Michael Shermer: "Social Singularity: Transitioning from Civilization 1.0 to 2.0"

[brucegalliver]

It's a shame about the relationship he makes with GDP and social progress, as there are so many other factors, including the rules of the banking system itself, that contribute to GDP that don't show any progress.

For example, GDP rises the more sick people there are in america, as the health industry benefits.

He doesn't challenge the existence of the monetary system as a root cause for social problems, we could see total equality in the future, in a different economic system.

[libertarianjury]

Shermer seems to not comprehend that "women's suffrage" does not equal "liberal democracy." In fact, given the loss of jury trials since 1832 (licensing of lawyers), 1850 (voir dire), 1895 (Sparf and Hansen v. USA, wrongful judicial instruction), 1930 (loss of defendant's free speech), we've in many ways backslid from the concept of a liberal democracy, burning up the industrial revolution's wealth, concentrating it into the hands of central bankers. Peaceful, yes. Progress, ...weak.

[libertarianjury]

How does he miss talking about jury rights, and the degradation of legal systems? How does he miss talking about the Federal Reserve's massive theft?

[libertarianjury]

Matt Ridley didn't come up with "ideas having sex with other ideas." I'd credit that to Dawkins' memes, or Kevin Kelly, the author of "What does Technology Want?"

[libertarianjury]

I'm really tired of "the golden rule" being thrown out as an oversimplified version of libertarian morality, rather than explicitly stating "the initiation of force is wrong." That level of specificity would do so much more to advance society, and return juries to dominance in our rule of law.

[MrAdvancedAtheist]

Louis XIV sucked as an economist. He drove the Huguenots from France, who had specialized in many valuable skills, and as a result damaged France's economy.

[MrAdvancedAtheist]

Given Shermer's commitment to empiricism, I wonder what he thinks about the rationality of patriarchy, despite what current political correctness says against it. Patriarchal beliefs derive from the accumulated experiences of men's lives with women over millennia. Men didn't pull patriarchy out of their asses, or invent it because of the meanness of our hearts. It arose from the pragmatic need to protect women from their often self-destructive inclinations.

[MrAdvancedAtheist]

Shermer sounds like he's borrowed from Matt Ridley and Steven Pinker.

[MrAdvancedAtheist]

I view the super rich, at least the legitimate ones, as "early adopters" of the lifestyles ordinary people could have if we have a few more centuries of exponential economic growth. We already see futuristic lifestyles in the One Percent.

[countseven]

... such as China and India the labor pool became huge and outsourcing happened in the USA. This is a correction to an imbalance. The income gap you enjoyed (usa) was artificial. The total GDP per capita has doubled since 2000. The poor of the world are in a much better state today than ever before. The singularity is a global argument, and isn't about America only. I find the criticism of KhanneaSuntzu emotional rather than objective. Also, you

[countseven]

The wealth the U.S enjoyed from the 1950's till the 80's was due to imbalances in the world labor market introduced by communism. When capitalism (or some functional market economy) was reintroduced to the large socialist/communist countries such as chi

[KhanneaSuntzu]

A somewhat disgusting presentation, arguing "things are great". Yes there are elites now morbidly rich, and most people a lot richer. But things are escalating towards unacceptable disparate affluence. This sick optimism fetish is a message that gets the SU sponsors all giddy, and gets the SU more corporate money. This is a political petting zoo presentation stating "the system is doing a good job". Did they evangelize this kind of drivel in Rome in the summer of 476 too?

[sdelima]

@KhanneaSuntzu It might be hard to see that things are getting better while the disparity between the super rich and the rest of us keeps getting larger. But they are the anomaly (moderns society itself is an anomaly), and the rest of us are still not that bad (you are probably on a laptop, sipping coffee right now listening to free music on youtube). He didn't argue "things are great". All he said was that, on aggregate, we're moving in the right direction...and you sure cannot argue with that.

[KhanneaSuntzu]

@sdelima - I regard these levels of disparity affluence as horrific, morally bankrupt and an actual toxic development in current politics. Corruption has deconstructed democracy. Tent cities of depressed hungry people are springing up around you. Suicides are an epidemic. No I do NOT agree. Do you use coffee and laptop and free music as a metric? There is more to the world dear. People's expectations are relative to the rest of society. > UUU.scoop.it/t/concentration-o­f-wealth-existential-risk

[sdelima]

@KhanneaSuntzu Technology relieves humans of their work by doing it better for cheaper. It eventually creates a tremendous surplus. The failure of modern society will be the extent to which it fails to distribute this surplus justly; it is a daunting task. But if history proves anything, it is that we are moving towards greater Non-zero sumness, on aggregate. And just like fire, stone tools, agriculture, and the printing press, singularity events first benefit the few, and eventually, the many.

[nawitus]

@sdelima The solution to the distribution of resources is basic income.

[sdelima]

@nawitus That's easier said than done. Who determines what, and how much, goes to whom? The Government, we all know, cannot be trusted. Hell, they are partly the reason we're in this Occupy mess in the first place...The real question is, "How do you organize a society around something other than employment". This will be the true social singularity, and it will be the crowing glory to help usher in Civ 2.0

[KhanneaSuntzu]

@sdelima I still have actual feelings of physical *hunger* at least one day of the week. I can't eat my laptop or desktop or tablet. No things are not getting better - they are moving in a catastrophic, terrifying, souldeadening direction. My hope for H+ and a Singularity is it will be a far more 'equal' and 'just' one. I hope we won't need a purging of Guillotines to end up with the best Singularity we can have. If we do those outclassed may decide to get going real soon.

[sdelima]

@KhanneaSuntzu You are obviously well versed in the H+ literature. And like you, I too agree that the coming singularity should be "equal" and "just". But it's not going to be, at least not at first. If you consider the printing press as a singularity event then you can see that, at first, it was just Europe that benefited, but later it changed the entire world. Luckily for us new technologies are inherently democratizing...

[ak1lon]

The first 20 minutes of this are a complete waste of time. Pure nonsense. True most stats have improved over the last centuries but the conclusions reached are absurd.

[randomactsofreason]

US Census Bureau tables show GINI Index for US households rising continually since 1967, now at highest ever.

See Table A3 in Census Bureau PDF: at census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-2­39.pdf

In just the past 10 years, the GINI for households has risen by 20%.

The income gap between the top 20% and lowest 20% has doubled since 1967

Shermer wants audience to think it has fallen, because that suits his politics.

Shermer has forgotten to apply skepticism to his own beliefs.

[WICKEDMAN9MM]

Debunking, that's what we are about. Humans are living in a completely lie built by them self...

[randomactsofreason]

Why does Shermer feel the need to misrepresent data to support his politics? As a longtime fan of his skeptical advocacy, this is very discouraging.

His credibility is already questionable given his approving blurbs on accommodationist books that present a woowoo version of purposeful evolution. Now this? He shows a graph with the line moving in one directly, while the actual data shows it moving in the exact opposite direction. Is there no one of integrity any more in the skeptical community?

[kelbykross1]

@randomactsofreason have you read the believing brain? he has a whole chapter where he covers this topic in depth and gives his opinion more strongly. he doesn't accept purposeful evolution as before african americans americans, the jewish were considered genetically superior for basketball because of their small balanced stature and quick wit.

[xapgkop]

@randomactsofreason please tell which graph do you mean?

[randomactsofreason]

@xapgkop Chart showing GINI Coefficient Trend

[xapgkop]

@randomactsofreason this chart is taken from the study called "Parametric estimations of the world distribution of income" done by Maxim Pinkovskiy (MIT) and Xavier Sala-i-Martin (Columbia). Their model does indeed show that world inequality is falling.

[randomactsofreason]

@xapgkop That is where Shermer's political deception comes in. I've transcribed the relevant part:

"so the folks down the road at the Wall Street protests are claiming things are unequal. Yeah they are unequal, they are never going to be perfectly equal, however it's getting better, in terms of everybody getting more prosperous, every boat rises on the tide. The Gini Coefficient...the inequalities decreasing as everybody else gets wealthier."

In US, GINI is rising, inequality increasing.

[randomactsofreason]

@xapgkop He uses chart comparing nation-to-nation inequalities while talking about "Wall Street protests". Those protests are not about global inequality, they are about inequality in the US. GINI coefficient has been rising steadily in US. Shermer knows this. This is why it is so disappointing that he lets his politics overrides his skepticism.

This is not the only example of this occurring. He is a fallen icon of critical thinking, IMO. Celebrity has gone to his head.

[xapgkop]

@randomactsofreason now I get your point