**4. Conclusions**

*"We're out to repair the future.*

*We are here for the storm that's storming because what's taken matters"* [136]

Loidolt concludes that "this right of the other, which should give the ultimate grounding and measure of every right, is exactly one that will always remain 'haunted' by the appeal of excessive immeasurable terms (and this always includes the danger to treat the other wrongly, especially in his otherness). However, an ethics of human rights must not be paralyzed by such a situation. It must undertake the responsibility of an urgen<sup>t</sup> judgment that proves its engagemen<sup>t</sup> by its openness for a universality to come."110 In the context of extreme human enhancements, we will respond to the challenge of an ethics of the rights of living beings and of conscious beings—whether "still human" or "beyond human". Loidolt's "ethics of discourse" is offered as a commitment to "a critique and the ongoing process of legitimization (which would be a strategy to cope with historical and cultural relativism)" thereby opening a horizon, "where responding to the ethical appeal of the other becomes conceivable as an attitude of commitment which resists the totality of having everything at [one's] disposal."<sup>111</sup>

As the UDHR was built out of the ashes of World War II and the mass genocide whose roots could be traced to centuries of persecution (including brutal attacks on minorities and Jews who were blamed for the plague epidemic of 1348–1351 (the "Black Death"), [137] it seems appropriate to consider if we can do even better than the drafters of the UDHR as we come out of a global pandemic, mass extinctions of species and harms to humans due to climate change, and as we seek to address (and redress) the consequences of centuries of systematic legal and social discrimination, and violence, against certain people due to their skin color, gender, sexual preferences, religion, ethnicity and/or social class or caste. All of this is occurring as technology and human enhancements are advancing at a rapid rate. Just as the UDHR of 1948 was a massive step forward from the American Declaration of Independence of 1776, which enfranchised white men only and left the abomination of slavery intact, we can, and must, do better than the UDHR in years to come.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Acknowledgments:** The author greatly appreciates the guidance provided by Woodrow Barfield, a leader in the world of human enhancements—both as a technical expert and as a futurist.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The author declares no conflict of interest.
