Great call to inspiration. I would only add that scientists, inventors, and founders, while among the greatest and most necessary heroes of progress, are not the only ones, and we should also urge people with other gifts and interests to think bigger. In particular, scientists, inventors, and founders need institutionalists and social entrepreneurs to create the conditions that multiply their impact.
Take my current hobbyhorse, urbanism. In the Western world today, it is very rare for cities to simultaneously be:
-- dense enough to get the agglomeration and amenity benefits of density
-- safe enough to spare dwellers the stress of worrying about crime and traffic collisions
-- beautiful enough to feel like worthy successors to the great places our ancestors built, the places we go to marvel at as tourists
-- and family-friendly enough to make it straightforward for a middle-class couple to raise even two, much less three or four or six, children happily to adulthood there.
That's bad for both quality of life and speed of future-building. And there is no law of physics that says it has to be this way. We know that there is a set of institutional and social changes that could convert cities to have all four of those properties. People with the determination and skill to help make that conversion happen are heroes of progress too, and should feel the inspiration and the responsibility that comes with that.
Yes, and there is a role for VCs and philanthropists, for academics and educators, for authors and journalists, for storytellers, for government. I'll say more about that in the next chapter.
The real frontier is getting rid of capitalism with its destructive hold on humanity, and designing and transitioning to a new replacement system. It is what hindering all progress and degrading us. We are good as we are and will do just fine without naming exploration as some vanity uplifting project.
Building and exploring the new worlds is a given for a successful civilisation.
You see how spirit fell and how depressed we are that now exploration is a dream that may not ever come true and is now relegated to publications like this, where it’s mentioned one last time as a dream.
The etymology of "capitalism" shows that it recognizes the role of man's mind ("caput" in Latin means "head," another term for the mind) in producing wealth. "Getting rid of capitalism" means getting rid of the man's mind, in other words, while still expecting mindless humans to have the ability to maintain a modern standard of living. How is that supposed to work, exactly?
I suppose should expect the follow up argument - “capitalism gave us all this technological progress, without it we would be living in caves”. On the contrary, it is the progress that we managed to “steal” from under eye of materialistic system. Only 10% of people that could go into science became scientists and rest went to pursue capitalist goals of wealth and doing science for commercial interests. If not for capitalism by now we would have free energy, be exploring the universe, communicating with other advanced civilisations.
Instead we are a primitive tribe zoo for them. They come in their anti gravity craft and hang out around military bases and airports because they want to see how crazy was jet propulsion engines. Those visitors are equivalent of vintage car enthusiasts, and were vintage circus.
The historical root of “capital” (from Latin capitalis, from caput) referred to “principal sum of money” or “stock of wealth,” not intellect. The modern term “capitalism” first appeared in 19th-century economic discourse meaning a system based on private ownership of capital.
Of course the progress theorizing is overlooking the role of IQ in the ability to build and maintain a technologically competent global civilization (TCGC). The human species' median IQ falls into the 80's, and you just can't create a TCGC when billions of humans are only barely smart enough for jobs in stoop labor.
Great essay, admittedly I’m only just catching up on the whole collection but one alone was enough to be thought provoking. I admit, I think there is one element to this vision - celebrating the agents of the techno-utopian project - that is missing. I’d like to write about that soon because I think it will help answer why there is so much cynicism and skepticism directed at those agents and the project today.
But first I will have to read the other 9 essays! Thank you for this great work.
Interestingly, just before this came up on my FB feed, I finally got around to watching Heinlein's commentary on the lunar landing. He had this neat idea of it being "New Year's Day of Year One" of a great new era of human history.
Unfortunately, he added, too many people are missing the significance of such progress.
Great call to inspiration. I would only add that scientists, inventors, and founders, while among the greatest and most necessary heroes of progress, are not the only ones, and we should also urge people with other gifts and interests to think bigger. In particular, scientists, inventors, and founders need institutionalists and social entrepreneurs to create the conditions that multiply their impact.
Take my current hobbyhorse, urbanism. In the Western world today, it is very rare for cities to simultaneously be:
-- dense enough to get the agglomeration and amenity benefits of density
-- safe enough to spare dwellers the stress of worrying about crime and traffic collisions
-- beautiful enough to feel like worthy successors to the great places our ancestors built, the places we go to marvel at as tourists
-- and family-friendly enough to make it straightforward for a middle-class couple to raise even two, much less three or four or six, children happily to adulthood there.
That's bad for both quality of life and speed of future-building. And there is no law of physics that says it has to be this way. We know that there is a set of institutional and social changes that could convert cities to have all four of those properties. People with the determination and skill to help make that conversion happen are heroes of progress too, and should feel the inspiration and the responsibility that comes with that.
Yes, and there is a role for VCs and philanthropists, for academics and educators, for authors and journalists, for storytellers, for government. I'll say more about that in the next chapter.
This just needs epic music, pictures of the universe, the lab, the boardroom, and historical stuff. The call to join the great cult of progress.
As I was reading it felt more and more inevitable that you would quote Ayn Rand, and sure enough!
Yes, her worldview has been highly influential on me, and especially on the topic of this chapter.
The real frontier is getting rid of capitalism with its destructive hold on humanity, and designing and transitioning to a new replacement system. It is what hindering all progress and degrading us. We are good as we are and will do just fine without naming exploration as some vanity uplifting project.
Building and exploring the new worlds is a given for a successful civilisation.
You see how spirit fell and how depressed we are that now exploration is a dream that may not ever come true and is now relegated to publications like this, where it’s mentioned one last time as a dream.
The etymology of "capitalism" shows that it recognizes the role of man's mind ("caput" in Latin means "head," another term for the mind) in producing wealth. "Getting rid of capitalism" means getting rid of the man's mind, in other words, while still expecting mindless humans to have the ability to maintain a modern standard of living. How is that supposed to work, exactly?
Reference:
The Mind-Based Etymology of ‘Capitalism’
https://richardsalsman.com/wp-content/uploads/Salsman-2019-The-Mind-Based-Etymology-of-Capitalism-TOS-Winter-2019.pdf
I suppose should expect the follow up argument - “capitalism gave us all this technological progress, without it we would be living in caves”. On the contrary, it is the progress that we managed to “steal” from under eye of materialistic system. Only 10% of people that could go into science became scientists and rest went to pursue capitalist goals of wealth and doing science for commercial interests. If not for capitalism by now we would have free energy, be exploring the universe, communicating with other advanced civilisations.
Instead we are a primitive tribe zoo for them. They come in their anti gravity craft and hang out around military bases and airports because they want to see how crazy was jet propulsion engines. Those visitors are equivalent of vintage car enthusiasts, and were vintage circus.
That’s an unusual take.
The historical root of “capital” (from Latin capitalis, from caput) referred to “principal sum of money” or “stock of wealth,” not intellect. The modern term “capitalism” first appeared in 19th-century economic discourse meaning a system based on private ownership of capital.
Of course the progress theorizing is overlooking the role of IQ in the ability to build and maintain a technologically competent global civilization (TCGC). The human species' median IQ falls into the 80's, and you just can't create a TCGC when billions of humans are only barely smart enough for jobs in stoop labor.
Great essay, admittedly I’m only just catching up on the whole collection but one alone was enough to be thought provoking. I admit, I think there is one element to this vision - celebrating the agents of the techno-utopian project - that is missing. I’d like to write about that soon because I think it will help answer why there is so much cynicism and skepticism directed at those agents and the project today.
But first I will have to read the other 9 essays! Thank you for this great work.
Interestingly, just before this came up on my FB feed, I finally got around to watching Heinlein's commentary on the lunar landing. He had this neat idea of it being "New Year's Day of Year One" of a great new era of human history.
Unfortunately, he added, too many people are missing the significance of such progress.
The irony is that it was more like the opposite: the end of an era of progress and the beginning of stagnation