I have long maintained that the greatest blessing
and curse of humanity has been our near infinite capacity for delusion. To firmly believe things that are illogical
or improbable, or even decisively disproved by blatant facts. This gift is what empowers great art -- and we
fiction authors have learned to weave ornate incantations, catering to a public
need to believe (temporarily) in imaginary events.
Alas, the downside of this talent is obvious. We are terrible at perceiving and appraising our own delusional mistakes – witness the almost unalloyed litany of horrid statecraft perpetrated by kings, lords and priests, when their delusions could go unquestioned and unaccountable.
Alas, the downside of this talent is obvious. We are terrible at perceiving and appraising our own delusional mistakes – witness the almost unalloyed litany of horrid statecraft perpetrated by kings, lords and priests, when their delusions could go unquestioned and unaccountable.
We’ve found a partial solution. Criticism is the only known antidote to
error. If you are blind to some mistakes, others may not be, and they will often be delighted to point out those errors of yours, without charge! (Will you listen: even gritting your teeth?)
The greatest advantage of a free and open society is not the pleasure of liberty (though that’s great). It is the high proportion of disastrous blunders that we manage to catch, in time, that led to our unprecedented ratio of success to failure. Science fiction plays a role, through “self-preventing prophecies,” like George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, which girded millions to fight against the worst possible failure modes. But other professions do their bit, as well.
Especially Journalism. Yes, much-maligned (sometimes deservedly) journalism. One of the 'expert castes' currently under attack in the War-Aganst-All-Spartypants. Individually they are as flawed as any of us. But a profession that lives by asking questions... are you sure you want to dismiss them, across the board?)
The greatest advantage of a free and open society is not the pleasure of liberty (though that’s great). It is the high proportion of disastrous blunders that we manage to catch, in time, that led to our unprecedented ratio of success to failure. Science fiction plays a role, through “self-preventing prophecies,” like George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, which girded millions to fight against the worst possible failure modes. But other professions do their bit, as well.
Especially Journalism. Yes, much-maligned (sometimes deservedly) journalism. One of the 'expert castes' currently under attack in the War-Aganst-All-Spartypants. Individually they are as flawed as any of us. But a profession that lives by asking questions... are you sure you want to dismiss them, across the board?)
== Do warnings bring action? ==
Let me add that terrorism isn’t the only way it can happen. A
“Carrington Event” – a massive solar flare like one that fried telegraph
systems in the 1850s – could have devastating effects upon our grid and
unlinked electronics in the home, (possibly even zapping the rooftop solar
systems that are our last bulwark against darkness, unless we learn how to
buffer them well).
Moreover, the 1850s event was apparently not as bad as they come. Studies of carbon isotope anomalies in tree rings suggest that the Sun occasionally belches prodigiously, giving our planet truly major electrical shocks. And note that I have not even discussed another threat – EMP or electromagnetic pulse – that some enemy might use to accomplish the same end.
Moreover, the 1850s event was apparently not as bad as they come. Studies of carbon isotope anomalies in tree rings suggest that the Sun occasionally belches prodigiously, giving our planet truly major electrical shocks. And note that I have not even discussed another threat – EMP or electromagnetic pulse – that some enemy might use to accomplish the same end.
Surely more attention should be paid to these dangers. And I regularly consult about such threats with “agencies” who have come to appreciate the unfettered darkside imaginings of
science fiction authors. You want
potential failure modes? Ones not yet on
anyone’s horizon? I got ‘em.
And yet, how to reconcile that with the rampant accusations that “Brin
is an optimist”? Easy. Unlike the certifiably insane cynical
grouches all around us, I am able to notice
the clear fact that things are (still tentatively) very very good for us, right
now. That our ancestors – including the
Greatest Generation so extolled by the Right – would have laughed in the faces
of today’s dolor-merchants and their dismal mewlings. Nor is the mad-right the only locus of grumpy
ingrates. Civil libertarians who decry the rising surveillance state are
justified (!) and useful… until they neglect to ask – “So, how did we get the present day peak of
freedom that I so-worry we’re about to lose?”
Asking that one, simple question empowers us to see a simple truth. That we did not get here by cowering and hiding.
In fact when we open our eyes to positive trends, we discover they are easily as big as
any list of negatives. From Steven
Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence has Declined to Peter Diamandis’s Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think to Ray
Kurzweil’s The Singularity Is Near, some of the smartest people alive are
pointing out the good news… and how much more there may be, if just a few
game-changing breakthroughs line up.
Even in the blogosphere, where the cynical curled lip and playground
bully sneer assail any hint of positivity, a few have spoken up, as in this
piece listing “11 Reasons Why 2015 Was a Great Year For Humanity.” Wherein the writer, Angus Hervey, opines that: “We are living
through the most astonishing period of human progress in history. And nobody’s
telling us about it.”
Indeed, he could have made it a clean dozen reasons, by mentioning
something I’ve been saying for the last month or so… that 2015 was by far humanity’s best year in the exploration and understanding of space, the cosmos and our place in the universe.
And the ease of self-deception...
Denial: Self-Deception, False Beliefs, and the Origins of the Human Mind, by Ajit Varki and Danny Brower asserts an answer
to one of the great questions of biology; why so many species, ranging from
dolphins and chimps to corvids (ravens) and parrots, sea lions and elephants,
and prairie dogs, all cluster close to each other under what I’ve called theglass ceiling of sapience,” displaying similar, basic capabilities at tool-use,
proto-language and self-awareness. Varki and Brower propose that there is a
lethal zone, just a little higher, wherein creatures become fully aware of
their inevitable death. Any species who rise into this zone lose fitness
because individuals become obsessed with their own mortality, to the detriment
of all other considerations, like reproduction.
Under this hypothesis — clearly influenced by the mid-20th Century Freudian “thanatos” complex — humanity burst beyond the glass ceiling by counter-balancing any thanatos obsession with another exceptional skill, that of denial. Self-distraction, using various mental tricks to ignore — for the most part — the glaring prospect of personal doom.
Under this hypothesis — clearly influenced by the mid-20th Century Freudian “thanatos” complex — humanity burst beyond the glass ceiling by counter-balancing any thanatos obsession with another exceptional skill, that of denial. Self-distraction, using various mental tricks to ignore — for the most part — the glaring prospect of personal doom.
Alas, my response
(admittedly without yet reading the book) is that Freudian and
meta-Freudian models are artifacts of a time when we had a much less
clear understanding of the workings of evolution. In this case, we
have a just-so story of creatures becoming so terminally obsessed with
mortality that they neglect their offspring. Tasty... but...
Refutation is
simple. Those who find a way to prioritize their progeny higher than
scrabbling for an extra few months… those are the ones who will pass on genes,
including for the trait of such prioritization. Indeed, nature is filled
with examples of courageous mothers and dads who do exactly that. All that is
needed is for parenthood to be an addictive high — and those channels are
already present in every species that abides near the glass ceiling. Oxytocin,
endorphins, dopamine levels, all reward parental care with overwhelming
ferocity. At which point the thanatos distraction will have a potent rival, one
far more correlated with fitness and success at the game of genetic
procreation. In other words, sorry. I’m not buying it.
There are other, more
plausible, hypotheses for why humanity shattered the glass ceiling by orders of
magnitude. In nature, whenever a trait experiences rapid runaway, the
first culprit to appraise would be sexual selection. In my neoteny paper I posit a rare two-way cycle of sexual selection, in which female and male
humans engaged in fierce judgementalism toward each other, demanding
ever-inflating sets of exaggerated traits, foremost of which was intelligence.
Word arrives here about the recent or imminent passing of the great science fiction editor, David Hartwell. I am bummed and will have more to say about this soon.
