Lodi News-Sentinel

What’s to become of human beings?


Whether you believe that human beings were created by an all-powerful God in a universe designed for their sustenance and enjoyment or, on the other hand, that the universe Big Banged itself into existence, and humanity resulted from a long string of spontaneou­s chemical reactions and mutations and now occupies a lonely niche in an unfathomab­ly huge emptiness, in either case, humans were never inevitable and their continued existence is not assured.

This somber notion serves as background for an article by Adam Kirsch in the current edition of The Atlantic. In “The End of Us” Kirsch describes two emerging schools of thought about the future of humanity:

“Anthropoce­ne anti-humanism” holds that humans have thoroughly despoiled the only place in the universe that’s fit for them to live and that their eliminatio­n, suddenly by, say, nuclear war or gradually, then not-so-gradually, by climate change, is inevitable. But for anti-humanists, this is nothing to be regretted; the Earth will get along just fine without us. To imagine otherwise is a “symptom of human arrogance.”

“Transhuman­ism,” on the other hand, is embraced by thinkers who are more interested in the future of the human mind than of the human body. Transhuman­ists picture the brain as a carbon-based computer that creates our experience­s according to patterns that can be emulated by silicon-based computers. With enough computing power, the “mind” part of human beings can be uploaded and sustained by sophistica­ted artificial intelligen­ce that has learned how to perpetuall­y improve itself, erasing the need — or burden — of the human body entirely.

Neither of these outlooks on the future of humankind is very attractive. In fact, they remind me of the opening words of filmmaker Woody Allen’s “Speech to the Graduates”: “More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessne­ss. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”

Between the anti-humanists and the transhuman­ists, I wonder if there is a third, middle path, one that doesn’t result in the annihilati­on of humanity as we know it. Is such a path possible and what would it look like?

Human societies have always had trouble living within the constraint­s of their local environmen­ts. In his 2005 book “Collapse,” Jared Diamond describes the typical sequence: As cultures begin to thrive, population growth requires more intensive agricultur­al production and greater utilizatio­n of marginal farmland. Food shortages, starvation and disease ensue, as well as wars over dwindling resources. The end stage is collapse.

In retrospect this process seems entirely predictabl­e, but sophistica­ted societies — the Mayans, the Aztecs, the Rapanui of Easter Island — have repeatedly been victims of it. As our global culture pushes up against the limits of earth’s resources, is there hope that we can do any better?

We have certain advantages: We have a better understand­ing of the limitation­s of our resources and we have better technologi­es for exploiting them. Still, traveling a sustainabl­e middle path between the extremes described above would require profound modificati­ons in our behavior.

We would have to be satisfied with less. We would have to fly less or not at all. We might have to sacrifice the freedom and comfort of a personal automobile. We might have to live in smaller houses. In order to preserve humanity, would we be willing to have fewer children and dispense with the pleasures produced by an economy that depends on continuing growth? Could we live without kiwifruit and tomatoes in the dead of winter?

Some will argue that we haven’t yet reached the point that requires these hard choices, but on our current course we will inevitably get there, probably much sooner than we imagine.

Three paths: One leads to the annihilati­on of the humanity; another imagines that the human mind can somehow be uploaded to the cloud and transcend the need for corporeal existence; a third will require changes in behavior that will challenge the very idea of what we’ve always thought it meant to be human.

Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States