How Should Humanity Steer the Future? -- Sideways! by Thomas Howard Ray

Thomas Ray

Strange thing, Robert. I replied to your excellent questions last night, and the reply appeared to post. Then next thing I knew, the browser (on all my internet devices) could not find the FQXi site, even though no other site was affected, and I've only been able to get back on just now. Anyway, I'll try and reconstruct:

I think it doesn't matter whether private or government interests manage the local supply chain. And local government regulation shouldn't be necessary, because of global feedback to the system, that make it self regulating. The keys are redundancy, inventory transparency, and coordination of transportation resources to transfer goods. An entity can be disconnected from the network for failure to cooperate, but that wouldn't be of any benefit to the non-cooperating node, nor catastrophically harmful to the remaining network members. Redundancy fills the gaps, whether a member drops out, or when needed to manage natural disasters or other economically damaging events. The risk is spread equitably, and the system should have the effect as well, of helping equalize the labor market to prevent unfair competition.

Once the supply chain at every node is filled to redundancy with essentials, the network members can concentrate on creating new goods to trade, generating more wealth, more creativity in perpetuity.

All best,

Tom

Robert de Neufville

The same thing happened to me, Tom. It now tells me when I've already rated an essay--which I don't think it did before, right?--so I think they did some kind of site update that somehow deleted the most recent activity.

My concern as a political scientist is always that instituting a new structure and making it self-sustaining is generally much harder than designing it, especially if--as is essentially always the case--individual incentives don't align with what is best for the group.

In any case, thanks for the discussion!

Best,

Robert

Douglas Singleton

Hi Tom,

Outstanding essay! And I have not slowly read the entire thing (I usually scan and then go back for a more through read). But from my brief scan this is a great essay. Also it nicely touches on an important issue that I did not touch on in my essay but about which I have strong opinions -- this is the issue of loop sided wealth distribution. Actually I knew the distribution was bad but not to the extent that the 85 richest have the same wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion. This is not good or natural and moreover it is this kind of lopsided wealth distribution that stifles progress in almost anything (science, politics, bettering society, etc.)

You may find of interest (or already have seen) one of the banned TED talks which deals with the issue of trickle down economics which you mention in you essay (I'm not so sure trickle down is dead by the way -- reference 6 notwithstanding. People use this still to justify unnatural wealth distribution. Anyway the banned video is "Nick Hanauer "Rich people don't create jobs" " TED talks are supposed to be thought provoking but the sponsors are themselves rich and it seems this talk was a bit too thought provoking and hit a bit close to home. Hanauer (who hiimself is some kind of invest type/money manager compares trickle down to the old idea that the Sun (and everything else0 went around the Earth. It's just wrong.

The idea of MAP (Mutual Assured Posterity) or as I heard it described "a rising tide that floats all boats equally" is possible and is in fact a good idea if it can be implemented. But there can be a hitch in the implementation. The place where I heard this expression about rising tides floating every boat equally was at some meeting in Thailand which was focused on ASEAN (a conglomeration of 10 Southeast Asian countries -- Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei, Myanmar -- which represents a huge labor force and huge economic market). If the ASEAN countries are combined (and if they really and fully did cooperate with one another) they represent an economic force in the region on par with China. But the poorer member states (Laos, Cambodia) are always wary of the richer states (Singapore, Malaysia) using them as pawns. And all the ASEAN countries are aware that the US support might simply be a way to use ASEAN as a pawn to counter Chinese influence in the region. If the ASEAN countries would really and fully cooperate with one another this would be a powerful economic block in the region. But there is a lot if mistrust so it's unclear if ASEAN will realize this potential.

Anyway excellent essay! Good luck with the contest.

Best,

Doug

[deleted]

Wow, thanks, Doug. I was not even aware that there are banned TED talks. It is demonstrably true, though, that trickle down economics is a myth, and that 'job creators' is simply another term for the philosophy supporting master-slave relationships. Plenty of jobs in the field, for plantation owners to fill.

I agree there are substantial political barriers to overcome, worldwide, before individuals can effectively self-organize a robust supply and communication network that renders politics incapable of controlling individual destinies, and social policy is a rationally cooperative endeavor rather than coercion.

That is why I emphasize education and mobility as human entitlements. I don't think we can succeed without personal commitment to maximum individual freedom.

All best,

Tom

Thomas Ray

Well, I watched Nick Hanauer's 5 minute talk ... this was banned? I suppose my essay would be banned as well -- he said everything I meant to say, and much more eloquently than I. Nick Hanauer, spread the word.

Thomas Ray

Here's the problem with getting the word out, in a nutshell. Paid propaganda from talking heads who haven't any background or knowledge in economics or science, shouting down those who do. It's due to change, very soon.

Douglas Singleton

Hi Tom,

I'm glad the Hanauer video resonated with you. Also how can a TED talk get banned? They are supposed to make you think.

I wanted to follow up on your solutions of education and mobility. These are exactly what need to be parts of the solution. People need to be able to logically and based on data come to conclusions. In Fall 2004 I moved into a low rent apartment in Fresno. I was between a Fulbright leave of absence to Moscow and a sabbatical to Costa Rica in Spring 2005 so I needed the cheapest place to stay and save up some money for the one semester I was back. My neighbors in this apartment complex were nice although they thought it odd that someone making what they viewed as "good money" would live there. Most of them worked one or more minimum wage jobs. Anyway this was around the time of the Bush-Kerry Presidential election and I was surprised to see as the election approached Bush-Cheney poster sprouting from the windows of several of my neighbors. No Kerry posters. This made absolutely no sense. All my neighbors were living barely above what is considered the poverty line in the US and yet they were supporting the party that was basically big business. In talking with them most were "educated" by one of the many conservative "news" programs (e.g. Fox News, O'Reilly Factor, etc.). These shows had "educated" them to think that *they* were at fault for their situation. They just needed to work harder and if they did they too would "make it". The reality was that the system was rigged and almost all of them would continue to work in these minimum wage dead end jobs. One can debate the merits of supporting big business vs. having a wider social net, better education (real education), etc. but it is really bizarre when people have been propagandized to such a degree they can not see their own best interest.

Anyway I really liked your essay. Best of luck.

Doug

Thomas Ray

Thanks again, Doug. You know I really liked your essay, too:

" ... every path makes some contribution."

We belong to a mutual admiration society. :-)

All best,

Tom

Thomas Ray

Robert, I hope our dialogue doesn't end with the contest. I share your concerns that a designed system is not self sustaining. That is why I prefer a robust, self organized system which is self limiting; i.e., it is to be seen that maximized degrees of freedom for the least elements of the system increase cooperation.

I briefly caught a segment today, on Stephen Hawking's new TV show that explores new technology. It included a piece on robotic cooperation -- two or three flying robots were able to perform complicated tasks (throwing and balancing a stick on end, catching and throwing a ball in a net) not feasible for one or two to do alone. Fascinating stuff.

Best,

Tom

Mohammed Khalil

Hi Tom,

Great essay! It is well argued and filled with interesting facts and connections. I agree with most of what you wrote, and I specially liked the section "The science of keeping the gates open".

Good luck in the contest,

Mohammed

pjackson

Tom,

Are some subjects taboo to you? I think honesty requires none in science should be.

Peter

Thomas Ray

Peter, I am compelled to repeat: Is this forum about you, or about the subject of my essay?

Israel Perez

Dear Thomas

Just to let you know that I read your interesting essay. I think it is well thought and written. I can see that we share some points in common, specially your view on the wealthiest and the basic needs of humanity. I foresee war and economic collapse in the following two or three decades. This will depend on China's ambitions and goals. After this, the USA may lose global power and nationalism will revive. This is quite evident, the USA hasn't been able to administer wealthiness and democracy is not longer the ideal it used to be.

Thanks for reading my essay and leaving some comments, I appreciate it.

Good luck in the contest!

Best Regards

Israel

Thomas Ray

Israel,

I admit your prediction is a bleak possibility, though I believe that we will yet regain our sanity and change the trajectory.

Best,

Tom

Christian Corda

Hi Tom,

As I told you in my FQXi page, I have read your interesting and peculiar Essay. Here are my comments:

1) Concerning Lysenkoism, my research field, i.e. astrophysics and gravitational physics, was more lucky in Soviet science than evolutionary biology because of the existence of the famous research group of Yakov B. Zel'dovich.

2) I did not know Eninstein's definition of "insanity". It is enlightening.

3) I think that your statement "Democracy is clearly losing the battle for freedom of education" is one of the biggest problems of the whole world today and the issue that 85 individuals out of seven billion people own and control as much wealth as fully half of the total world population is, partially, a consequence of that statement.

4) I hope that the conclusion by Lim et al. that "Peaceful coexistence need not require complete integration" will be correct as, sadly, I do not think a real complete integration to be possible in our society.

5) Although I am not an economist, I appreciate your explaining of the early 21st century's economic problems.

6) I did not know "mathematical biology" by G. Chaitin, but I surely endorse the idea that the power to understand our physical world can be increased through abstract modelling. This is consistent with my preferred Einstein's aphorism that "Imagination is more important than knowledge" and it is also the main reason because I work on theoretical physics.

In any case, you wrote a very beautiful Essay. I will give you an high score.

I wish you best luck in the Contest.

Cheers,

Ch.

Thomas Ray

Thanks Christian! I'll find time for a detailed reply later -- traveling now.

All best,

Tom

Thomas Ray

Christian,

I appreciate your emphasis on Einstein's much-misinterpreted "Imagination is more important that knowledge."

You're exactly right that Einstein meant to suggest that theory is primary to discovery. The whole meaning of science as a rationalist enterprise is contained in that simple statement.

I have already given your essay my high score -- all best in the competition!

Tom

[deleted]

Hi Tom,

I think your idea of a "a globally-linked supply chain controlled by high tech information systems in a robust network" is an interesting one. I see how this would help to recover from disasters, but you also seemed interested in reducing inequality--- is that right? If so, how does the supply chain help with this?

Thanks!

Best of luck,

Daniel

Thomas Ray

Hi Daniel,

Quick cooperative relief from any sort of disaster has everything to do with equality. Ask the victims of Hurricane Katrina what they think.

Best,

Tom

Alex Hoekstra

Hi Thomas,

This is a genuinely interesting and exciting concept; one which I hope is given as thorough consideration in its evaluation as has clearly gone into its writing.

Despite the emphasis on technological progress put into my and other essays, I sincerely value the evaluation of the social and political context in which technology has developed, is developing, and will continue (hopefully) to develop. It seems clear and certain that technological enhancement without philosophy enhancement is not sufficient to protect our species (from ourselves, and from external existential threats that we might hope to avoid).

Thank you again for such a thoughtful entry. Best regards in this contest, and in all other things.

Thomas Ray

Thanks, Alex! I think your entry deserves top consideration as well.

Best,

Tom

Eckard Blumschein

Tom,

In an equitable system everybody was treated equally. Is this really desirable? Perhaps the slogan of communism "give everybody anything he/she wants" is unreal, and I don't see equal distribution necessary at all.

However, imagine a population of let's say 100 billion equal people sharing the scant resources that remained after decades of reckless exploitation to come while this overpopulation nonetheless horribly polluting water, air and soil. Our stupidity will be cruel to our children. I advocate for rationality including the obligation to slightly improve our ethics by inclusion of the human obligations for responsible behavior as precondition of human rights.

Eckard

« Previous Page Next Page »