Randall,
I knew from the first line of your abstract that I'd like your essay; "..historic developments that are perceived as progress.." It seems like me you're not a man for accepting things at face value! viz;
"Evolution by natural selection is therefore not a survival strategy for humanity, but a possible scenario for extinction." I agree entirely. Would you agree that perhaps while are; "equipped to be adapted to life elsewhere.." and; "..can instead inhabit space-worthy forms" that we need to ensure we don't get stuck in theoretical 'ruts' slowing development?
I certainly agree we must aim to be a multi planet race, and as soon as possible as time may be critical. But do we not still have a big problem with making your first need; "Human adaptability" possible at revolutionary not evolutionary pace?
I found all aspects of your essay first class. I'm not sure why it's has so few reads and ratings (but that does mean my score will have more affect). One of your strengths I perceive is the recognition of our limited understanding and of constant change and it's effects; i.e; "Finally, an important realization is that our understanding is constrained, that the unfolding
of events is a complex process during which novel insights arise. It is therefore very likely that analyses of the nature of humanity and of desired conditions will lead to modified goals." That seems a rare asset.
I don't pretend I'm not concerned about neural manipulation. I believe that we can make far more effective 'use' of our brains in terms of removal of hidden assumptions, problem analysis and tracking consequences. My own essay, very different to yours, describes a real case of this, with a real result allowing a revolutionary leap in understanding. But many can't even perceive that as possible! I hope you get to read it, written as an allegorical tale.
I will look closer at your work. Something I spotted today which intrigued me was this; memory implant and erasure. showing how close we are mind control in all senses! I think we also need far better
teaching methods. Do you think developing AI as an extension of our own thinking methods may not in some way be perpetuating our limitations?
Anyway let's get on with it and of this planet and talk elsewhere. That may gve us different views!
Best wishes, and hope you may now make the 'cut'! do look forward to your thoughts on mine. Don't be afraid of the couplet 'QM', The end note classical experimentalists were as young as 11 and they can now produce quantum 'correlations' logically!
Peter Jackson (in case the AI here is lying and has logged me out again!)