Michael, what a great question.

I have struggled to decide how many people the Earth can support sustainably. We were told to be optimistic and I think the figure chosen probably is. The story is set some time in the future, falling birth rates, disease, famine, and war have reduced the population to near the 5 billion housed in the sanctuaries. (It says- disease, famine, and war were left behind)

There are still several reasons for people being outside of the sanctuaries.

Some people thrive on challenge, pitting themselves against adversity or foes and conquering. Either conquering the environment (e.g. mountain climbing, jungle survival ) or own fears or limitations or their own personal best; winning in a contest or battle. For the joy of overcoming, the adrenalin, the endorphins, the camaraderie and celebration. That's what makes life meaningful and worthwhile for them. Being safe and having an easy life could seem suffocating and prison like. If these people are enclosed within the sanctuaries they could upset the harmony because they do not have a dedication that makes their heart race and that bonds them closely to like minded souls, and that they feel allows them to express their true warrior nature.Its better that they serve the sanctuary rather than act against it. So there is some reciprocal advantage to the arrangement. Food and water supplies, holidays in the sanctuary, respect, admiration.

Social cohesion is very important but some may resent the social affirmations which are a kind of drip fed, daily indoctrination, or they may disagree with the imposition of compulsory sleep or with the planned parenting measures.Strong minded individuals particularly those wanting personal power may exclude themselves from the sanctuaries. Anyone can choose to leave, it isn't a prison. Some may get personal fulfillment and purpose from banding together with like minded individuals, struggling to survive and working against the sanctuaries.In the name of freedom but wanting control of the resources and to be in charge. These people were referred to as terrorists

Another group are criminals that have incurable personality disorders.Rather than having people permanently incarcerated for the safety of the sanctuary they will be exiled. Unlike the terrorists who just want to break the system the criminals may just want to get back into the sanctuary where life is a lot nicer or to get resources as they are scarce outside.Finally there may be feral bands that are the descendants of those that did not want to enter the sanctuary because its culture conflicts with their strongly held beliefs. They hang on to that identity because it is all that they have.

Why cannot all of humanity find sanctuary in the future? In a nutshell, certain aspects of human nature and personality. They do not want sanctuary or can not be given sanctuary for the safety of the rest.

Georgina,

Great essay. I find it very interesting how you discussed humanity's problems and their solutions within a story. I especially like your statement "The human species is the ultimate generalist, we learn, we adapt, we survive." I totally agree that it is important to learn from our mistakes and adapt to our changing environment.

Best wishes,

Mohammed

    Hello Georgina,

    I've quickly read your essay once, and I find it quite original and entertaining. Your style of presentation is cute.

    At a quick glance, there are two aspects in your described potential future that do not look too attractive to me.

    The first is that there appears to be a clear separation, even more marked than now, between the good inhabitants of the sanctuaries, and the criminals, terrorists and debris (that pose a threat to the ventilation shafts and logistics portals, or threaten exchange mission among sanctuaries).

    The second, in part related, is the overall impression that the life in the sanctuary system is based on regulations imposed from above by some authority hidden behind the scenes. Because your text is very suggestive, even visually, it may be that it has induced in my imagination some unintended resonance with some common place science fiction scenarios, as seen in some science fiction movie (does `Zardoz` ring a bell?), or read in some book.

    Nevertheless, I wonder (i) whether you feel that any future stage of humanity will unavoidably have to cope with a percentage of bad guys, and, perhaps less naively, (ii) how you imagine the transition from our present world to the sanctuary system could take place (e.g., whether peacefully or not).

    Tommaso

    PS1. Humans are becoming symbiotic residents of living man made hosts. Sometimes, when queuing in my car along the highway, I feel we have already got to that point.

    PS2. I see you have a lot of comments above, which I could not read. If you feel my points are already covered in some previous post, let me know, and I might stick in at the right place.

      Dear Ms. Parry,

      As is now becoming usual in these contests, your essay was another terrific read. Unlike every other essay I have read at this site so far, your main concern in writing it was to inform and involve the reader only in the process of being expertly informed.

      With the highest of regards,

      Joe Fisher

        Hi Tommaso,

        thanks for your interest and observations. In my reply to Michael Alan I have talked about some of the less Utopian aspects of the tale.

        You are right indoctrination, shared affirmations, is used as a means of maintaining social cohesion. Common knowledge of past mistakes, necessary limits, optimism and common purpose are used. As can be seen it is part of the education system, parental guidance and public information. Whether this is good or bad is a matter of opinion. Self interest to the detriment of others, greed, and profits do not have a place, success is measured in other ways. Nor does anarchy have a place. Perhaps there can be discussion among the populous about the affirmations, choosing perhaps the shared affirmations for the next quarter, discussion of the meaning/interpretations, validity and benefits of the different affirmations. Perhaps voting to delete some from the public list or adding new ones as they seem appropriate to new circumstances. In this way the people might feel they have some democratic input into the steering of the society.

        Re. bad guys. I think they are not all of one type. There are people who can dedicate themselves to service of the sanctuaries as external protectors and gatherers of data. Their character may make them unsuited to permanent sanctuary life as it does not sufficiently challenge their competitive drive. These are not bad guys but could become bad guys if trapped in an unsuitable environment and culture. There are those opposed to the social control of the system and want to overthrow it in favor of their own form of government or anarchy and those who are have personality disorders that can not be cured and are a danger to the other residents.Using brain scans it is now possible to observe the structural differences of such people and screen them out of the population, and exile them.It may be possible to detect them while still children and put them into a different education path that will prepare them for life outside of the sanctuary.It may be possible to think of some positive role that those fearless, ambitious, self interested people could play.

        Re. the political system I have in mind a benign democratically elected meritocracy, rather than sinister hidden authoritarian control. Social leadership would be a dedication like any other and suitable personalities would have appropriate broad based education (e.g.sociology, psychology, history, science, leadership, prior to becoming candidates for election. I haven't gone as far as thinking about a suitable curriculum : )

        I think that putting in the infrastructure and construction of the sanctuaries would happen with a background of unrest as the need for them would not be agreed to until the environmental conditions have made survival difficult.I imagine it would require peace keepers to prevent obstruction from those who regard them as a waste of resources that could be better spent on food production and basic necessities of life, and those that would want to take resources from the sanctuaries for their own personal survival.The only way a peaceful transition could take place is if the 'indoctrination' of the people begins before construction so that the majority are in support of the projects.

        Thanks for helping me put some more flesh on the bare bones, Georgina

        Georgina,

        You are a very creative writer. Have you written books or other articles that I can access? I enjoyed your futuristic view and I hope it reflects where we are headed. I worry about our collective wisdom. Do we really have the ability to create a utopian future or do we forget how to deal with adversity when the seas become smooth? Your optimistic view is refreshing. I enjoyed the tidbits of wisdom and they are the lessons that we need to learn and act upon. Your background in biology clearly gives you a platform to help guide the future. You get my high vote.

        Thanks for reading my essay. I appreciated your positive feedback.

        Gene Barbee

          Gorge (as Enid Blyton in the Famous Five books decreed your name can be)

          You have surpassed all the essays I have read in this contest. I for one had to be reminded that I had neglected to mention overpopulation as a crucial factor in the steered-to future. Your dystopia/utopia is admirable for the possible solutions to this problem. The quotes from current research show that the Sanctuaries are no mere SciFi dream but may come to pass in some fashion.

          Quite apart from the excellent ideas I enjoyed the narrative in which you have made your research seem already a fact of life.

          Gawd help us all!

          Vladimir

            I mistyped George sorry and the mistake was almost invisible on the ipad editing window! Is this progress?

            Hello Georgina - Thank you for a very entertaining and provocative read. I always love an ending where the good guys have won, but like Tommaso, I ended up with a queasy feeling. The community you describe would seem to involve conformity and compliance as a primary value, and the result seems serene, almost plastic. This is perhaps an appropriate cocoon for a child in school, but you have not given a clear picture of what the community is like at the adult level. Conformity and compliance at this level for adults could depress rather than promote innovation, initiative and creativity - all essential for continued survival in the face of continuous change and challenge.

            You've discussed this concern in your responses above, and as you say "smooth seas do not make good sailors". Perhaps there is another level to your narrative that is only faintly revealed - the immense fear and vigilance of the adult community required to sustain this child's sense of peace - vigilance which includes personal self-sacrifice (forays to the surface, dangerous missions, emergency bio-hazards to fight) - something which generates the motivations to build and sustain the powerful shared moral framework on which the community rests...... We all love a good story with a balance of good and evil - and good winning out in the end (but just barely).

            Thanks for the inspiration. - George

              I second you, Tommaso. John Boorman's Zardoz came immediately to mind. Then Orwell's 1984 with its indoctrination of the middle classes and exclusion of the proletariate. (Thinking I might want to escape and join the prols, I was going to add Lucas's THX 1138 to the mix; but freedom of movement isn't policed in that direction.) Georgina is quite frank in acknowledging these dystopic overtones. - Mike

              Hi Wilhelmus,

              you are right that the seas have never been entirely smooth but mankind has lived through the best of times in the relatively stable inter glacial period. Now it seems climate change will only add to our woes world wide. More droughts more floods, more tornadoes and cyclones, more lightning, more wildfires, more heatwaves, more unseasonable weather, as well as a population still growing and oil running out that mechanized intensive agriculture, that has fed the world, depends upon.

              I will read your essay Wilhelmus : )

              Hi George,

              thanks for reading the essay and for filling in the blanks in your own way. My daughter also informed me that in a story something exciting or intriguing has to actually happen. We were only allowed 9 pages and were instructed to be optimistic. All I have done is set the scene, as a vehicle for highlighting a number of issues and their solutions. They are facing the unknown. What they can do is to learn how to survive whatever happens, they are 'filling the tool box' so to speak, so that they have what they need to do that.

              High culture and creativity are two measures of the success of the sanctuary so there will be effort put into enabling and encouraging personal development and exploration and celebration in those areas. I imagine just as the children learn to create virtual environments to explore so do the adults, not just as games but as experiences. Art is not limited to external images and objects but becomes immersive and interactive too. Architecture is also a creative field in which old limitations might be left behind. Building unimaginable shapes There is also no reason why the sanctuaries could not 'evolve' over time to better meet the emotional and intellectual needs of the people. A symbiotic relationship is imagined in which the people serve the needs of the sanctuary and the sanctuary serves the needs of the people.

              Hi Vladimir,

              Yes George is OK if you like, the 'ina' is just a feminisation.

              Thank you so much for your very appreciative comments. Glad you picked up that the tale is not mere fantasy but is a vehicle for raising a number of problems facing humanity and their solutions, linked to current scientific knowledge.

              Glad you enjoyed it.

              Hi Gene,

              this is actually my first attempt at fiction (since high school). I found it surprisingly easy to write as my imagination did a lot of the work for me. I have written other FQXi essays but I would only recommend "Which of our basic physical assumptions are wrong", as it is relatively easy to read and was well received. It contains the diagram of the explanatory framework for physics which was in passing referred to in the last section of the story you read. There is also an enlarged copy of the diagram in the discussion thread. Prior to finding FQXi.org on which I am able to discuss and share ideas I wrote a few books but I am no longer distributing them as my ideas have moved on, it is not financially viable or worthwhile to me to produce and distribute them and I am also a better writer now than then. Perhaps this contest may inspire me to wrote more fiction. Really glad you found it enjoyable, and yes I do think we have a lot to learn.

              Hi Joe, thanks glad you enjoyed it and found it informative. I really appreciate you taking the time to read and comment.

              Hi Domenico,

              glad you found some sense in it. I suppose it might be a bit disorienting. There is a narrative in black type which is describing life in the sanctuary . There is the writing on the girl's computer and home screen in blue, sayings that bind the community together and lessons that the girl is being taught. Then in red is technical information from the Knowledge Hub, which is I imagine is the communities super computer and repository of knowledge. The technical information is not a necessary part of the story but provides actual scientific information to back up the story details. The reference numbers throughout refer to the reference list at the end in which there are many hyperlinks making the finding of additional information easy.

              Population growth is slowing but it is still growth. I am unsure about the future promise of biotechnology due to the hit and miss nature of using virus vectors.(Possible damage to the plants genetic code by the insertion of the vector and attached code.) There is some debate about the safety of GM crops. the increasing use of pesticide on Roundup ready crops and the problem of resistant weeds arising from unintended gene transfer. Perhaps one day it may be possible just to print out desired genetic code circumventing the vector issue.

              Thanks for your comments.

              Dear Georgina,

              Very enjoyable essay!

              You have a fascinating futuristic world. How are we to get there from where we are now, I am wondering. What practical steps are feasible? Will appreciate your thoughts. For instance, how to regulate and restrict the primordial instinct, and the individual freedom, to procreate, given the way societies function today?

              Kind regards,

              Tejinder

                Georgina,

                I have to say, from my personal perspective, that is a very tough read. I started it a few days ago and had to stop. Much of what you describe is potentially quite logical, but on an emotional level, I find myself rejecting it quite vehemently. Maybe this is due to my own fairly comfortable and usually outside life, but there is a degree of sterility I sense would be quite deadening. Not to say much of current society isn't already overly sterilized, but then I try to avoid leaving the farm.

                I think if I was to take one point to argue over, it would be the emphasis on survival. Now logically it would seem survival is a natural prerequisite for life, but I would go out on a limb here and argue the opposite, that so much of living is about expression and that it is this cycle of rising and falling which is most elemental. Simple survival would be like a flatline on the heart monitor. DNA is about survival. Individual lives are about pushing the boundaries as far as possible. Like a tree, the growth rings are on the outside, while the wood in the trunk is stable but prone to rot. A healthy society is often on the border of chaos and order is for the churches, schools and courts.

                Regards,

                John

                  John,

                  thanks for reading it. The story is a vehicle for raising and giving solutions to a number of problems.On this discussion thread a have given a list of many of the problems raised. It is set of a time when surface living has become too difficult for most because of the consequences of climate change. Though subterranean or sub-aquatic living is not compulsory and some have decided to stay outside and 'battle' the elements. I would ague with you view that there is a degree of sterility . Unlike many other Utopian tales nature has been taken into the sanctuaries for its continuation and for the needs of mankind. As I said mankind belongs with the tree of life. Disease is avoided by having a healthy natural microflora living in the environment. There are green spaces for recreation and stress relief, there are wildlife zones there is horticulture and aquaculture. There are companion animals for stress relief and companionship.

                  There is a hierarchy of needs and at the base there are the prerequisites for survival. Without the ability to survive non of the higher needs will be fulfilled. The societies are facing the unknown and so is filling its 'tool box' with means of survival so that they are able to adapt to whatever happens. They are becoming highly versatile. Yes I agree about pushing boundaries but that is what these people are doing by biominicry, bio-engineering,and creative cultural pursuits. High culture and creativity are measures of the sanctuaries success.See may reply to George Gantz re.creativity