CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Proactionary principle

pro-innovation ethical principle

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 5, 2026
Entity authorityQ3922094
Source-derived summary

The proactionary principle is an ethical and decision-making principle formulated by the transhumanist philosopher Max More as follows:

People's freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even critical, to humanity. This implies several imperatives when restrictive measures are proposed: Assess risks and opportunities according to available science, not popular perception. Account for both the costs of the restrictions themselves, and those of opportunities foregone. Favor measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of impacts, and that have a high expectation value. Protect people's freedom to experiment, innovate, and progress.

The proactionary principle was created as an opposing viewpoint to the precautionary principle, which is based on the concept that consequences of actions in complex systems are often unpredictable and irreversible and concludes that such actions should generally be opposed. The Proactionary Principle is based upon the observation that historically, the most useful and important technological innovations were neither obvious nor well understood at the time of their invention. More recommends 10 principles in his paper "Proactionary Principle":

Freedom to innovate

Objectivity

Comprehensiveness

Openness/Transparency

Simplicity

Triage

Symmetrical treatment

Proportionality

Prioritization

Renew and Refresh

In a syndicated newspaper article that has been translated into eight languages, Steve Fuller has argued that the precautionary principle and the proactionary principle are likely to replace the right-left divide in politics in the 21st century. A subsequent book, The Proactionary Imperative by Fuller and Lipinska attempts to make the proactionary principle fundamental to transhumanism as a world-view, stressing the principle's interpretation of risk as an opportunity rather than a threat.

In theory, sufficient study of the variables of any proposed course of action may yield acceptable levels of predictability.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Proactionary principle” as pro-innovation ethical principle. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Proactionary, principle and pro-innovation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current 275-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Proactionary, principle and pro-innovation providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Proactionary principle”, the useful work is to connect “pro-innovation ethical principle” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 5, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3922094. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Proactionary principle”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Proactionary principle primary sources, Proactionary principle archive and Proactionary research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Proactionary principle”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Proactionary principle” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.