Essay Abstract

Humanity is facing an “anthropic dilemma”: if the life is so rare in the universe, considering how many problems limit its rise, why our universe seems “just right” to host life? At the moment, the anthropic dilemma still lacks the right answer and, starting from our empirical evidences, it postulates the uniqueness of the Mankind, the sole intelligent life form able to understand and contemplate the Universe. Such a postulate it's here called "anthropic postulate". This postulate imposes that Hans Jonas'€™ moral responsibility must comprehend the humanity as a whole, present and future generations. The plausible uniqueness, or at least the extreme rarity of the human experience, entails the burden of its preservation from any kind of lethal menace. Given the extremely high vulnerability of our planet, the timeline of such a responsibility should be prolonged 'till the time when humanity will be able to face an exodus towards the outer space, out of the solar system. So, it is possible to postulate the following "anthropic imperative": it’s necessary to undertake all the actions to guarantee the undefined survival of the mankind through time. The anthropic program presented in this paper is a first proposal aimed to find challenges and possible solution to the fulfilment of this imperative.

Author Bio

Roberto Paura is co-founder and president of the Italian Institute for the Future, a centre for futures studies based in Naples, Italy. He is also a science journalist and was columnist for the science channel of Fanpage.it, a leading Italian online newspaper. Since 2011, he works for CittГ  della Scienza, the first Italian science centre, in the communication area and for the organization of the annual exhibition "ВЂВњRemote Future". His latest book is "Futuro in progress" (IIF Press).

Download Essay PDF File

  • [deleted]

Hi Roberto,

I found your polarization of views exaggerated, I am sure there is a lot of middle ground.

"The plausible uniqueness, or at least the extreme rarity of the human experience, entails the burden of its preservation from any kind of lethal menace." What about the uniqueness of the variety of non human life?

Your arguments are well set out. I liked your list. It is clearly expressed and that makes it a pleasure to read. Good luck, Georgina

    Thoughtful essay, but I don't understand why it takes 4 pages to decide that we should choose human flourishing over extinction or why we need the idea that we're special in the universe to validate our will to survive and flourish. Also, it's hardly true that uranium is (as a practical matter) a limited resource, plus there's Th, so that is not the reason for preferring solar as a main solution.

      Hi Georgina, thanks for your comment! Of course my position is a little bit exaggerated. It comes from the wish to reply to all the ideological positions against the long-term survival of humankind. According to them, humankind is just one of a very large number of lifeforms on Earth. It is right, of course. But we must emphasize the uniqueness of humankind: there are a lot of lifeforms, but just one intelligent civilization. We must fight to preserve it for the forthcoming generations, even if some ecologists think we must eradicate the civilization to save Earth.

      Roberto

      Dear Mark,

      thank you for your comment. With respect to the lenght of the theoretical considerations in the essay, read my answer above. Regarding uranium, from a long-term point of view it's a limited resource if we compare it to solar energy. Of course it is not a short-term problem.

      Roberto

      Hello Roberto, May I offer a short, but sincere critique of your essay? I would ask you to return the favour. Here's my policy on that. - Mike

      My view of the fault of the Fermi Paradox is that we in-general do not consider the extents to which we are capable of evolving in a few thousand years with technological enhancements.

      Are the God(s) people pray to the aliens we seek. As such, they are a part of every atom of our bodies; they are ever present.

      For the sake of promoting broad perspective.

      The concept: You will be God one million years from now.

      Assumptions:

      Good as defined:

      "That which benefits most, the greatest diversity of life; to include all future time."

      A good person wants to help foster the best in everything.

      A good person is naturally empathic and this helps to foster good.

      The human body evolves. As proof we have more genes in common with mice than we do with prehistoric man. More than 10% of our genes are different than ancient man, monkeys are different by about 1%, and mice at 5%.

      Of the known species, we develop technology quickly. (in one persons' lifetime of 100 years, we've gone from 1.6 billion people and an agrarian society of outhouses, to 6.7 billion people and depleting 50% of the worlds oil reserves)

      We use technology for our benefit.

      Existing Efforts:

      We need to evolve to meet our own expectations.

      We view genetic engineering as a simple tool.

      We discourage genes that produce ADD/ADHD, while promote genes that help us develop photographic memories.

      We live longer. In 1900 (US) people except blacks lived to be 47, blacks lived to be 33. Now the average is 80 for everyone. Blacks live 2 1/2 times as long as their great grandparents did.

      By the end of this century it is possible that through technology life will become indefinite (only terminated by accident or intent).

      We are beneficially evolving at an increasing rate.

      With increased human intellect, we are also evolving more advanced technologies.

      We are creating interfaces that directly connect our minds to our environment. Helping handicapped with walking, seeing, and functioning. Providing military capabilities not previously imagined like flying robots where the operator feels every sensation of the robot.

      We currently are working with "Entangled Pairs". This is a phenomena where actions are implemented instantaneously; where previously it was thought that nothing occurs faster than the speed of light. An action through entangled pairs occurs at the same time, even if across the vast expanse of the Universe.

      Future predictions:

      We continue developing mind to computer interfaces. Eventually providing collective conferencing. Multiple people can work on different aspects of a problem set and seamlessly share memory developments. We will increasingly depend upon technology to function at the expected levels of performance. As such, mind to computer interfaces will allow us to live longer because the computers will monitor our body chemistry and overall health. We will continue developing the computer with mind interfaces until we interact with every mental process. Additional resources will continually be added to our mental toolbox (greater memory storage, more external processing capability, more sensors, feelings for connectivity, shared memory networking, cognitive simulators, cognitive multi-tasking ...).

      As the body ages, the computer interface will attempt to compensate for failing processes. Over time as brain cells continue to die, the computer compensates. Until the last human brain cell dies. With eyes wide open, work and life unhindered, without ever realizing any non-beneficial effect, the human mind merges into a computer architecture. Our lifetimes indefinite. Our capabilities ever growing.

      As we evolve into other technologies more advanced than anything we have at present, we will continue to interact more with the Universe around us.

      As we evolve, we will desire to do greater good, not just for ourselves, but for everything, everywhere. Ethics is a natural consequence of high intellect.

      To effectively do so, we would need to be everywhere at the same time throughout the Universe.

      Every atom is found to have entangled pairs associated with it.

      Through technological advancements we create a mechanism by which we can interact with entangled pairs throughout the Universe.

      With our advanced mental interfaces we can concurrently detect the position of every atom in the Universe.

      With our advanced abilities to think multi-dimensionally, we are able to predict into the future all things that will happen.

      We anticipate all the great future catastrophe's and make small manipulations to do the greatest good for all life everywhere.

      Through continued evolution at increasing rates, we evolve our own conscious minds into the entangled pair systems.

      At this point, we become part of every atom in the Universe, seeking to do the greatest good.

      Over the technological course of a thousand years, or even one million years, we become one with the Universe.

      We have become God-like.

      However, we continue to evolve at an increasing rate.

      90% of the Universe is composed of Dark Matter (theoretically). There appears to be environments that exist but which we do not interact with.

      We evolve in such a way that we can interact with these other environments.

      ....and that's the limit to which I can see.

      Back to the Present:

      We as a technologically cognitive species, humans are only at most 30,000 years old.

      However, the Universe is around 14 billion years old using our current estimates. Giving 4 billion years for things to cool and evolve intelligence, like our own Earth. That would mean there are likely to be beings 10 billion years older than ourselves. If we become God-like between a thousand and one million years from now. What capabilities do beings that are 333,000 times older than ourselves have?

      Why don't they communicate with us? Maybe there is no need to. We certainly would be uninteresting to them. Such a primitive and self-destructive species. They know our future. And they've made it possible for us to optimally survive. Among all the asteroid collisions that have destroyed most life on Earth in the past, solar radiation bursts, and perhaps thousands of other events that would have snuffed out the human race, we presently survive.

      How many other species in the Universe are being cultivated?

      There are well over 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 observable stars in our universe; and at least 10 times as much mass that we can't see. It is potentially possible that during the life of one out of every 100 stars that one of its' planets will foster life for millions of years. So there are 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe that probably have had, have, or will have life; not to include any life that might exist on mass we can't see. However, new stars are being born every day, while others die. How many self-contained life systems exist that revolve around dead cold stars? Stars we can't see because they are cold masses in space. Life that uses a nuclear process called "total annihilation" as its' energy source (trillions of times more energy than a fission or a fusion of atoms - in current technological development).

      So with a strong likelihood, God-like beings are helping to orchestrate the Universe. A Universe with likely many more than 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kinds and types of life. Of which I'm sure there are many compatible with ourselves.

      For a primitive species like mankind. If something is ethical and God-like versus God, how would you know the difference?

      I believe other civilzations, billions of them, are ever present within us and we are part of their consciousness; a very small part.

      6 days later

      Dear Mr. Paura,

      Your essay was truly fascinating to read, and I do hope that it does well in the competition. I do hope you do not mind me leaving a comment about it.

      You clearly indicated that humanity was unique, but then you seemed to concentrate on only listing alarming abstractions about the state of an abstract universe that were not in the least unique.

      As I have thoughtfully pointed out in my essay REALITY, ONCE, everything in the real Universe is unique, once. Unique is neither alarming nor beguiling.

      Regards,

      Joe Fisher

      • [deleted]

      Roberto -

      Thank you for the thoughtful essay. I like your analysis leading to the anthropic postulate - while we may speculate endlessly on the possibility of extra-terrestrial life or the nature of a multiverse, all of the evidence so far is that humanity is unique. Arguably, we are therefore accountable to all lives past and present and for all potential future lives.

      The challenge many of us have been dealing with in our essays (mine is The Tip of the Spear) is how do we motivate the shared goals and moral framework that will bring about the desired behaviors of our fellow-travelers and institutions so that we can tackle and solve the problems that we face now and in the future. I don't think any of us have quite answered this challenge.

      Cheers - George Gantz

      8 days later

      Roberto

      Nice essay,very rich in ideas,Imagine the universe as a Olympicfield/pitch where many sporting events take place simultaneously.Would a Discus throwers injured arm affect the perfomance of an athlete in the same field doing say javelin or steeplechase ? Thats the main challenge anthropocentrism is merely Biological perception(illusion).All other animals too are intuitively primed to think they are the centre of the universe,-thats why The anthropic principle also has a cosmological basis see my paper here(http://vixra.org/abs/1312.0169) This should not be misunderstood,We must seek answers within the reality we inhabit.i address that here-http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2101 in my essay , LIVING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE SUN: REALITIES, PERILS ESCAPADES MAN, PLANET AND KARDASHEV SCALE.MAKING THE GREAT TRANSITION by Michael muteru.Hope you find time to rate/review.Thanks all the best

      Roberto,

      Interesting essay. I focused mainly on the risks of runaway artificial intelligence in my essay, but I definitely am aware of the other risks you mention as well. Overall well thought out.

      Max

      6 days later

      Excellent essay, Roberto. You give an expert summary of main of the same issues I cover in my own essay. I think you are absolutely right that we need as a species to embark on a conscious anthropic program. I loved that you put forward a smart, specific plan for how we should proceed. And I agree completely that we need to advocate this anthropic program with global decision-makers. They won't take action without public pressure. I hope if you get a chance you will take a look at my essay. Good luck in the contest in any case--your essay deserves to do well.

      Best,

      Robert de Neufville

      9 days later

      Dear Roberto,

      I congratulate you to speak out for Anthropic imperative against the paradigm of "random chance" existence. I shared this random chance paradigm before I discovered KQID and KQID revealed shockingly new oaradigm that supports the Anthropic Imperative that you spoke about. You wrote that. I applaud and share: "Humanity is facing an “anthropic dilemma”: if the life is so rare in the universe, considering how many problems limit its rise, why our universe seems “just right” to host life? At the moment, the anthropic dilemma still lacks the right answer and, starting from our empirical evidences, it postulates the uniqueness of the Mankind, the sole intelligent life form able to understand and contemplate the Universe. Such a postulate it's here called "anthropic postulate". This postulate imposes that Hans Jonas'€™ moral responsibility must comprehend the humanity as a whole, present and future generations. The plausible uniqueness, or at least the extreme rarity of the human experience, entails the burden of its preservation from any kind of lethal menace."

      If I may quote KQID's discovery from my blog that supports your anthropic postulate above:

      KQID calculates when our universe theoretically ends and compares our universe lifespan from the Bit Bang to now about 13.8 billion years with our human lifespan of about 100 years, our fetus universe exists about 1/100,000 seconds or 10^-5 seconds just after the Cosmic conception. Thus, if this is true and I certainly believe so because this truth revealed by nature through KQID theory, we might be the only species of our intelligence in our universe, we are the aliens who will spread our intelligence to all known worlds. That means we are the most precious cargo that our fetus Universe carries. We are the most precious children that our universe gives birth to. Let's united in diversity of thought, opinions, desires, personalities and wills; let's fight together against our common enemy: dead, suffering, ignorance, scarcity, uglyness, meanness and evil; and let's fight for our common goods: life, knowledge, joy, abundance, beauty, kindness, and wisdoms. Let life lives free here, now and forever.

      Let us work together for the survival of our specially unique and rare intelligent species in this universe, yes indeed this universe, not only on earth.

      Please check my essay and make comments. Thanks.

      Best wishes,

      Leo KoGuan

      Roberto,

      I disagree with criticisms above and commend you approach, analysis and propositions. I agree something such as a "Commission for the Anthropic Program should be constituted" because most of our focus is presently very short term and long term policy has no 'authority'.

      While I agree that "anthropocentrism has been continuously losing ground" I suggest it exists in layers, and needs to loose ground far more quickly to allow better ways of thinking, to in turn allow the better understanding of nature that history proves drives us forward.

      Our current thinking is 'sun-centric' (the barycentric rest frame). My essay suggests we must see past that, galaxy centric, local group centric, cluster and even 'supercluster centric' to fully understand nature, and the universe (unification of physics). At present even when staring us in the face the answers that will ensure our future can't be 'seen'!

      I agree our; "responsibility should be prolonged 'till the time when humanity will be able to face an exodus towards the outer space, out of the solar system.' But also suggest that by then we must be thinking beyond this galaxy if we really wish for long term survival in what may well be a cyclic cosmology.

      The amount of unheralded 1 scores my essay has attracted yet it's high number of scores demonstrates a real polarisation of thinking. Top marks for seeing that alone. I fear we may have a lot of work to do to escape what seems like a current developmental and theoretical 'rut'.

      I hope you manage to read my allegorical essay set a little in the future.

      Best wishes

      Peter

      Hello Roberto ~

      "However, at the moment, the anthropic dilemma still lacks the right answer

      and, starting from our empirical evidences, it postulates the uniqueness of the Mankind, the sole intelligent form of life able to understand and contemplate the Universe. Such a postulate it's here called "anthropic postulate".

      "Anthropic postulate" . "Anthropic program". "Anthropic principle".

      Bravo !! I really liked your approach. And I felt you have presented your case very well.

      A number of other essayists have held up human excellence or human thriving - or at least our potential for these states - as being the goal to drive towards.

      Indeed, Darwin himself hinted at the possibility !!!

      "What limit can be put to this power, acting during long ages and rigidly scrutinizing the whole constitution, structure and habits of each creature, - favouring the good and rejecting the bad? I can see no limit to this power, in slowly and beautifully adapting each form to the most complex relations of life." The Origin of Species, Sir Charles Darwin page 379 Oxford World's Classics.

      And I too am one of those contributors to this essay contest who are convinced that there is nothing mediocre about us - or our once glorious Planetary home. I don't know WHY this is the case - butI think it's a waste of time trying to figure that out.

      As for what we have to do to achieve our highest potential, I am convinced that we are not left in the dark in this regard, also, as evolutionary biology clearly tells us not only that we humans are destined to be this universe's crowning work - the very best entity this universe can create - but nature also tells us exactly HOW to achieve this goal.

      Here is a statement of the evolutionary equation which clearly indicates that a life form exhibiting supreme excellence is its inevitable endpoint :

      "Evolution is a process of adaptation & given enough time & raw materials will eventually produce a fully evolved, perfectly adapted life form, which particular fully evolved, perfectly adapted life form will be evidenced by the facts that it will be able, courtesy of its fully evolved perfectly adapted state, to live - indeed thrive - anywhere, at any time, under any circumstances, or relocate or terra form to suit, doing so, moreover, without causing any waste, loss or damage to either itself or its surrounds, animate & inanimate alike." Page 3 of my own essay.

      In my essay - which stands second in the 'submissions date' list - I also point out that nature not only tells us that some life form will inevitably achieve a fully evolved, perfectly adapted state, but also HOW TO ACHIEVE that state. You will need to read my essay to find out what nature tells us to do to get back on the pathway that leads up to this exulted state of being.

      I enjoyed your essay very much & I hope you still have time & the desire to read & rate my essay too.

      Thank you,

      Margriet Anne O'Regan

      Hi Roberto,

      I am voting very favorably for your essay and your thesis. There seems to be a "trend" to glorify nature and vilify humans. And we forget that humans are an important part of nature. Your essay helps balance the scale. Humans and Nature will evolve toward a better world (IMHO) and there are risks that you pointed out.

      My attempt to mitigate the risk is in my essay on education, you should take a look.

      Thanks,

      Don Limuti

      Write a Reply...