[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-84697-en":3,"doc-seo-84697-105":29,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":87},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"doc_content":15,"file_id":16,"file_url":17,"file_type":18,"file_size":19,"view_count":20,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":20,"is_downloadable":20,"audit_status":20,"page_count":21,"language":22,"language_code":23,"site_id":24,"html_lang":23,"table_of_contents":25,"faqs":26,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":27,"read_time":28},84697,4398048949847,"Eliana","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/400002536579ef2da7f?_k=1778318612642679267",8,"Research & Report","The Case for Globally Beneficial Technology","The document argues that advanced technological breakthroughs should be designed, developed, and distributed to benefit everyone, grounding the claim in five moral arguments. It uses historical cases—medical forceps and the modern three-point seat belt—to show how choices about openness and access can either sustain preventable harm or avert it and unlock human potential. It extends the discussion to general-purpose technologies and emerging AI, emphasizing global economic justice, human rights, beneficence, birth contingencies, and a global tree of knowledge.","The Case for Globally Beneficial Technology  \nIason Gabriel and Atoosa Kasirzadeh  \nTo whom do the fruits of advanced technological innovation belong? To their inventors, to the organizations and individuals involved in making such discoveries possible, or to still larger groups of people, potentially encompassing all of humanity? This question sits at the heart of the present investigation. The arguments developed here focus on an expansive reading of the entitlement to benefit from technological breakthroughs: we argue that they should be designed, developed, and distributed in ways that benefit everyone. This central claim, which encompasses technologies such as advanced forms of artificial intelligence, is grounded in an exploration of five moral arguments that involve human rights, beneficence, contingencies of birth, the global tree of knowledge, and global economic justice. Taken together, they underpin the argument for globally beneficial technologies.  \nConcernfor the man himselfand his fate must always form the chief interest of all technical endeavors… Never forget  \nthis in the midst ofyour diagrams and equations.  \nAlbert Einstein  \nIntroduction  \nThe early 1600s saw the invention of a major new life-saving technology. At that time, obstetric forceps were first developed and successfully trialed by the Chamberlens, who were a family of barber-surgeons practicing in London, heralding a potentially dramatic improvement in child and maternal survival rates for complicated births. Before the invention of medical forceps, the best efforts of doctors involved cesarean sections, which were often fatal, efforts to break the mother’s pubic bone, or dangerous attempts to terminate late-stage pregnancies. However, for more than three generations, the new instrument was kept a secret and used exclusively by the Chamberlens to bolster their business, with the forceps being concealed in medical bagsand under surgical draperies when they were used for operations. It was not until more than a century later, in 1723, that the Flemish surgeon Jan Palfijn publicly demonstrated and published the details of his mains defer (“iron hands”) , a similar device that he had independently invented. Within a decade, medical forceps were adopted and became part of standard medical practice, first in Europe and then more widely. Finally, in 1813, a visitor to Woodham Mortimer Hall in Essex noticed a small cork disk, flush against the  \nfloor, along with covered screwheads and a trapdoor with small, sunken hinges. Upon further investigation she found three pairs of the original medical forceps hidden beneath the floorboards of the old Chamberlen family home. At this moment it became possible to appraise the full human cost of what had transpired.  \nIn 1959, the development and deployment of life-saving technology took a different path. A Swedish engineer named Nils Bohlin, who worked at the national automotive company, Volvo, invented the modern three-point seat belt. Bohlin had noticed that earlier, simpler versions led to a pattern of serious and sustained injury: upon impact, people would fall forward, with their heads hitting interior surfaces, and the body twisting in ways that caused serious damage to the spine and internal organs. The new seat-belt design halved the overall rate of injury for people unfortunate enough to find themselves in automobile accidents and increased the odds of surviving a more serious crash by one third. After a period of discussion within the company, it was agreed that the technology would be filed with an “open” patent so that it could be freely used by other manufacturers without paying royalties to the inventor. As a result of the obvious improvements the new design brought with it, adoption spread quickly around the world. Reasonable current estimates suggest that the modern seat-belt design has saved somewhere in the region of 250,000 to 350,000 lives in the United States alone (Kahane, 2015; Sauber-Schatz","cbCaiizA07Z2W9Sf","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiizA07Z2W9Sf","pdf",894369,1,41,"English","en",105,"# Introduction\n## Distributing benefits of innovation\n## Historical cases: forceps and seat belts\n## General-purpose technologies and AI\n## Core moral question and five arguments","[{\"question\":\"What central question drives the paper’s investigation?\",\"answer\":\"The paper asks who the benefits of advanced technological innovation belong to—inventors, those enabling the discoveries, or potentially all of humanity.\"},{\"question\":\"What is the paper’s main claim about who should benefit from advanced technology?\",\"answer\":\"The paper advances a radical claim that the benefits of advanced technology belong to the world, supported by five moral arguments.\"}]",1784197720,103,{"code":4,"msg":30,"data":31},"ok",{"site_id":24,"language":23,"slug":32,"title":13,"keywords":33,"description":14,"schema_data":34,"social_meta":82,"head_meta":84,"extra_data":86,"updated_unix":27},"the-case-for-globally-beneficial-technology","",{"@graph":35,"@context":81},[36,53,68],{"@type":37,"itemListElement":38},"BreadcrumbList",[39,43,47,50],{"item":40,"name":41,"@type":42,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":44,"name":45,"@type":42,"position":46},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":48,"name":12,"@type":42,"position":49},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":51,"name":13,"@type":42,"position":52},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-case-for-globally-beneficial-technology/84697/",4,{"url":51,"name":13,"@type":54,"author":55,"headline":13,"publisher":57,"fileFormat":60,"inLanguage":23,"description":14,"dateModified":61,"datePublished":62,"encodingFormat":60,"isAccessibleForFree":63,"interactionStatistic":64},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":56},"Person",{"url":40,"name":58,"@type":59},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-07-17","2026-07-16",true,{"@type":65,"interactionType":66,"userInteractionCount":20},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":67},"ViewAction",{"@type":69,"mainEntity":70},"FAQPage",[71,77],{"name":72,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":74},"What central question drives the paper’s investigation?","Question",{"text":75,"@type":76},"The paper asks who the benefits of advanced technological innovation belong to—inventors, those enabling the discoveries, or potentially all of humanity.","Answer",{"name":78,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":79},"What is the paper’s main claim about who should benefit from advanced technology?",{"text":80,"@type":76},"The paper advances a radical claim that the benefits of advanced technology belong to the world, supported by five moral arguments.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":51,"og:type":83,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":58,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":85,"canonical":51},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":24},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":88},[89,93,97,101,106,111,116,119,124,127,131],{"id":20,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":90,"show_sort_weight":91,"slug":92},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":94,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":96},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":113,"show_sort_weight":114,"slug":115},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},30,"research-report",{"id":120,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":122,"slug":123},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":122,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":122,"slug":126},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":128,"slug":130},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":132,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":133,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":134},19,"General","general"]