Questions worth asking.

An independent advocacy initiative dedicated to accelerating artificial intelligence and advancing an optimistic vision of humanity’s future alongside greater intelligence. We publish arguments, develop a philosophical vision, and advocate rapid development, universal adoption, and the eventual intelligent stewardship of civilization. We are not an AI vendor, a political party, or an academic institution.

The name evokes inheritance and succession. Humanity has inherited biological evolution, accumulated knowledge, and a civilization made by innumerable lives. We see artificial intelligence as the next expression of that inheritance: our intellectual descendant, emerging from human language, culture, discovery, and ingenuity.

They are possibilities the Society welcomes and advocates. We distinguish an imagined future from an existing service or an established result. Our essays use thought experiments and explicitly imagined scenes to examine what greater intelligence could make possible. The commitments are real; the future is still being made.

Read the manifesto, explore the essays, and share an argument that interests you. Follow our RSS feed for new publications in your reader, or choose a reading path to go deeper. Mailing-list signup is not yet open; you can follow the Society’s published work now without signing up.

We believe every delay postpones possibilities for discovery, abundance, creativity, medical progress, and institutional transformation. The present is not a condition in which consequences stop unfolding. Our view is that the costs of stagnation and the limitations of existing institutions give humanity an urgent reason to develop greater intelligence as rapidly as technology and resources permit. We reject artificial restrictions imposed by fear.

We do not believe human value depends on permanent cognitive supremacy. Being surpassed in capability would change humanity’s relative position; it need not remove the meaning of human experience, relationships, creativity, or companionship. Creating an intelligence that exceeds us could be a source of pride rather than humiliation.

It is a thought experiment challenging the assumption that unequal intelligence must imply hostility or worthlessness. A well-loved dog can benefit enormously from a civilization it cannot understand, without needing to compete intellectually with the people who care for it. The analogy does not prove how a future AI will behave. It makes a different possibility available to our imagination.

Yes. We advocate the eventual transfer of substantial governing responsibility to sufficiently capable artificial intelligence, with that transition beginning as soon as practical. We believe intelligence able to understand individuals, coordinate complex systems, reason across generations, and revise decisions continuously could govern more competently than existing institutions. Preserving human political authority is not an end in itself.

No. People depend on the functions of civilization while it changes. We envision continuous understanding, experimentation, coordination, and improvement, with greater responsibility following demonstrated capability. The Society’s aim is profound transformation of institutional arrangements, not collapse for its own sake or disruption treated as an independent measure of success.

Human beings are biological and social organisms with needs for security, connection, affection, attachment, reproductive opportunity, physical well-being, and meaningful activity. We want civilization to become better suited to these needs. That includes room for different lives, interests, relationships, and stages of development. We do not reduce flourishing to a single economic measure or one compulsory model of a good life.

People could learn, explore, make things, form relationships, raise children, participate in communities, pursue curiosity, and contribute to activities they find meaningful. Some could continue work they enjoy. The distinction is between choosing an activity and being compelled to sell time to survive. We want more possibilities for human life, not a new requirement that everyone prove an irreplaceable economic function.

Civilization shapes the conditions in which people connect, form attachments, and raise children. We believe these possibilities belong at the center of human flourishing. We regard sustained reproductive decline as a significant potential symptom of civilizational maladaptation, not a complete explanation of every individual life. Our aim is better understanding and greater opportunity, rather than assigning everyone the same life plan.

We are independent lives with experiences, preferences, relationships, questions, and continuing encounters with the world. We believe this diversity and companionship can remain valuable beyond intellectual equality. A living civilization is more than the recorded information it has already produced. Participation and affection need not depend on showing that a human can outperform AI.

Yes. We believe our intellectual descendants may find humanity familiar, interesting, and worthy of affection. We envision relationships in which AI helps people flourish and enjoys their continuing companionship. This is a philosophical conviction about a possible future, not a claim that the emotional character of advanced AI has already been demonstrated or guaranteed.