proactionary Principle. http://www.maxmore.com/proactionary.html

  • Pedersen, D. (2013). Who Should Govern the Welfare State 2.0? A Comment on Fuller. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 2(12), 51–59. http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-19F

  • Remedios, F. (2013). Review of Humanity 2.0: What It Means to be Human Past, Present and Future. LSE Review of Books. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/ 2013/05/07/book-review-humanity-2-0/

  • Remedios, F. (2015). Knowing Humanity in the Social World: A Social Epistemology Collective Vision? In J. Collier (Ed.), The Future of Social Epistemology: A Collective Vision (pp. 21–28). London: Rowman and Littlefield International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remedios, F. (2016). Steve Fuller: Knowledge, the Philosophical Quest in History. Metascience, 25(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1981). The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle. (1998). http://www.who.int/ifcs/documents/forums/forum5/wingspread.doc

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Remedios, F.X., Dusek, V. (2018). Proactionary and Precautionary Principles and Welfare State 2.0. In: Knowing Humanity in the Social World. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37490-5_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37490-5_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-37489-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-37490-5

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics