krulecello wrote:
... although, I'm wondering if the proliferation of 'smart' devices will eventually see an evolutionary step backwards, via brain shrinkage (through non use), and perhaps the resulting smaller head size will negate the need for a backbone too.
I understand this fear, and I hear it a lot, but actually I think it goes the otehr way. I think it can work like that, but I think constant immediate access to information can increase intelligence because it means if you are curious about something then you can look it up right away. It might mean you are not storing lots of useless factoids around in your memory, but you are excercising the thinking part that thinks about connections between things, and actually I think we might actually be more likely to remember if we are feeding that curiosity at the moment when it is actually there. I think 20 years ago if I was curious about something and to check it our find out more I had to either go and find the encyclopedia that we had somewhere that might be 10 years old and out of date, or go to a library, then I would just not bother and forget about it. I think constant access to information has actually dramatically increased our intelligence, and conversations like this, internationally online are testament to that. Actually this is one area where I feel somewhat optimistic for this reason.
One thing I'm not sure about though is how far "transhumanism" will take this. People are already working in ernest to develop head gear that can unobtrusively go in a head band or hat that will allow you to operate your smart phone etc with thought. In the short term this might be a novelty, but you have to wonder where this will lead. Firstly, you will no doubt have to exercise a part of your brain in order to learn to use it - like muscle building - which I personally think could have unforseen (good) results, but that's another story, what it will mean is this fad of texting will probably be short lived.
What will it mean for humanity when communication becomes that instant and instead of sending a little
smilie to try and convey the tone of what you are saying, they can get an actual image of your actual thoughts and emotions?
Take it 50-100 years further along and what will it mean for social interaction? Will people become so used to being interconnected with everyone that we start to co-operate more and are less divided? What if you have your special hat on and the normal thing to do is when you meet someone, instead of sending them a test message "business card" you instead send them an impression of yourself that people can feel directly.
I know this sounds way out and science fiction, but it's surprisingly close, and my point is I seriously doubt texting will be around long enough to have any actual physical effects... however, transhumanism, thought enhancing technology and brain augmentation could well once it happens because that might be more likely to last longer...
One thing is for certain - just as people from 1913 wouldn't recognize the world in 2013, we wouldn't regognize 2113, and it will probably be exponentially more different than 1913 to 2013 was.
Likewise, I think our only
real hope for the environment is science and technology, and a lot of clever people are working on the problem
Those that wish to tell me (or think it privately) that my actions are a waste of time (although admirable) generally feel powerless (or nihilistic) because they have handed over their own personal responsibility to an external authority. How can someone who has done this ever understand the joy of true freedom? (rhetorical).
I don't see this as handing over personal responsibility to an external authority, to me it is more like mice watching on in despair while a herd of mammoths tears through the forest devouring everything in sight.
At the moment the super-rich basically have free reign to do what they like completely unaccountable because anyone who gets elected into office qickly becomes corrupted and/or discovers that they can't really do anything against them and this is why well meaning people run for office promising the world then get in and turn out to be massive disappointments - because the reality is far different to what they thought.
And to be fair, it's not just super rich who are possessed by greed. This obsession with industrial progress marches on because nobody ever seems to have enough. Like George W. Bush's famous "haves and have mores" speech in Farenheit 911 - there don't seem to be many "have enoughs".
And actually I've lived on or below the poverty line most of my life and am living proof that you can live on very little and in a system like this you can have a totally decent life with surprisingly little. I realise a lot of the comforts, including having this conversation on a computer on the internet are completely due the industrialized world, my point is that currently there seems to be no limits on greed. People who have billions use their billions to get more billions.
I'm not saying all billionaires are bad or do nothing to help either, I'm just saying given how little a person can live off to have a comfortable life, then at some point we should try and ensure that 2 conditions are met:
1. that everyone has a right to a comfortable life, and
2. everything we do needs to consider the impact on the environment and people's well being.
It really wouldn't take that much actually. Then once those conditions are met, they can earn as much money as they like. it would naturally put limits on the kind of unchecked greed that exists now, but people would just have to deal with it. People should maybe start dealing with the concept of "enough".
But at the moment banks and corporations enjoy a kind of privileged anarchy where they do whatever they like regardless of who it affects or how much damage it does in the state sanctioned pursuit of more, more, more. This unchecked lust for more is what's killing the planet and ruining people's lives.
So to me, the challenge is as an international community to figure out how to reign this in and make sure every business action is ethical GLOBALLY. Seeing as they can make their money globally, their ethical responsibilities should also be global.
But at the moment these people possessed by greed are using national armies and weapons to expand their search for more, killing as many people as they like.
No doubt about it, the world is simply insane.
But you know, it's even simpler - this current state of things is a kind of neo-feudalism. Stripped back to it's simplest form, it is the school bully stealing the other kids' lunch money. or even further, the alpha chimp beating up the other threats to his dominance. It has always worked like this. There is always an alpha who lives at the expence of the others. It's only that now we are "civilizing" more and more we start to understand this nature of power and feel like there is a better way, but that means challenging the most basic and primal tendencies for the more bold and ambitious to dominate, because we are getting more intelligent overall and realize now that we can all have enough and nobody needs to go without so that a small few can have more than they could need in several lifetimes.
) :
