Category: Philosophy

  • A Purpose Driven Life

    A Purpose Driven Life

    I have here borrowed the title of a popular book; one I have not read. It is a title I love.

    George Bernard Shaw said,

    “This is the true joy in life, the being used for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one; the being a force of nature instead of a feverish, selfish little clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.

    I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community, and as long as I live it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can.

    I want to be thoroughly used up when I die, for the harder I work the more I live. I rejoice in life for its own sake. Life is no “brief candle” for me. It is a sort of splendid torch which I have got hold of for the moment, and I want to make it burn as brightly as possible before handing it on to future generations.”

    What is your purpose? As Peter Diamandis so beautifully put it, what is that for which you would gladly die? Live in service to that, and you are living a life that could change the world; a purpose-driven life.

    If joining with our growing community in creating the world’s first Celebration Society calls to your heart, and perhaps even your soul, welcome! But if your purpose is something else, please take the time to inquire deep within until you know it, whatever it is.

    A purposeful life can overcome many obstacles. To a purpose-driven person, challenges and losses that might crush someone else are simply stepping stones, and even opportunities to learn.

    I speak from experience. Back in 2014, I wondered if I would ever complete this book. I had been developing it for many years. Though I saw the vision clearly, and burned for its expression, I was paralyzed by fear. Acutely aware of myself as a flawed and limited person, I was afraid that others would ridicule me or—worse—think badly of the message because the messenger was inadequate.

    Then I had a great blessing. I contracted a severe infection, was in Intensive Care for 4 days and could have died. (This was a resistant strain of bacteria, and the hospital was powerless to deal with it until they flew in a special antibiotic from the CDC. That antibiotic was my last chance.) Outside the context of a purpose-driven life, I could have seen this as a curse and given up. Many do so.

    But I instead took it as a chance to learn a life lesson. I looked to see what might be there, and found three precious ones. First, by being forced to wear a catheter 24/7 for a month, unable to bend over and sometimes having accidents, I learned real compassion for disabled people. Second, by experiencing continuing excruciating pain, I learned to distinguish pain from suffering. Third, and most importantly, I was forced to face my mortality square on and look at my life in a larger context.

    Realizing that I might die at any time, if not from this illness then from something else, I considered how I would feel, looking back upon this life from another realm. I realized that, while I would miss many things and especially the dear ones in my life, I would most regret that I had the opportunity to bring forth this book and failed to do so. I was haunted by the phrase, “The saddest words of tongue or pen are these: it might have been.”

    That ate at my soul. I resolved in that hospital bed that, upon getting well, I would focus entirely on finishing the book. And so it happened. That, above all, is why I call the illness a great blessing. It gave me the motivation to serve my life’s purpose, regardless of the personal cost.

    What would you die for? Knowing that, what will you live to serve? I pray that you find a way to get clear on that, today, and that you don’t need a life-threatening illness to bring things into sharp relief so that you take the necessary action.

  • Addressing Our Needs: A Thought Experiment

    Addressing Our Needs: A Thought Experiment

    While job displacement from accelerating automation may be our most urgent problem, we have many others. The purpose of this thought experiment is to consider what kind of integrated solution might address the majority of these at once. Regarding the threat of worker displacement and social unrest posed by accelerating automation, I submit that in a pragmatic solution we will want to:

    • Allow existing economic engines to continue to function
    • Find a way to embrace rather than oppose or limit the fruits of technological progress
    • Meet the basic needs of everyone on the planet
    • Offer meaning, self-esteem and the chance for social recognition to people, regardless of whether they work or do not
    • Support the desires of the wealthy and powerful such that they do not oppose the solution

    In order to address other vital issues, we will also want the following in a solution:

    • Environmental restoration, preferably as a byproduct of economic growth rather than as a drag upon it
    • Effectively unlimited, sustainable sources of clean energy and raw materials
    • Effective and economical recycling using advanced technology
    • An effective way to provide for security and safety without sacrificing much liberty
    • Representative government that naturally avoids gridlock and partisanship, while protecting a codified set of common values
    • Education that prepares children for adult rights and responsibilities, including citizenship
    • Entertainment that is safe and provides the full range of exploration of interests and desires
    • Physical structures that enhance rather than detract from natural beauty
    • Institutions that serve to support and cultivate a finer quality of life
    • A way to protect the elderly, the young, and others unable to care for themselves
    • A means of minimizing disease transmission into the society
    • A method of supporting technological progress that captures the value while minimizing risks

    Further, I submit that to enhance feasibility any viable solution should be:

    • Straightforward to test and then to implement, requiring no new technology
    • Designed with the risk of failure contained and financially modest
    • To minimize cost and logistical challenges, preferably testable on a local basis and ideally via simulation before being physically tested.

    I close with the following questions:

    • Is this a complete statement of requirements?
    • If the above is what a desirable solution should accomplish, how can we accomplish this in an integrated manner?

    I have proposed one possible solution that I believe meets the above criteria. I invite you to consider these criteria and then agree, disagree or propose your own. Many of our problems need new thinking, and especially those problems associated with technological unemployment.

  • Why I am not a Techno-utopian

    Why I am not a Techno-utopian

    The techno-utopians do a great job of showing the potential of technology to solve huge problems and give us a better world. I generally see this potential the same way they do.

    My fundamental difference with them is a particular kind of skepticism. Just because things could work out well doesn’t mean they must work out well. For instance, the best technology isn’t always the one that gets adopted.  Sometimes this is relatively innocuous, and sometimes it’s dangerous.

    It’s well known that inferior VHS beat superior Betamax. Less well-known is that environmentally sound thorium nuclear power lost out to risky uranium nuclear power due to politics.

    Our capacity to make bad decisions continues. For instance, according to a NASA report, it would cost around $150 million to protect the US power grid from long-term shutdown in the event of an increasingly probable major solar flare, with estimated damage exceeding $1 trillion. Politicians won’t make the investment.

    While such a solar flare may not hit Earth for decades, railroad accidents happen far more frequently. The derailment of Amtrak train 188 in Philadelphia in 2015 killed eight people, and some train disasters have been far worse. They could be devastating. Trains are used to carry highly toxic and flammable substances through the hearts of major metropolitan areas. The US Congress has offered only token funding for Positive Train Control (PTC); a technology capable of preventing such accidents,

    One problem is that the word “best” is meaningful only within a context. It could refer to cost, reliability, service of a particular purpose, or service of a different purpose. My best may not be your best. However, if I’m the one in charge of making the go/no go decision on a major piece of technology, we will all have to live with that decision; probably for a lot longer than most of us imagine.

    I want to build Celebration Societies where Citizens are aligned upon a specific set of mutually agreed values that guide all societal decisions. I want those values to be the result of careful deliberation and open, evidence-based debate. I want it recognized that technology is not some magical genie that grants all wishes, but rather a great yet neutral power that augments human capabilities for good—or for ill.

    Artificial intelligences, and the robots they control, may provide us with universal abundance that works to the liking of everyone, or it may work to the liking of some and the displeasure or even horror of others. It is entirely plausible, as pundits like Stephen Hawking have said, that the abundance these systems generate may be hoarded by their owners.

    If our leaders continue to view the world through a Scarcity Game mindset, the hoarding of capital and means of production will only accelerate. Those less powerful or wealthy will fight for scraps, or live on whatever charity the masters care to dole out. This is one of the crucial blind spots of techno-utopians: if technology is controlled by only a few, its benefits will be allocated according to the wishes of those few.

    The only way I know to assure universal abundance is to have localized distribution and control of automated systems of production in the context of an Abundance Game. Likewise, localized systems allow for multiple experiments to be conducted in parallel, with the results of those experiments informing us all.

    Human progress is sloppy, and includes many mistakes. By placing our societal experiments within local Celebration Societies, we have the chance to keep the consequences of those mistakes local and only duplicate successful experiments elsewhere. In this way, we can embrace the potential of technology to create a wondrous future, while remaining aware of how human nature affects the deployment of that technology.

    In addition, many–not all–techno-utopians seem to brush aside concerns about how advancing automation will disrupt the lives of those not so well endowed with assets or astute as themselves. History suggests that the process will be brutal for many of our fellow human beings.

    Consider, for example, how a generation of aerospace engineers were thrown out of work when the US space program was effectively shut down. Many wound up flipping burgers; some killed themselves in despair. Those engineers were among the most technologically skilled of professionals.

    That was a political decision and such decisions can be reversed. When automation decimates professions, it will not be reversible. How much worse will it be this time for people, especially those lacking technical competencies that can be redirected or retrained?

    Finally, the whole concept of utopia is misguided. There is a section in the book, Never a Utopia. The reason is that utopia is a fantasy of some future perfected state without change. Who would really want that? Also, it’s not realistic.

    A Celebration Society will be a scientific society, prizing the best available evidence. That evidence evolves.  Science is a progressive unfoldment of truth. Ultimate truth is never attained, but only ever more closely approximated. Consequently, assuming we are able to create a Celebration Society, we will see continuous experiments and improvements. And that will keep life interesting!

     

     

     

     

    [1] http://www.wired.com/2009/04/storms2012/