Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view


whats new at ieet
MIT Media Lab’s folding CityCar

‪BMW shows off their semi-autonomous driving system‬

Autonomous Transportation for the Year 2030

Automated Cars: Redux

Russell Blackford: Freedom of Religion

‪Jason Silva on Psychedelic Rapture, Ecstatic Awe‬ and Technology

Must the Rich be Lured into Investing? Who are the Real “Job Creators?”

I Want a God-Like Brain

SENS5 - Collective advantages of Life Extension

Malcolm Gladwell on Income Inequality: We’re Off the Rails


ieet books

Smart Mice, Not-So-Smart People: An Interesting and Amusing Guide to Bioethics
Author
by Arthur Caplan

From Transgender to Transhuman: A Manifesto On the Freedom Of Form
by Martine Rothblatt

Freedom of Religion and the Secular State
by Russell Blackford

The Olympics: The Basics
by Andy Miah and Beatriz Garcia


comments

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 9, 2012)

hankpellissier on 'I Want a God-Like Brain' (Feb 9, 2012)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv


IEET > Security > Rights > Neuroethics > Life > Enablement > Vision > Futurism > Technoprogressivism > Fellows > Jamais Cascio

Print Email permalink (3) Comments (2761) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


Get Smarter


Jamais Cascio
Jamais Cascio
The Atlantic Monthly

Posted: Jun 19, 2009

Pandemics. Global warming. Food shortages. No more fossil fuels. What are humans to do? The same thing the species has done before: evolve to meet the challenge. But this time we don’t have to rely on natural evolution to make us smart enough to survive. We can do it ourselves, right now, by harnessing technology and pharmacology to boost our intelligence. Is Google actually making us smarter?

Seventy-four thousand years ago, humanity nearly went extinct. A super-volcano at what’s now Lake Toba, in Sumatra, erupted with a strength more than a thousand times that of Mount St. Helens in 1980. Some 800 cubic kilometers of ash filled the skies of the Northern Hemisphere, lowering global temperatures and pushing a climate already on the verge of an ice age over the edge. Some scientists speculate that as the Earth went into a deep freeze, the population of Homo sapiens may have dropped to as low as a few thousand families.

The Mount Toba incident, although unprecedented in magnitude, was part of a broad pattern. For a period of 2 million years, ending with the last ice age around 10,000 B.C., the Earth experienced a series of convulsive glacial events. This rapid-fire climate change meant that humans couldn’t rely on consistent patterns to know which animals to hunt, which plants to gather, or even which predators might be waiting around the corner.

How did we cope? By getting smarter. The neuro­physi­ol­ogist William Calvin argues persuasively that modern human cognition—including sophisticated language and the capacity to plan ahead—evolved in response to the demands of this long age of turbulence. According to Calvin, the reason we survived is that our brains changed to meet the challenge: we transformed the ability to target a moving animal with a thrown rock into a capability for foresight and long-term planning. In the process, we may have developed syntax and formal structure from our simple language.

Our present century may not be quite as perilous for the human race as an ice age in the aftermath of a super-volcano eruption, but the next few decades will pose enormous hurdles that go beyond the climate crisis. The end of the fossil-fuel era, the fragility of the global food web, growing population density, and the spread of pandemics, as well as the emergence of radically transformative bio- and nano­technologies—each of these threatens us with broad disruption or even devastation. And as good as our brains have become at planning ahead, we’re still biased toward looking for near-term, simple threats. Subtle, long-term risks, particularly those involving complex, global processes, remain devilishly hard for us to manage.

But here’s an optimistic scenario for you: if the next several decades are as bad as some of us fear they could be, we can respond, and survive, the way our species has done time and again: by getting smarter. But this time, we don’t have to rely solely on natural evolutionary processes to boost our intelligence. We can do it ourselves.

Read the rest here.


Jamais Cascio is a Senior Fellow of the IEET, and a professional futurist. He writes the popular blog Open the Future.
Print Email permalink (3) Comments (2762) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


" harnessing technology and pharmacology to boost our intelligence."

I don't know much about Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics, but can we pass down such a boost to our children?



No-one will get smarter unless they are *motivated* to do so, and this motivation is not itself a part of intelligence.

Consider the mythical 'Paper clip' monster with recursive intelligence and no motivation other than the desire to make paper clips. It would only improve to the complexity required for paper clip optimization, and then it's self-improvemet would simply stop.

As I said on M.Anissimov's blog, the Singularitarians have it all wrong. There will be no intelligence explosion unless minds are *motivated* to self-improve and they *maintain* this motivation, if at any point the motivation to self-improvement is lost, the intelligence explosion stops dead.

So in fact IQ is not the most important cognitive skill after all. The problem is not people's lack of intelligence, but the fact that most of them simply 'don't give a damn'.

The relevant cognitive ability here is self-reflection (the ability to introspect, to grasp one's own flaws and change oneself to overcome them). Someone with this ability could start from an IQ that was actually far below the human level, and end up soaring far beyond it.

The answer is not to 'Get Smarter', but to 'Get Reflective'.



And the answer to Veronica's question is no, unless you believe in Lamarckism -- in which case I have a bridge on Rigel IV I want to sell you. You may pass on a mutation engineered to alter you genetically. The chance is 50/50 per mutation per child because chromosomes recombine each time a gamete (sperm or egg) forms. Pharmacological alterations are somatic, so their inheritability is zero. You can influence your kids much more decisively by epigenetic mechanisms, aka by raising them to the best of your ability.



YOUR COMMENT

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:




Next entry: Do We have a Right to DNA Evidence in Trials?

Previous entry: The Case Against Gene Patents

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376