Abstract
There are at least three dimensions to rights. We may have and lack freedom to 1) be, 2) do, and 3) have. These dimensions reformulate Locke’s categories, and are further complicated by placing them within the context of domains such as natural or civil rights. Here the question of the origins of rights is not addressed, but issues concerning how we may contextualize them are discussed. Within the framework developed, this paper makes use of Actor-Network Theory and Enlightenment values to examine the multidimensionality and appropriateness of animal rights and human rights for posthumans. The core position here is that rights may be universal and constant, but they can only be accessed within a matrix of relative cultural dimensions. This will be true for posthumans, and their rights will be relative to human rights and dependent on human and posthuman responsibilities.
Highlights
There are at least three dimensions to rights
Rights are nested in dimensions Multidimensional rights exist in fields or matrices Transhumanism challenges our traditional ideas about rights Posthumans will be free to be, do, and have, just as humans and animals are References
Few would claim that HVRs apply to the possession of gold, because gold is rare and not tied to survival; but we often hear about a “human right” to water and even to weaponry for self-defense, on the grounds that without these things our survival is threatened
Summary
Rights are nested in dimensions Multidimensional rights exist in fields or matrices Transhumanism challenges our traditional ideas about rights Posthumans will be free to be, do, and have, just as humans and animals are References.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
