Now that there are a good 700+ comments I think it's time to leave a pinned comment answer to the most frequent and notable replies. Thanks for all your thoughts. 1) For those who think the video is pessimistic / fatalistic ... As I mentioned at the start (albeit very briefly to get the vid rolling) investing too much of our time and resources into the unattainable detracts from more important issues in life. There can also be great costs and damage done to our lives by our attempts to achieve the unattainable. In this context I consider the video to be a positive message about realigning our priorities for better real world results. EDIT: Two examples of things we need to deal with as more likely outcomes are the self-made threats to humanity (and Earth life as we know it) of nukes and synthetically created bio threats. If human civilization destroys itself through either of these then the fantasy outcomes of interstellar travel etc certainly won't happen. The argument of "we'll eventually get there" can apply as much to humanity's self-destruction. 2) For those who believe that I'm saying that no attempt should be made to reduce crime, improve equal opportunities etc ... That's not what I've said at all. I'm saying the attempts to bring about particular absolute results with no exceptions leads to a severe imbalance in our priorities as individuals and as a society. If we except that we can make broad changes, but cannot achieve absolute outcomes with no exceptions, this allows us to exercize wisdom in our choices. 3) For those who say that my debunking of absolute outcomes - no crime, no inequality etc - constitutes a "strawman" argument ... There are people and organizations setting such absolutist goals. Do a search for the term "universal equality" and you will find multiple sources, some academic, that use that very term among their stated aims. It's the same on social media - I follow anti-capitalist groups out of interest and a lot of people talk about their desire to "End capitalism". At the same time, I said in the intro that these things are not always verbally stated, but appear to be implied. sure that's more open to interpretations, but enough declarations of intent are out there. 4) For those who say I didn't provide any sources ... See point 3 above, plus, I said in the vid my aim is to prompt thought and discussions and that any of these subjects can be expanded into a much longer video full of sources and quotes. I've read up a lot on these issues, so didn't pluck the ideas out of a hat. I also provided a link in the vid description to a more detailed video I made on the Human Level A.I. delusion (6 yr old vid but the points still stand). 5) For those who say I've misdefined "capitalism" ... a lot of you say that, but don't provide a description of your own. Those who do provide a description not only mismatch each other a lot, but also mismatch with the various dictionary descriptions of the term (which also mismatch each other lol). Several of you claim capitalism is about the private ownership of the means of production, but miss the point made in the vid that handing such ownership over to a state bureaucracy is still private ownershjip, but even worse because the state can ban all competition. There also tends to be a lack of clear definition as to what the "means of production" is. "Capitalism" is an ideological term, and ideological terms are typically vague in meaning to avoid basic logical debunks. The malleable meaning allows the term to be used on a whim and, frequently, in inappropriate contexts to discredit something the speaker doesn't like for their own personal or organizational reasons. Which leads into the next point ... 6) For those who claim I'm coming from a particular ideological position such as fatalism or conservatism or whatever, as I said in the video, I don't believe in ideologies. They're too generalistic. Ideologies try to apply overly simple ideas as a "one size fits all" solution to a very broad range of complex situations. I prefer to try and take each situation on its own merits. I'm also a swing voter because I know that no particular party has all the right answers and that the parties change in motives and behaviour over time, even if the same ideological slogans remain. 7) For those who say "you're not an expert" in a particular subject such as A.I. ... Academia isn't the only way to learn about a subject. Experience counts for as much. And a personal effort to read and cross-reference the available literature on a given subject (without academic conformity pressure and without funding bias pressure) can lead to valuable insights. I've written, directed, produced and edited films but never went to film school. I was employed as a graphic artist, but never went to art school. And I worked in mental health, probation and with the homeless and abused kids for seventeen years without academic qualifications. I don't need an institutional certificate to contribute my thoughts and neither do you, esp if your thoughts already incorporate a lot of published material put out by the "experts". Hope that clears up these issues. Thanks for watching / reading :)
This is all fine. However, this list is still missing what I think is the main the objection to your more technology-oriented claims of "delusion." The objection is: 8) We don't know which of the technological predictions made by authoritative experts today will come to pass or if so how soon. Any proposed technology that is not impossible according to our best understanding of the laws of physics cannot be ruled out as a near-future innovation. So, I agree that faster-than-light space travel will probably never exist; the laws of physics make it almost infinitely unfeasible. The other technologies discussed, however, Strong AI and Brain Commuter Interfaces in particular, cannot be ruled out, since no physical laws forbid them. For one, Brain Computer Interfaces already exist: www.medgadget.com/2021/12/thought-to-text-brain-computer-interface-interview-with-florian-solzbacher-chairman-of-blackrock-neurotech.html www.medgadget.com/2021/05/brain-computer-interface-translates-imagined-writing-into-typed-text.html www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03506-2 Thought-to-text brain implants with up to 99% accuracy have already been implemented and demonstrated. They are scheduled for production and general medical availability this year. Thus, not merely theoretical but actual proof-of-concept instantiations show BCI's to be feasible. The only real barriers are economic and social. If there is a benefit to be had, and thus a profit to be made, from such technology (there obviously is-- imagine writing and controlling your devices without moving a finger), those barriers will eventually be overcome. Likewise, the number of new applications of AI systems has exploded over the last decade due to the advent of neural network-based machine learning. Yes, all these systems put together do not add up to a single instance of Artificial General Intelligence or Strong AI. And yes, our understanding of how the human brain generates intelligence is incomplete (though knowledge in this area has also exploded recently, thanks in part to tandem developments in neural networks). But we know that the brain is a physical system that produces general intelligence, so we know that the production of general intelligence by physical means is manifestly possible. We have also seen that by mimicking the brain's structures, together with embodied robotic learning, we can replicate the performance of any given intelligent task at human level or above. These instances are becoming both more diversified and more general. So, there is simply no warrant for the claim that it is highly unlikely we will see a real proof-of-concept instance of Artificial General Intelligence in the near future. The following arguments against the possibility of a given feasible technology, one that no physical law prevents, simply don't work: 1. Strong AI and BCI have been promised for over 60 years, and they are still nowhere to be seen. Therefore, they will never happen. This is an invalid argument because many times in the past, technology that had been promised to be immanent for half a century or more did eventually come about. Smart phones were first hyped as coming in the near future in the 1920's. A person in the 1990's could have said, "Smart phones have been promised for over 70 years." Likewise with Jules Verne promising the near future advent of space travel and satellites in the 19th century versus the first orbital satellites over 50 years later. Likewise with organ transplantation being discussed by Mary Shelley in the early 19th century versus the first successful organ transplants over a century later. These instances demonstrate that the general form of implication here is invalid. 2. Humans have never created anything like an artificially intelligent being and have never radically altered their own biological or neurological functioning. That is, there is no precedent whatsoever for this technology, therefore it will never happen. This is an invalid argument for the same reason. There was no precedent for instantaneous face-to-face communication around the globe in the 19th century. The power to do that was the stuff of high fantasy. Likewise with space travel, with many modern medical technologies, and so on. Again, these instances demonstrate the invalidity of this general form of implication. 3. More broadly, we are forced to reject as invalid any claim that a technology will not happen because it is unintuitive; or farfetched; or socially or psychologically bizarre or upsetting; or potentially dangerous or undesirable; or outside of the way things have developed so far. Projected technologies with these traits have indeed come about, many times, so the "therefore" is invalid. To reiterate, the key questions are: 1. Has a given technological feat been demonstrated to be feasible, first in principle, then as a real proof-of-concept instance? 2. Is there some benefit to be had from implementation of the technology? If the answer to both questions is "yes," then based on historical precedent it is overwhelmingly likely that that technology will come to pass *eventually,* regardless of the economic and social hurdles to the technology's mass production and spread.
@@ebyronnelson You say "overwhelmingly likely" based on past science successes, but I think you're also ignoring all its failures and the harms it has broad to the world too. A key thing I've learned about the science community is that they don't like to talk too much about these things, esp the latter and certainly when they're trying to get funds. The Transhuman thing I actually consider something of a con - it appeals to the mega-rich and they plow lots of money into it, as they once did in scientology among other things. In fact, given the dedication of many scientists in recent centuries (and still today) to creating weapons of war, a very strong argument could be made that weapons made by scientists will demolish human civilization way before we manage to escape our own solar system. Biowar is now as dangerous as nukes. Only takes one whacko scientist with access to something deadly and most of us could be wiped out.
@@collativelearning yeah, but I'm not really talking here about whether the outcome will be utopian or dystopian. So far it's been a bit of both. I think if we could transport Jules Verne to the present, he would be amazed and would see our lives as utopian in a lot of ways. But he would also probably be quite disappointed in how technology has been used to perpetuate and sometimes increase misery. My point is only that I think that certain things that have been demonstrated to be feasible will come about, quite possibly within the next few decades. When they come about, they will completely transform our lives, as much as our lives have already been transformed by technology. I don't know if for good or for ill. I hope the outcome is more utopian than dystopian.
sorry to come back at you on this, but on point one, you say "investing too much of our time and resources into the unattainable detracts from more important issues in life. There can also be great costs and damage done to our lives by our attempts to achieve the unattainable" - that to me sounds very much like a previous point I said "all the great inventions have already been discovered" a quote I have in the back of my mind that I recall from the early 20th century (feel free to correct me if I got it wrong) Who is anyone to say something is impossible or unattainable in the future? It takes forward thinking minds and people striving for the "impossible" that makes all technology happen does it not? Speak to somebody in 1900 about being able to see somebody on the other side of the world on a screen and communicate in real time and they would say it was impossible and unobtainable, same with any number of modern technology we take for granted today. I'm not saying it is something that will happen overnight, it is small innovations building on previous innovators works and collaboration of great minds (something which has never been easier in human history than right now) but I would suggest that these innovations have been a HUGE benefit to our quality of life. I don't know how with the historical knowledge of the technological path humanity has taken, particularly in the last 40 years, that you can say that something is unobtainable, particularly with the advancements in space exploration that we have seen - I'm not saying that we will invent ways to terraform or change atmospheres of planets, but that is not the only way to inhabit and colonise Mars, or the moon for example, and I think that is perfectly within the realms of possibility of achieving at some point in humanities future, in fact it may even be an inevitability, not in our lifetimes maybe, but again, by innovating and improving. Although reflecting on it, I think maybe I am hyper-focussing on the semantics of how you put it (unobtainable) rather than what I think perhaps your point is, that we should focus our resources on fixing current problems rather than the follies of space exploration/travel etc - (apologies if i am misrepresenting what you are trying to say, but that is what on reflection I got from what you are saying) I think that disregards a lot of the important technological advancements which have been the by-product of space exploration. To that end I find the desire to move forward in that endeavour, colonise and explore deeper into space is a worthwhile one that has many benefits to us and really hope it continues. I appreciate that we disagree, but I just wanted to thank you for the thought provoking video, as always, you have certainly given me a lot of food for thought. happy and safe new year to all :)
We sit atop the cumulative effort, discovery and invention of those that went before. We're lucky in many respects that those proto humans found the monolith and had the courage to throw the bone.
@@ianwestwick4381 I don't accept the throwing of the bone was an accidental discovery. Sentient man's first thoughts would have been similar to a new inmate at Pentonville. "Shit. I better get me a tool, or these animals will have me for breakfast"
Mark Fisher wrote a very short but very important book called _Capitalist-Realism_ where he shows that people are more likely to believe in the end of the world than the end of Capitalism.
This was a thought-provoking video. I don't agree with every point you made, but I can see what you are getting at even in those cases. UA-cam used to be full of videos where people said what they thought, and now it is full of people who are too afraid to say what they think. I know which I prefer.
You can thank McCarthyism 2.0, or "Cancel Culture", for that. UA-cam is also overflowing with "creators" who are more interested in views (payment) than raising the bar of a low-IQ society. And those who accidentally "say what they think" then have to make a choreographed apology video for believing in what they believe in (this does not include apology videos for profitable sex offenders who were caught). Just wait for the generation after the Zoomers...it's a frightening thought.
I hope it's more than thought provoking. Between 4 to 8 million people in Australia have been forced out of their jobs. I believe it's happening in Germany and austria too. It's been happening in the US at a much slower rate. What is the long term outcome of people being prevented by government of the ability to earn a living? It's called homelessness and starvation. And what do you call it when millions of people are put to ***** ? Genocide. No one cares. And no one is talking about it.
@@kickinrocks6055 I called it thought provoking because that is exactly how I found it. And there are reasons for doing one thing over another, with positive outcomes and negatives. you have listed all of one side of the argument you wish to make. That does not make your assessment the only possible argument that can ever be made. Rob did a pretty good job of making his arguments. But he didn't include the best arguments against his positions. And he shouldn't. Other people should make them for themselves. Your arguments are beyond terrible, so I can't be bothered to reply to them.
Thankyou for highlighting the difficulty of space colonization. Sci fi and optimistic media reports make it seem like just a few decades away. But the reality is the more we learn the further away it gets. Solar system maybe, interstellar forget it.
@pyropulse Human history isn't that long and improvement happens exponentially, that's why I'm really curious what will happen in the future. There's not just the known unknown (things we know that we don't know) but also the unknown unknown. Who knows which breakthroughs may happen one day.
It's kind of pointless anyway - space is empty, and unless we wanted to increase the number of humans a millionfold there is already more than enough space here on earth. The only reason we would need to leave is if the earth became uninhabitable
Another thing I dislike about space exploration is that it is being pushed by the rich and powerful to further their interests. Nothing inspiring like the space race exists today to bring us together as a country, civilization, or even species. It's man-boys playing Star Wars
Every time Ager touches the face just know the opposite is true. For a small example, Democracy, Nations States, Nukes, all a hoax, all just an illusion, he knows this, not telling you though! Shhhh
It is impossible to stop child abuse, spousal abuse, murder, rape, etc. Everyone is different. Mentally ill people go untreated, some don't want to be treated, some won't admit they need treatment. Some people like to be bad. You've nailed it. Another Great Episode. Now I'm very depressed. But thank you!
Well stopping child abuse isn't the only way that child abuse can cease to to exist. In fact, the way it would have to cease to exist is if people chose to stop doing it as individuals. And there's no reason why each individual can't just choose to not abuse. That option is just as possible as any other.
@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 Well, you discovered hot water there...again... It will stop if people chose to stop doing it... Well, people, human beings are not completely rational beings, I wonder if we are even so rational as it was contemplated once, and people simply don't want to stop doing that, for many reasons...Some are born bad, psychopaths, in some psychopathy is induced, sociopaths, some are simply such, some have such personality types... If you expect people to take care of themself, you will get nowhere. If people were able to do that we would have no military, police, judicial system, or prisons... But, the sad reality is that we have to have those things because some are monsters. Why, that is another big topic.
How many times a week do you hear that someone has "discovered a potential inhabitable planet!" Some people actually buy the idea, but it's brainwashing by ? someone. Like "keep wasting/polluting/destroying this planet because there's another one to go to" Abject nonsense.
Point 12 is basically about the Whiggish view of history. People grasp that "being from a different place doesn't make someone stupid or wrong." The same fact applies to someone from a different era, but people want to view *some* group as inherently inferior beings, so it's convenient to demean people who are dead & can't defend themselves.
On the final point on historical superiority. I had a friend who was so committed to this myth. That he insisted that people from the past got less sleep then us. Using a flawed argument that because of the stress of war people actually had to get up early then us because at any minute your city could get raided. Now it doesn't take an idiot to realize that people in the past slept better because they didn't have phones to keep them up till two in the morning. However because in his mind wr current exstiance is the pinical we must get more sleep then they did.
It’s never ceases to amaze me how many of these were anticipated by C.S. Lewis, with his critiques of the scientistic Utopianism of mid century Britain. Great video, Rob!
I've really come to appreciate the great insight and wisdom of C.S. Lewis in my thirties and forties. Tolkien wrote the far better stories but when it came to essays and the spiritual condition of modern man, Lewis was supreme.
Are we referring to "That Hideous Strength" and "The Abolition of Man?" Lewis was a great thinker. He was equally enlightening in terms of the spiritual, moral, social, natural, political, and technical, and aesthetic worlds- and how they all come together. He was aware of their many pitfalls and tried to offer a true compass for humanity. He came from the ranks of other greats such as George McDonald (rarely mentioned today, sadly).
I wouldn't praise the man too highly, he was in with the high society and also in the military, and most likely some club connections these people have. They are privy to information and knowledge not available to us plebs.
My vote for one of the top videos of 2021. Great job, Rob. My #13 would be the Geo-engineering or Climate Engineering delusion. I don't deny it's been warming for more than a century, but the idea that politicians would be able to control the atmospheric temperatures of an entire planet, when they can't even get the simplest tasks completed, is laughably absurd. Never mind the harm to billions by banning energy from fossil fuels. Instead mankind will, as it always has, adapt to new conditions.
You will eat your bug protein, live in your pod, have no culture other than food preferences, no ethnic history, and you will consume the transnational products you're given, and you better like it!
There are thousands of weather modification patents in existence... combine those with nano materials and nano tech in the atmosphere and towers that are way beyond 5g ... they even have them in the ocean apparantly which tells they are beyond 5g as 5g cannot penetrate... anything over 5g in the oceans will literally microwave the water and further heat the atmosphere
Politicians sadly as they are rule societies.Societies can change way of living and eocnomy to be more favorable to climate.hence they can change things.
Regarding historical superiority, though I am an atheist, when I read City of God by Saint Augustine, I couldn't help but be impressed by what a keen intellect he had. If I could talk to any person from centuries ago, it would be him.
Atheism is one of the most delusional worldviews you can have, if everything in our world started with an accident and the meaning we put into them isn’t real, then that is the case with you as well. It’s actually sad to see so many people fall into this trap
On the 12th day of Christmas Rob Ager sent to me. 12 red pills For me to see... One ...We aint going to space, Two ..Humans wont be replaced... Three..War is here to stay.. Four ..we're all different ..Yay! Five ..communisim just wont work Six..leave those kids alone you , you Jerk! Seven..If that dude across the street is looking sketchy and eyeing you up and whispering to his buddy while quickly looking up and down the street for any potential witnesses, then discriminate..they mean to do you harm, listen to your intuition and common sense. ..They dont want you to do this. They want automotons. Discriminate ! which brings us to number .. Eight...A.I is all just guff , they did not birth life ..it's all a bluff. NIne..Whats a crime? who decides?.. or gets to define, and change over time? , or who gets fined , and gets confined? Ten ..Offended ? I'm offended that you're offended!!! All this offence is never ending... Eleven. We're all gonna die, no use pretending.. one day this life, ...this earth . .will have an ending.. Twelve... where we delve into oursleves we once all lived in caves, not much has changed within our brains , but technology has has saved us, ? thank fuck there are no aliens they'd definitley enlsave us.
Hahahaha ... when I was writing this vid I had the twelve days of Xmas in mind at one point as a private joke. Didn't think anyone watching would follow that little strand of thought, but you did so beautifully.
Before replying to this pinned comment folks, if your reply isn't to do with the pinned comment itself then post it as a separate comment. Don't use the pinned comment as a sounding board for unrelated issues. Cheers. Rob :)
@@citycrusher9308 I've been going through all the comments and replying to most (in many cases answering the kinds of statements you were making), so just create a fresh comment, thanks. Or I have a contact email on my site.
First and most disturbing delusion most people still hold onto in our decadent western society: trust/believe in politicians. I still can't wrap my head around that one.
Absolutely unfathomable. Truly. I honestly think this might be the first time I’ve seen such a comment online. I feel like I’m part of some colossal joke because the fact that people still trust a political system to benefit them (rather than realizing they must *make* it bend to their will) is truly inconceivable.
ironically, if any of these were actually achieved, well, most of them, we'd end up with dystopia. the fact that these are the predominant goals of the powerful, and theyre being pushed on everyone, most people being adverse to the so-called ideals, says a lot for the world we live in today.
From one point of view this is already a dystopia. When there are problems to be solved, solving them can often create more problems, but it's all created a lot of quality of life improvement from one generation to the next overall.
The zone of space where solar energy can be used to power civilization ends somewhere in between mars and Jupiter. That’s an enormous volume to inhabit, even if some sections are to be avoided for radiation, fast-moving rocks, etc. Now, the money tap needed to get to the moon was turned off in 1973, but the total amount needed wasn’t exceptional, set next to expenses incurred fighting wars of the past. Right now robotic devices haven’t yet reached their apex, which crippled human space flight to a small outpost at low earth orbit. To go to mars, you have to have a human-sustaining infrastructure from earth all the way to mars and back, and no individual country wants to bear that cost. However, without going into space-based mining that moment won’t happen - that means whichever country or country blocks that makes a net profit from space will expand exponentially in space. That’s a low barrier. A second barrier that has to be broken is the production of large amounts of radioactive isotopes that can be used to make reactors that can be used in space beyond Jupiter. Given the violent radiation around Jupiter, it may make sense to skip Saturn as well and make a dash for Uranus and Neptune. The neat thing about frozen moons is that very little heat is needed to separate useful from less useful. The last step will be to find a way to make space mining profitable beyond Pluto. And at that point, mankind has made it out of the solar system. At each step, the veterans from the prior step will either see value and continue outwards, or stop and mine until exhaustion of resource occurs and then have to move outwards.
My Economic teacher tried to prove to us that we don't want to live simple lives because they can only buy one shirt color. He failed to understand that the simple concept of the simple lifestyle is a separation from such desires. I wanted to argue with him so bad when he said that
Don't often comment on the videos I watch but this one deserves it. Great presentation on your thoughts, everything you said was digestible and given as a musing rather than a fact. Love your deep dives and this kind of content too. Nothing you offered was divisive or inflammatory, something which cannot be said for a lot of other media. Keep up the good work.
Point 12, historical superiority, the saying "It's [CURRENT_YEAR]" perfectly demonstrates the fallacious reasoning. Not only is it a vapid catchphrase that doesn't say anything of merit, thus showing the intellectual dumbing down of people, but it's intent is the opposite of what the people said it just demonstrated. Such people say it to mean that we shouldn't be grappling with such issues anymore, we have "ADVANCED" past them. They can't even articulate it in a manner that isn't just meme speak and shows a lack of actual thought, this is how far they have REGRESSED.
The use of capitalisation of a whole word in sentence level writing to emphasise a point or thing that indicates their resentment is basically a meme as well.
55:29 A much better example would be how past generations might react to modern extreme consumerism, or lack of interest in the fine arts, or the obesity epidemic, or exploitative global corporations (so much more powerful & controlling than any group in the past). Cases where an outsider would point out actual problems, not just cultural differences.
@@collativelearning My gut feeling is that if we as humans all fall in the trap like is described by the books of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell and don't come out of them the next 500 years. The ruling class would have the power to do extreme unethical experiments like what they did in concentration camps but with modern equipment like CRISPR and a longer timeframe. Once scientists get the OK from the ruling class to do as many unethical experiments needed to understand the human body more, they will have at some point have enough understanding to completely modify humans, like making them more capable to survive better on place like the moon and travel in hibernation to other planets. This kind of space colonization is i think possible because it will be paid by immense suffering and horror. I don't have Elon musk tier fan boys type ideas about space colonization.
I would argue that you don't need to be an outsider to point out these problems, because these problems are actually being pointed out a lot, especially in the recent decade, at least from my experience. (But simply not by the mainstream media). The problem is that not enough is being done about these problems, even with growing awareness.
I love how concisely and eloquently Rob exposes the fantastical thinking that is present today's arts and media. When this is not only not being discussed by other people but it doesn't even occur to most people to discuss these delusions.
Except the Equality and Capitalism sections were terribly vague strawmen. Equality is expressed in every Union, and every Democracy, it doesn't say Jimmy is as good at Sports as Tim, it says Jimmy has the same rights as Tim. The end of Capitalism doesn't demand the end of trade, it's about the means of production belongings to the laborers who do the work, because we know whenever Capitalists control the playing field they hijack democracy and end in monopoly, which was his strawman that State Ownership leads to, when it's not the only option. It's a bad faith argument. Nothing delusional about either of those ideas at all.
@@uncannyvalley2350 Sorry but that's wrong. If Jimmy isn't as good at sports as Tim then he does not have the same rights. Jimmy will have less opportunity to compete in sports or earn a living from it. Tim will also be judged not as an equal, but as the greater sportsman etc. The "means of trade belonging to the workers" argument is old hat jargon used by state monopolists as an excuse to acquire their own monopoly of industry. the truth is that when big corporations do acquire the level of power you speak of, it's more because of government interference suppressing the competition. In other words it's not really market capitalism, it's what's often referred to as corporate socialism ... you know, bailing out failing corporations instead of letting them die and be replaced by their competition who might do a better job.
@@collativelearning actually no, because the battle for equality is the battle for equal rights, equality under the law. You're trying to spin it as something egalitarian, equality of outcome, which is a lazy bad faith strawman The fact you need to spin and lie to make your case is the admission that it's failing
@uncannyvalley2350 egalitarianism is exactly about equal rights and freedoms, not about equality of outcome. It's technocracy, and the idea of communis, which leads to state monopoly, that everyone should get the same outcome for the same job, planned economy, and planned production - same expected outcome, nothing more, nothing less. This is why there are no countries like that anymore, not even China
@@P.Aether Its no idea of communsit either.we have diffrent paygrades in communism and in fact wer paid accordign to work hours,position , levele of education etc... its completely manifactured capitslist propaganda trope.maybe some radlibs want it.
It's refreshing to hear someone's opinion to be as objective and open as possible. I firmly believe desillusions are some of the most valuable gifts people can receive, so thank you for this video!
There are also wars with little to no physical violence: companies doing underhand tactics to beat their competitors, clash of ideologies whose weapons are words and laws, also hybrid war involving sanctions and infiltration of another countries' groups and movements to alter the government.
I thought this was going to be a video on the UK show Utopia. Hope you do it some day but this new change to the channel is a welcome one for me. Hope there’s more videos like this.
Whether or not I agree or disagree with your points of discussion are beside my point which is that I very much enjoyed watching your video Rob. Thank you for taking the time to make and share this vid! Lastly I'll second you in that these topics are utterly massive and imo require hours of discussion per section just to unpack them and debate. At this point in human evolution there are certainly technological/social/economic etc. limitations/shortcomings that make a lot of these concepts delusional and practically impossible BUT there still remains that which we have not discovered (on purpose or by accident) which may open up the door of possibility. Cheers
"It makes no difference what men think of war. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way. All other trades are contained in that of war. Is that why war endures? No. It endures because young men love it and old men love it in them. Those that fought, those that did not." /Cormac McCarthy - Blood Meridian/
Hi Rob. Brilliant as always. I think that we sit atop the cumulative effort, discovery and invention of all those that came and went before us. How lucky we are that a troop of proto humans at the dawn of our existence found that monolith and had the courage to first pick up and the throw the bone!
Rob - I almost breathed a sigh of relief after seeing this. Rational, reasoned and critical thought is not dead! ... yep you're right on all of these points and the fact you've had to do a 'there there diddums" addendum really makes an ironic zeitgeisty point all of its own. Good stuff man!
I would switch the motivations behind the interstellar fantasy and the end of capitalism fantasy. People don't believe we will inevitably be a space faring civilization, but that we need to become one to survive (look at Elon Musk's whole deal). On the capitalism side, people don't think we need to get rid of capitalism but that it is inevitable (look at the "late stage capitalism" meme). Your point about the contradiction between being pro industrial nationalization and being against the nation state is a good one. There are a lot of people these days who go on about no borders but advocate for central economic planning and tax+welfare. This will be more of an American one, but I think a common fantasy is that news media has some claim to objectivity and authority and hasn't been deeply infected by politics and special interests. On the times I've caught the news recently (always by accident) I am shocked that anyone could believe it is objectively reported. Just yesterday I heard on local news that inflation was high but that this was a good thing and it indicates a healthy economy. They went on to say that rate hikes (to address inflation) were bad because it would make it harder for people to borrow money. Media objectivity is the greatest delusion of our time.
If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading Jean Baudrillard. I would begin with Kellner's "Baudrillard: A Critical Reader." He predicted the future better than the rest, even Lyotard.
Having lived in the SF Bay Area the past five years I can assure you magical thinking is the default mentality. It's not a creative artistic spirit where one gets the sense people are dreaming of how to make life better. Quite the contrary. The ethos is far more sinister. Under the guise of altruism one gets the sense that everyone is hellbent on making everyone in the world just like them. There is no rational debate. It's the most dangerous thing I've ever witnessed.
Could have added that if most people start breaking a law the bureaucrats just remove it or the police stop enforcing it. Examples might be drugs in Bristol, shoplifting below £80 or FGM where no one in the UK (last I checked) has been sent to jail for
50:16 it’s truly unfortunate that a loud minority of people leaning wayyyy too far into their ideas has made the very term “offended” or “offence” a joke and in some ways hard to legitimize, meaning expressing certain thoughts has become essentially pointless
I love when you do these videos. I’ve thought about these things…I like how you’ve organized it and put your thoughts out there. Thank you. I definitely agree. Maybe I’m realistic. Not pessimistic. People today aren’t realistic and they don’t want to live in the real world.
Seems mostly to boil down to not wanting to face the paradox of cosmic poetic chaos and majesty of life ITself. Laziness and cowardice is catered to and playing the victim whilst enjoying outrageous luxuries is the name of the game these days... Accountability is the grim spectre of death to the average human. Also, ‘chartreuse’ is a wonderful color and delicious word to say.
Good thoughts on transhumanism, I believe it's difficult for many to truly understand what any of that means if it could even happen in the first place. People seem to think that simply building a mimic of life, somehow generates the spark of life itself within the mimic. Those are two completely separate things and one is eons beyond the other in reachability as far as technology and understanding is concerned.
In all seriousness. Here are some thoughts about the points you raised: Overall a lot of things you said are correct. For instance what you said about capitalism (not that I'm a big fan of it), war and equality. These things are probably going to be around forever in some form or another. Except about capitalism I'd say it's feasible that we come to a point where everyone can have most of the things they need at a fairly low level without doing away with capitalism. Ray Kurzweil and Peter Diamandis have a point when they say we can produce most things we need with 3D printers almost for free or very cheaply: - Houses - Clothes -Most Items - Cars could be made very affordable at the very least Most of the earth is still empty. So there is enough space and there are ways to get cheap food and water. With the advent of atomically precise manufacturing it could become feasible to replicate food like in Star Trek. If we're lucky fusion energy becomes available. If not - there are other ways to power our civilization. About AI: A lot of the arguments you raised seem pretty flawed. For instance: "No one has done it so far. Ergo it won't happen." This could be said about any new technology. Or: "AI isnt self-aware." This argument suffers from the same flaw as the first one. Also: AI doesn't need to be self-aware to produce most of if not all of the achievements of humans such as creativity, art, science, literature, having a natural conversation et cetera or even surpass them. Check out this conversation with a new "AI" called GPT-3 for instance: ua-cam.com/video/PqbB07n_uQ4/v-deo.html I'd be convinced that this entity is intelligent, even though it's "just a program". It may not be self aware, but it just lies and says it is anyways. LOL. In any case. I've had less intelligent conversations than this with most humans. In fact: most people I talk to I find pretty boring and dull even compared to this program. Somewhere else I've heard you say "None of the robots or AIs are alive or can reproduce." Again. Those things are probably irrelevant for these systems. They will still be able to surpass humans in more and more areas. Similar things could be said about your "space delusion". The ultimate flaw about both points - the "space delusion" and the "AI-delusion" are that there is nothing in physics or science that prevents either. They are just very, very hard engineering problems that are outside of the current scope of science. There is nothing in science that says intelligence has to be limited to biological circuits. In fact: electronic circuits work orders of magnitude faster. Biological evolution is just stuck with them because it's all its got to work with. Similarly, there is nothing that prevents going to space and travelling to other planets and even terraforming them. It's just very, very, very hard and expensive and it requires a TON of energy that we currently are not able to produce. Again, though: it's more of an engineering problem. Having said all this: we may never get to these technologies because our society is declining to rapidly. We re certainly not going to see manned space travel to other planets - let alone stars in our lifetime.
Thanks for your thoughts. I think we're already at a point in the west where most things people need are more easily available than they have ever been before, though certainly room for improvement. The stuff about 3D printing and so on ... interesting ideas. I'd have to look into the practicalities, though I don't think it conflicts with anything in the vid as a concept. Regarding AI, I found that clip amusing. Just did a bit of reading up on GTP-3 and there are folks calling it out as a misleading, though I'm not familiar with the details yet. This one about not allowing research access suggests to me it's just another PR scam www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/22/1007539/gpt3-openai-language-generator-artificial-intelligence-ai-opinion/ I'd love to sit down with it and ask some highly specific curve-ball questions. I'd bet £10k the computer's "answers" are just generic waffle. It's a shame you feel that way about real people. I find them far more interesting than computers. A lot of people have poor articulation, but if you manage to dig deep in conversation their thoughts are often wiser than their words. The subconscious mind, even of a low IQ person, is endlessly fascinating to me, but computers have no comprehension of symbols, metaphors etc. They can't dream. They're just programmed input output devices. Your claims about what computers will be able to do in the future are ... well, they're just claims. As I said in the vid, such claims like that began in the 1950's and here we are half a century later. You even bring up a key point yourself - computers are a lot faster at sending signals and they still lack the versatility and consciousness of a human mind. We still simply do not know how the brain manages to be so massively parallel. How can we imitate the brain if we don't understand the brain. My suspicion is that brains work on very different principles to how computers do - they might be principles so complex or so different that a computer cannot imitate it. It's not just me saying this. Many in the field do. Chomsky, for example, has done some great lectures on the severe limitations of AI. Re interstellar space travel, the evidence really isn't there that we can do it. We don't even know yet what challenges lie out there between our solar system and other ones. Is the space really completely empty? Does it require millions of times more energy to fully escape the gravity of our own solar system than we currently think it does? And there's the issues of how to sustain ourselves on the journey and how to find planets where we can actually survive. To pursue such an aim is rather pointless at thye moment and we're better putting our energy into more attainable endeavours. If our technology advances far enough in the future (and there's no guarantee it will always advance and not decline) then at that point maybe it would be worth considering the interstellar challenge. Until then it's pure sci-fi.
@@collativelearning Good point about GPT-3. Maybe it can't do as much as it seems in this clip. I was under the impression that the conversation happened the way it was recorded. I.e. the guy from the video just asked it the question and the AI answered. If this is what happened, I'd argue that this conversation demonstrates a pretty sophisticated level of understanding concepts. Why would it be impossible to emulate parallel processes from the brain on electronic circuits? I'd say our brains are fundamentally about processing information. Computers do the same thing in principle. This is an interesting point. I just don't grasp it on an intuitive level. About the space travel points you raised: The voyager probe is already leaving our solar system, so I'd say we have a good idea of how much energy it takes to leave our solar system. It's pretty much in agreement with Newtonian or Einsteinian physics. All the other issues are raised are, again, engineering problems. I don't see how you demonstrated that they are impossible or why they even should be. I'm just saying that these issues CAN be overcome if we become sophisticated enough. I'm not saying that we will do it. Just to be clear.
@@collativelearning Ok. So I've gone through your article and it raises some good points. I will say though, even if it doesn't infer that grape juice is a drink or that lawyers don't wear bathing suits - I don't think it's outlandish to think that a further improved version of it may learn to do it. My larger point was that an AI does not need to be alive or self-aware or work exactly like the human brain to achieve these things.
'I'd be convinced that this entity is intelligent, even though it's "just a program". It may not be self aware, but it just lies and says it is anyways. LOL. In any case. I've had less intelligent conversations than this with most humans. In fact: most people I talk to I find pretty boring and dull even compared to this program.' You come off like someone who loves the smell of your own farts lol
As Shakespear said, our faults lie not in our stars but in ourselves, and that's really the gist of the utopia problem. We are and always have been a very deeply flawed species. Hell, in a lot of respects, we're terrifying. How anyone could look at the totality of our history and still believe that we are in any way capable of creating utopia just leaves me gob smacked!
Only addressing how much is spent on space travel: many technologies we now take for granted only exist because of the demands of space travel (or at least came into existence much sooner because of them) such as battery operated tools, and high efficiency solar panels as far as I know
I find it hilarious that people will say “discrimination is bad” but then not hire you because of a criminal record, or not want to date you because you are under 6 feet tall.
I find it 'hilarious' when a person, say myself, witnesses an event first-hand, and then immediately say, "I can't believe that just happened". I know it happened, I know it's real, why am declaring that I 'can't' believe what I just saw? Meanwhile, some people seem to be absolutely certain of something they've never seen for themselves.
This was a great video and I would love to see more like it in the future. It is a topic near and dear to my heart; I feel like an alien on hostile territory because my understanding of existence is totally antithetical to the modern world and mentality. I constantly experience a sense of nausea (to borrow a Sartrean term) and dread as a result. People like Julius Evola, Rene Guenon and others have explicated the delusions afflicting modern man in great detail and posited the counter balance in the man of Tradition and helped me to better understand myself and the crisis the world is in. As for whether this video is part of a stream of lower quality content, no, quite the opposite. It is tackling some of the most important topics possible. In Europe especially, if you go too in depth on these topics, you go to jail; that tells you everything you need to know about the importance of what is being talked about.
I just had my water cooler on my PC fail. Which fried my CPU. I replaced both of them, but my motherboard was also toast, so I replaced everything and now it's running. Only I now can't overclock my memory for some reason. This is the most reliable computer I've ever owned. So here's the deal....I'll listen to them talk about uploading my consciousness into a computer just as soon as they can make a computer that runs for 10 years without any hardware or software issues, and without needing maintenance. By the way, Neil Postman's book "Technopoly" is extremely useful. In it he makes several observations about why computer brains and human brains will never be the same, and how the language we use about computers (ie "virus") tends to make us view them almost anthropomorphically.
Oh, that book sounds interesting. I have been quite familiar of technology generally being anthropomorphised in studying Videodrome. Things like UA-cam "thumbnails", lol. Cheers, mate!
28:00 or so: your definition of capitalism equates people bartering to capitalism. Not at all, capitalism (private ownership of the means and output of production) has only existed since the 1,300s and in this end-stage form since the industrial revolution. Someone trading for a bad deal does not mean that's capitalism. Also, the basis of society was trade. Now it's greed, which is facilitated through capitalism. You are coming from the position of "this is the way it is and no other system can exist". As for your nation state / nationalizing industry comment, again - you seem to think it's entirely run by a government like a dictator or it's in private hands. There are other options. Community / co-operatively run is an option. Socialism, communism, post-scarcity are all options and we had merchantilism, feudal-serf, etc before too.
my favourite Jungian Scouse film critic holds court for an hour! Couldn't ask for more haha, Merry Christmas Rob, all the best for the new year! Been putting out some bangers lately!
People generally don't seem to be able to understand the insane amount of time money and effort that has already been wasted on Space instead of investing in our own world.
Vague and incorrect. Consider, for example, that the "green industry" has outpaced every single other industry on the planet. Would that not be a investment in our own world? How about the fact that Obama cut NASA's budget almost entirely in the name of "green"? Then you have the results. NASA and space exploration have actually produced results. Just on the level of human achievement, it is completely unparalleled. Technology advancements far too many to list. Yeah, I disagree with you on this one.
@@gcarlson It is indeed unparalleled. But this spectacle blinds, and makes people forget that none of these unparalleled achievements are helpful in the areas that need it most.
@@crowstakingoff notice that if one were to split the US government’s budget from a dollar NASA takes half a penny and well over half of the metaphorical dollar is spent on welfare. The concern is the lack of whereabout in spending in the current US system. We have the CIA and it’s reoccurring “accidents” such as their more infamous child sex ring that was meant to be the bait but became a commercial use or the FBI using its money to start false flag operations throughout the country such as Governor Whitmer being threatened by anarchists when out of the 9 who were planning this kidnapping 7 of them were agents. The blind side here wouldn’t be our focus on space travel but the conflict amongst personalities mixing with hobbies
You should do a small amount of research into the benefits to our world that space exploration have delivered. Emergency foil blankets, ball point pens, LED lighting, memory foam, CAT scans, water purification systems, baby formula, artificial limbs, the computer mouse, camera phones and the list goes on. When you push the envelope in exploration you will create new technologies and products, some of which will become ubiquitous and help/be adopted by the wider populace.
@@Satorotas89 And a happy New Year to you! Yes, yes and yes. Don't forget Tang! There is a youtube channel "homemade documentaries" that covers most of the NASA missions, from Mercury to Apollo. When you see from his perspective how much this "wasteful endeavor" has contributed to mankind, it will bring a tear to your eye.
Proud to be a Patreon supporter of your content. You're one of the most brilliant minds out there. Even though I don't agree with all your takes (growing up on an ashram, I'm much more open to things of a spiritual / fantastical / supernatural /metaphsyical nature), I always appreciate your intellect and articulation.
One thing that disturbs me specifically about the Human AI and other techno utopian concepts is that, unlike the other topics listed here (like equity, elimination of war, crime, abuse etc), it's virtually impossible to find any criticism or debunking of these topics.
Rob it's funny, these are things I always thought about and used to argue with people fairly regularly whenever they'd come up in some theoretical conversation. I think you also share a rather realistic, cynical (in a good way) view of humanity, in that we are creatures destined to repeat ourselves ad infinitum even if we do "change" in some ways over time.
Rob this is one of your best videos right next to “how to manage your boss” and you AI discussions I appreciate how respectfully you discuss 12 things that will never happen… hell of a follow up to your top 100 albums video :)
I'd replace the word war with conflict. That way you remove the need for violence to be synonymous with the idea but keep the fundemental understanding of the concept.
Thanks Rob for another interesting video. "#1 The Interstellar Delusion" Perhaps there pop up some serious contenders for inhabitable planets in the next few years. I mean, they discovered exoplanets such as Kepler-62f quite recently of whom they surmise not being that extremely hostile to life as we understand it, or already contain life in one form or another. Some of those planets aren't so far off from earth in astronomical dimensions. So I am curious about what future observations bring to light. But of course you are right, even negotiating just four light years (which would be the distance to Proxima Centauri) cannot be done any time soon considering our current state of science and technology.
Interesting video, Rob. I particularly liked your thoughts on the interstellar delusion. I really hate the ego-driven billionaire space race. It's an obscene waste of money and resources (in my opinion). When I was younger, the idea that space was an empty, cold void was depressing to me. Now, I really don't feel that way. I also agree with you on borders. As you say, we will always have borders. I can see gated communities becoming increasingly important.
Absolutely. I must find the article again, but one thing I read recently compared the philanthropic work of rich and powerful men in the past to guys like Elton Musk, who ignore that sort of thing in lieu of sending themselves into space, seemingly to fulfill some sort of wet dream fantasy they had as a teenager!
@@davidlean1060 That does sound interesting. There are so many things he could achieve with his resources. I don't get why so many people are obsessed with Musk. I used to think the Steve Jobs fanboys were irritating but the guys who love Musk really are the worst.
@@patrickdoherty4527 And my big question about Musk is, if he is so savvy about tech and so rich, why the hell did he pick a plastic surgeon that left him looking like he'd had a face lift done with a knife and fork?! Seriously though, I read a great observation on a page about Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. Pardon me if you know the book and you're already aware of the themes etc, but just in case, like Dr Strangelove, the novel links 'the rocket' and sex constantly. The V2 is a fetish icon for some of the characters. Musk could be a modern day GR character (his name is as strange as the names Pynchon gives his characters already!) continuing the strange, lustful desire to be part of 'the rocket' and it's legacy.
@@Brubser_Jr_Reloaded I can't find the comment. I wish I could because I thought it was genius to suggest it too. It makes his fascination with the rocket even more perverse!
Excellent list. Sadly, humanity needs its delusions. Of course, some delusions are relatively harmless. Others not so much. But they all bring me back to what Joseph Conrad said: "Life doesn't bear much looking into."
I enjoyed that very much, thank you! I've tried expressing some of these subjects to a few close people, but I don't have the vocabulary to have them understand what I'm trying to say. Now I am happy that I can refer them to you for clarification! 😁
I didn't have the time or the strength to go through all the comments. Probably someone else already mentioned this... Anyway, this is a year old video, so it doesn't even matter that much. But: The words 'atheist' and 'agnostic' aren't actually mutually exclusive. You can be a gnostic theist, an agnostic theist, a gnostic atheist or an agnostic atheist. (A)gnostic refers to claims of knowledge, (a)theist refers to accepting the claims about god. You can accept or not accept the claims about the excistance of god(s). If don't accept the claims, you are an atheist. The word means "without belief in a god" (a + theist in Greek). You can then say, "I'm an atheist, that is, I don't accept what the religions claim about gods' excistance" but also add, "I'm an agnostic atheist, so I don't claim to know one way or the other", or, "I'm a gnostic atheist, so I claim to know that there are no gods". It's often the case that these words are used a bit too carelessly. If you don't readily accept the claims about god(s) of a certain religion, then you are holding the atheistic position towards that religion. If you don't readily accept any claims about any gods, then you are holding an atheistic position towards all religions. You are an atheist, in the very sense of the word. But even so, you can say that you don't KNOW for a fact if there is a god or not. That means that you hold the agnostic position alongside the atheistic position. Most people are atheistic about most of the religions in the world. But of course if you believe in any one of them (or if you have your own idea about a god), then you are a theist. Even if you are a theist, you can say that you're either a gnostic theist or an agnostic theist - that is, you believe there is a god and you either claim to know that you're right or you claim that you don't actually know for a fact but you believe it to be true. If you are altogether against the idea of having any kind of god-beliefs, because there really are no good evidence for the excistance of god(s), you can say that you're an anti-theist. I myself am an agnostic theist, because I don't think we can ever say for certain if there is a god or not, but I don't accept any of the thousands of claims made about gods. I haven't found any of them even slightly convincing. But I am also kind of anti-theistic, since I consider almost all kinds of unfounded beliefs (and especially belief systems such as religions and churches) to be harmful. But that's just me.
If the Earth were the size of a basketball then the Moon would be the size of a softball and be about 4m away from it. If the Sun were the size of a yoga ball then the Earth would be the size of a small marble and be the length of a football pitch away. If the Sun were the size of a chick pea then the nearest star would be about 230kms and also be about the size of a chick pea (about as far as Liverpool from London or Seattle to Portland). In this model, the Earth would be nigh invisible and about 2 feet from the Sun. If the Milky Way was the size of a grain of sand then the observable universe would still be about 1000m in every direction. It's old hat to say space is unimaginably large; for my money it's more impressive how unimaginably empty it is.
Man, I really applaud you. Simply talking about these things really stirs people on both sides of the isle; and it begs the question as to why… There’s a reason. I’ve always sat crisscross applesauce in that isle.
Not rlly related but Prometheus is one of the most underrated sci fis ever made, def one of Ridleys best work aside from some dumb typical horror movie scenes
@@cigaweed88 funnily enough I actually only rewatched it last night on my new tv, I can definitely see the flaws it’s more of a guilty pleasure, that was def one of my most enjoyable first watches for a movie tho shame it never got a true sequel
So many of the science fiction authors of yesteryear-HG Welles, Gene Roddenberry-had such high hopes for humanity. But alas, they didn’t factor in our unlimited capacity for selfishness and greed.
Soothing video, despite the content, that might not always be 'positive' but at least it's enlightening or (very) coherent. Good stuff. Sobering in a way.
Hey Rob, still watching the video but I just finished the Transhumanism part of the video, and I wanted to add that even if we could somehow find a way to make yourself fully and completely immortal... Would you enjoy it? I've started to think that not only does death contextualize life (if everyone is immortal than nothing means anything), but also that living forever would be a horrible burden on a mind... I imagine an immortal human mind would become so disconnected with the world around it after millions of years, even if the person was able to maintain a young, healthy human body for that time, that it would just be torturous... Not to mention can you imagine how awful it would be for society if tyrants, dictators, and other wealth empires (either business-wise or or government-wise) never changed leadership or ownership, and some people were able to accumulate incomprehensible amounts of wealth and power... As well as the fact that death provides a relief from old societal ideas... If nobody ever died then society would never progress because the same people with the same ideas would always be in charge and grow more and more detached from reality as time goes on... I don't fear death anymore (although I do fear dying), I think that death is not only a natural part of life, but a necessary part of life
Given how specialized society is now, it takes about 30 years to fully educate someone on a subject. Give another 10 years or so to be come competent, so about 30 years of full productivity, the majority of which will be with progressing cognitive decline. Can't speak to immortality, but there is no doubt the lack of longevity screws us in immeasurable ways.
You could say the same thing about heaven. The length of the life has no connection with the fulfillment of the life. Its the actions of the life that determine that. For example: living indoors alone in hate for the rest of your life. Living outside loving with friends and doing things to help people.
Great perspective on cultural myths. The only one that's subpar is capitalism. Capitalism is defined well, also trade and markets and money existed waaaay before capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production are privatized. I agree on that there's doesn't seem to be an alternative to capitalism.
Cheers. As I said in the vid the problem with capitalism (and I do follow some anti-capitalist groups to hear their thoughts) is the monopolies that come out of it. But if you hand over that ownership to the state, that's just another form of privatization - capitalism by legal decree. There's no guarantee politicians would make better or more responsible decisions with it. Sometimes the result is worse.
@@collativelearning In my reading of the history, I have never found a case where a true monopoly formed without either a government mandate or charter, or the private firm in question explicitly using violence to prop up its monopoly claim--in which case, it is now just a criminal enterprise (or a little government, right? haha...) Kind of the flipside of the same coin to state ownership of capital like you mention. More abstractly, treating the idea of capitalism as some kind of historical force which inevitably leads to things like monopoly is getting it all wrong. Its an explanatory theory of a system that is strictly value-free--and even though they didn't have the same terminology or theoretical framework to explain it, it has nevertheless been in use in some basic form or another and absolutely indispensible to even the most basic forms of civilization for millennia. You simply can't produce enough excess wealth without "capital", i.e. goods which are not consumed but used to produce more goods.
Like Zizek likes to say. People have an easier time imagining the end of the world than the end of capitalism. Thats some powerful propaganda. Your lives are totally dominated by the logic of capitalism so it seems impossible to find a better system.
I think about downloading my consciousness into a computer the same way I think about cryogenically freezing myself. There’s a very good chance that the company will go out of business or get bought out and the new owners decide it’s not worth the time and money to keep “you” alive. I’ll take a pass on this fantasy and pass down my ideas, feelings and attitudes the way humanity has since the beginning. By having and raising children of my own.
I would say that we as a species are in the infancy regarding many of these 'delusions'. Who's to say what technological advances will come to pass in say 5000 years time that will aid interstellar travel for example. I think many of the 12 points raised are somewhat disingenuous as I don't think many seriousy think there will come a point in time where no conflict exists, but we are certainly on the road to where LESS conflict exists. This is demonstrably true judging by the data.
See pinned comment. There are people and organizations stating the absolutists outcomes as their aims. What "data" says we're on our way to less conflict? Looks like business as usual to me. And now we have the increasing threat of biowarfare which could be more devastating than anything we've ever seen.
So you've entered the resigned stage of life. Some of the items on your list really are not delusions. Rather, they are goals that we humans have set for ourselves. Whether achievable or not is currently not a big issue, I will argue, as we humans have been domesticating ourselves for a very long time (in human lifespan measures), and setting idealistic goals is useful to continue that domestication.
I kind of agree. Part of what gets us through the day and through our lives is the idea things will get better. To strive is to be human. Hes a little too resigned/nihilistic in some of the topics. He did say not everyone would agree so hes def entitled to those opinions.
I can understand you seeing that way, but I did say at the start of the vid that it's not about being negative, it's about freeing ourselves of delusional distracting goals so that we pay more attention to other things that matter and are more attainable.
@@collativelearning i agree... get your head out of the clouds so you can deal with what's on the ground level. Problem is most (even the atheist/agnostic) need some created future to look forward to. The idea that well my life sucks maybe I can do good enough so the one after me has it better. I find a lot of delusions are rooted in that way of thinking for better or worse
the problem with ideas of capitalism vs communism is that we associate what we have experienced as what they actually mean. we don't have pure capitalism or pure communism. both ideas have merits and are inherently good. but what we have experienced is corrupt versions of them that are actually a mixture of both. we cannot say either is bad or good or that they work or don't work because we never experienced them as they are supposed to be
Now that there are a good 700+ comments I think it's time to leave a pinned comment answer to the most frequent and notable replies. Thanks for all your thoughts.
1) For those who think the video is pessimistic / fatalistic ... As I mentioned at the start (albeit very briefly to get the vid rolling) investing too much of our time and resources into the unattainable detracts from more important issues in life. There can also be great costs and damage done to our lives by our attempts to achieve the unattainable. In this context I consider the video to be a positive message about realigning our priorities for better real world results. EDIT: Two examples of things we need to deal with as more likely outcomes are the self-made threats to humanity (and Earth life as we know it) of nukes and synthetically created bio threats. If human civilization destroys itself through either of these then the fantasy outcomes of interstellar travel etc certainly won't happen. The argument of "we'll eventually get there" can apply as much to humanity's self-destruction.
2) For those who believe that I'm saying that no attempt should be made to reduce crime, improve equal opportunities etc ... That's not what I've said at all. I'm saying the attempts to bring about particular absolute results with no exceptions leads to a severe imbalance in our priorities as individuals and as a society. If we except that we can make broad changes, but cannot achieve absolute outcomes with no exceptions, this allows us to exercize wisdom in our choices.
3) For those who say that my debunking of absolute outcomes - no crime, no inequality etc - constitutes a "strawman" argument ... There are people and organizations setting such absolutist goals. Do a search for the term "universal equality" and you will find multiple sources, some academic, that use that very term among their stated aims. It's the same on social media - I follow anti-capitalist groups out of interest and a lot of people talk about their desire to "End capitalism". At the same time, I said in the intro that these things are not always verbally stated, but appear to be implied. sure that's more open to interpretations, but enough declarations of intent are out there.
4) For those who say I didn't provide any sources ... See point 3 above, plus, I said in the vid my aim is to prompt thought and discussions and that any of these subjects can be expanded into a much longer video full of sources and quotes. I've read up a lot on these issues, so didn't pluck the ideas out of a hat. I also provided a link in the vid description to a more detailed video I made on the Human Level A.I. delusion (6 yr old vid but the points still stand).
5) For those who say I've misdefined "capitalism" ... a lot of you say that, but don't provide a description of your own. Those who do provide a description not only mismatch each other a lot, but also mismatch with the various dictionary descriptions of the term (which also mismatch each other lol). Several of you claim capitalism is about the private ownership of the means of production, but miss the point made in the vid that handing such ownership over to a state bureaucracy is still private ownershjip, but even worse because the state can ban all competition. There also tends to be a lack of clear definition as to what the "means of production" is. "Capitalism" is an ideological term, and ideological terms are typically vague in meaning to avoid basic logical debunks. The malleable meaning allows the term to be used on a whim and, frequently, in inappropriate contexts to discredit something the speaker doesn't like for their own personal or organizational reasons. Which leads into the next point ...
6) For those who claim I'm coming from a particular ideological position such as fatalism or conservatism or whatever, as I said in the video, I don't believe in ideologies. They're too generalistic. Ideologies try to apply overly simple ideas as a "one size fits all" solution to a very broad range of complex situations. I prefer to try and take each situation on its own merits. I'm also a swing voter because I know that no particular party has all the right answers and that the parties change in motives and behaviour over time, even if the same ideological slogans remain.
7) For those who say "you're not an expert" in a particular subject such as A.I. ... Academia isn't the only way to learn about a subject. Experience counts for as much. And a personal effort to read and cross-reference the available literature on a given subject (without academic conformity pressure and without funding bias pressure) can lead to valuable insights. I've written, directed, produced and edited films but never went to film school. I was employed as a graphic artist, but never went to art school. And I worked in mental health, probation and with the homeless and abused kids for seventeen years without academic qualifications. I don't need an institutional certificate to contribute my thoughts and neither do you, esp if your thoughts already incorporate a lot of published material put out by the "experts".
Hope that clears up these issues. Thanks for watching / reading :)
This is all fine. However, this list is still missing what I think is the main the objection to your more technology-oriented claims of "delusion." The objection is:
8) We don't know which of the technological predictions made by authoritative experts today will come to pass or if so how soon. Any proposed technology that is not impossible according to our best understanding of the laws of physics cannot be ruled out as a near-future innovation. So, I agree that faster-than-light space travel will probably never exist; the laws of physics make it almost infinitely unfeasible. The other technologies discussed, however, Strong AI and Brain Commuter Interfaces in particular, cannot be ruled out, since no physical laws forbid them.
For one, Brain Computer Interfaces already exist:
www.medgadget.com/2021/12/thought-to-text-brain-computer-interface-interview-with-florian-solzbacher-chairman-of-blackrock-neurotech.html
www.medgadget.com/2021/05/brain-computer-interface-translates-imagined-writing-into-typed-text.html
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03506-2
Thought-to-text brain implants with up to 99% accuracy have already been implemented and demonstrated. They are scheduled for production and general medical availability this year. Thus, not merely theoretical but actual proof-of-concept instantiations show BCI's to be feasible. The only real barriers are economic and social. If there is a benefit to be had, and thus a profit to be made, from such technology (there obviously is-- imagine writing and controlling your devices without moving a finger), those barriers will eventually be overcome.
Likewise, the number of new applications of AI systems has exploded over the last decade due to the advent of neural network-based machine learning. Yes, all these systems put together do not add up to a single instance of Artificial General Intelligence or Strong AI. And yes, our understanding of how the human brain generates intelligence is incomplete (though knowledge in this area has also exploded recently, thanks in part to tandem developments in neural networks). But we know that the brain is a physical system that produces general intelligence, so we know that the production of general intelligence by physical means is manifestly possible. We have also seen that by mimicking the brain's structures, together with embodied robotic learning, we can replicate the performance of any given intelligent task at human level or above. These instances are becoming both more diversified and more general. So, there is simply no warrant for the claim that it is highly unlikely we will see a real proof-of-concept instance of Artificial General Intelligence in the near future.
The following arguments against the possibility of a given feasible technology, one that no physical law prevents, simply don't work:
1. Strong AI and BCI have been promised for over 60 years, and they are still nowhere to be seen. Therefore, they will never happen.
This is an invalid argument because many times in the past, technology that had been promised to be immanent for half a century or more did eventually come about. Smart phones were first hyped as coming in the near future in the 1920's. A person in the 1990's could have said, "Smart phones have been promised for over 70 years." Likewise with Jules Verne promising the near future advent of space travel and satellites in the 19th century versus the first orbital satellites over 50 years later. Likewise with organ transplantation being discussed by Mary Shelley in the early 19th century versus the first successful organ transplants over a century later.
These instances demonstrate that the general form of implication here is invalid.
2. Humans have never created anything like an artificially intelligent being and have never radically altered their own biological or neurological functioning. That is, there is no precedent whatsoever for this technology, therefore it will never happen.
This is an invalid argument for the same reason. There was no precedent for instantaneous face-to-face communication around the globe in the 19th century. The power to do that was the stuff of high fantasy. Likewise with space travel, with many modern medical technologies, and so on.
Again, these instances demonstrate the invalidity of this general form of implication.
3. More broadly, we are forced to reject as invalid any claim that a technology will not happen because it is unintuitive; or farfetched; or socially or psychologically bizarre or upsetting; or potentially dangerous or undesirable; or outside of the way things have developed so far. Projected technologies with these traits have indeed come about, many times, so the "therefore" is invalid.
To reiterate, the key questions are:
1. Has a given technological feat been demonstrated to be feasible, first in principle, then as a real proof-of-concept instance?
2. Is there some benefit to be had from implementation of the technology?
If the answer to both questions is "yes," then based on historical precedent it is overwhelmingly likely that that technology will come to pass *eventually,* regardless of the economic and social hurdles to the technology's mass production and spread.
@@ebyronnelson You say "overwhelmingly likely" based on past science successes, but I think you're also ignoring all its failures and the harms it has broad to the world too. A key thing I've learned about the science community is that they don't like to talk too much about these things, esp the latter and certainly when they're trying to get funds. The Transhuman thing I actually consider something of a con - it appeals to the mega-rich and they plow lots of money into it, as they once did in scientology among other things.
In fact, given the dedication of many scientists in recent centuries (and still today) to creating weapons of war, a very strong argument could be made that weapons made by scientists will demolish human civilization way before we manage to escape our own solar system. Biowar is now as dangerous as nukes. Only takes one whacko scientist with access to something deadly and most of us could be wiped out.
@@collativelearning yeah, but I'm not really talking here about whether the outcome will be utopian or dystopian. So far it's been a bit of both. I think if we could transport Jules Verne to the present, he would be amazed and would see our lives as utopian in a lot of ways. But he would also probably be quite disappointed in how technology has been used to perpetuate and sometimes increase misery. My point is only that I think that certain things that have been demonstrated to be feasible will come about, quite possibly within the next few decades. When they come about, they will completely transform our lives, as much as our lives have already been transformed by technology. I don't know if for good or for ill. I hope the outcome is more utopian than dystopian.
This video was chum in the water for comment section conversation. Very nice.
sorry to come back at you on this, but on point one, you say "investing too much of our time and resources into the unattainable detracts from more important issues in life. There can also be great costs and damage done to our lives by our attempts to achieve the unattainable" - that to me sounds very much like a previous point I said "all the great inventions have already been discovered" a quote I have in the back of my mind that I recall from the early 20th century (feel free to correct me if I got it wrong) Who is anyone to say something is impossible or unattainable in the future? It takes forward thinking minds and people striving for the "impossible" that makes all technology happen does it not? Speak to somebody in 1900 about being able to see somebody on the other side of the world on a screen and communicate in real time and they would say it was impossible and unobtainable, same with any number of modern technology we take for granted today. I'm not saying it is something that will happen overnight, it is small innovations building on previous innovators works and collaboration of great minds (something which has never been easier in human history than right now) but I would suggest that these innovations have been a HUGE benefit to our quality of life.
I don't know how with the historical knowledge of the technological path humanity has taken, particularly in the last 40 years, that you can say that something is unobtainable, particularly with the advancements in space exploration that we have seen - I'm not saying that we will invent ways to terraform or change atmospheres of planets, but that is not the only way to inhabit and colonise Mars, or the moon for example, and I think that is perfectly within the realms of possibility of achieving at some point in humanities future, in fact it may even be an inevitability, not in our lifetimes maybe, but again, by innovating and improving.
Although reflecting on it, I think maybe I am hyper-focussing on the semantics of how you put it (unobtainable) rather than what I think perhaps your point is, that we should focus our resources on fixing current problems rather than the follies of space exploration/travel etc - (apologies if i am misrepresenting what you are trying to say, but that is what on reflection I got from what you are saying) I think that disregards a lot of the important technological advancements which have been the by-product of space exploration. To that end I find the desire to move forward in that endeavour, colonise and explore deeper into space is a worthwhile one that has many benefits to us and really hope it continues.
I appreciate that we disagree, but I just wanted to thank you for the thought provoking video, as always, you have certainly given me a lot of food for thought. happy and safe new year to all :)
Ancient and medieval people were very, *very* intelligent. I wish more people understood that.
Not only that but worked at a level we can barely conceive of.
In most cases far greater men than we
We sit atop the cumulative effort, discovery and invention of those that went before.
We're lucky in many respects that those proto humans found the monolith and had the courage to throw the bone.
Ya if they were so intelligent, why are they dead? Idiots.
@@ianwestwick4381 I don't accept the throwing of the bone was an accidental discovery. Sentient man's first thoughts would have been similar to a new inmate at Pentonville. "Shit. I better get me a tool, or these animals will have me for breakfast"
My utopia is simply neighbor trusting neighbor over trusting politicians.
I like that one. Bit confusing if your neighbour is a politician though lol
A true utopia would have NO politicians, because there would be no need of a government
No government leads to anarchy and misery except for those who bring misery. One of the worst delusions is the belief that humans are perfectable.
@@ingridlinbohm7682 THAT is the point. A true utopia is impossible, because perfection is impossible.
@@briancorvello3620 Some people need Government.
Mark Fisher wrote a very short but very important book called _Capitalist-Realism_ where he shows that people are more likely to believe in the end of the world than the end of Capitalism.
Didn't think I'd find another Fisher fan in here, but very true.
Every Union, and every Cooperative is a step towards the end of Capitalism
@@uncannyvalley2350 and that’s a good thing.
@@uncannyvalley2350 Unions and co-operatives are not prohibited in any way in capitalism.
@@shlockofgod 2 Nuns in a bath, one says where's the soap?
The other says it does, doesn't it
This was a thought-provoking video. I don't agree with every point you made, but I can see what you are getting at even in those cases. UA-cam used to be full of videos where people said what they thought, and now it is full of people who are too afraid to say what they think. I know which I prefer.
You can thank McCarthyism 2.0, or "Cancel Culture", for that. UA-cam is also overflowing with "creators" who are more interested in views (payment) than raising the bar of a low-IQ society.
And those who accidentally "say what they think" then have to make a choreographed apology video for believing in what they believe in (this does not include apology videos for profitable sex offenders who were caught). Just wait for the generation after the Zoomers...it's a frightening thought.
@@chrisbutler1668 too scared to name who is behind cancel culture?
I hope it's more than thought provoking. Between 4 to 8 million people in Australia have been forced out of their jobs. I believe it's happening in Germany and austria too. It's been happening in the US at a much slower rate. What is the long term outcome of people being prevented by government of the ability to earn a living? It's called homelessness and starvation. And what do you call it when millions of people are put to ***** ? Genocide. No one cares. And no one is talking about it.
@@chrisbutler1668 and, as with most societally divisive things, the almighty Powers That Be are the wizards behind the curtain.
@@kickinrocks6055 I called it thought provoking because that is exactly how I found it. And there are reasons for doing one thing over another, with positive outcomes and negatives. you have listed all of one side of the argument you wish to make. That does not make your assessment the only possible argument that can ever be made. Rob did a pretty good job of making his arguments. But he didn't include the best arguments against his positions. And he shouldn't. Other people should make them for themselves. Your arguments are beyond terrible, so I can't be bothered to reply to them.
Thankyou for highlighting the difficulty of space colonization. Sci fi and optimistic media reports make it seem like just a few decades away. But the reality is the more we learn the further away it gets. Solar system maybe, interstellar forget it.
@pyropulse Human history isn't that long and improvement happens exponentially, that's why I'm really curious what will happen in the future. There's not just the known unknown (things we know that we don't know) but also the unknown unknown. Who knows which breakthroughs may happen one day.
It's kind of pointless anyway - space is empty, and unless we wanted to increase the number of humans a millionfold there is already more than enough space here on earth. The only reason we would need to leave is if the earth became uninhabitable
I also was thinking , we even havent mastered the deep sea at all , were conditions are somewhat more favorable than the void of space.
Another thing I dislike about space exploration is that it is being pushed by the rich and powerful to further their interests. Nothing inspiring like the space race exists today to bring us together as a country, civilization, or even species. It's man-boys playing Star Wars
@@MrJamesC well you certainly aren't a realist
I appreciate Rob talking for an hour straight without any cuts (or few). Mind blowing.
He's a modern day genius
Every time Ager touches the face just know the opposite is true. For a small example, Democracy, Nations States, Nukes, all a hoax, all just an illusion, he knows this, not telling you though! Shhhh
I saw several cuts, but that doesn't diminish the talent.
It is impossible to stop child abuse, spousal abuse, murder, rape, etc. Everyone is different. Mentally ill people go untreated, some don't want to be treated, some won't admit they need treatment. Some people like to be bad. You've nailed it. Another Great Episode. Now I'm very depressed. But thank you!
Well stopping child abuse isn't the only way that child abuse can cease to to exist. In fact, the way it would have to cease to exist is if people chose to stop doing it as individuals. And there's no reason why each individual can't just choose to not abuse. That option is just as possible as any other.
@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 Well, you discovered hot water there...again... It will stop if people chose to stop doing it... Well, people, human beings are not completely rational beings, I wonder if we are even so rational as it was contemplated once, and people simply don't want to stop doing that, for many reasons...Some are born bad, psychopaths, in some psychopathy is induced, sociopaths, some are simply such, some have such personality types... If you expect people to take care of themself, you will get nowhere. If people were able to do that we would have no military, police, judicial system, or prisons... But, the sad reality is that we have to have those things because some are monsters. Why, that is another big topic.
Underrated comment lol.
All of those, and every other form of human suffering, will inevitably end. Eventually there will be no more humans to suffer.
How many times a week do you hear that someone has "discovered a potential inhabitable planet!"
Some people actually buy the idea, but it's brainwashing by ? someone.
Like "keep wasting/polluting/destroying this planet because there's another one to go to"
Abject nonsense.
Point 12 is basically about the Whiggish view of history.
People grasp that "being from a different place doesn't make someone stupid or wrong." The same fact applies to someone from a different era, but people want to view *some* group as inherently inferior beings, so it's convenient to demean people who are dead & can't defend themselves.
On the final point on historical superiority. I had a friend who was so committed to this myth. That he insisted that people from the past got less sleep then us. Using a flawed argument that because of the stress of war people actually had to get up early then us because at any minute your city could get raided. Now it doesn't take an idiot to realize that people in the past slept better because they didn't have phones to keep them up till two in the morning. However because in his mind wr current exstiance is the pinical we must get more sleep then they did.
Look up biphasic or first and second sleep. We slept much differently centuries ago than most of us do today.
It’s never ceases to amaze me how many of these were anticipated by C.S. Lewis, with his critiques of the scientistic Utopianism of mid century Britain. Great video, Rob!
I've really come to appreciate the great insight and wisdom of C.S. Lewis in my thirties and forties. Tolkien wrote the far better stories but when it came to essays and the spiritual condition of modern man, Lewis was supreme.
Are we referring to "That Hideous Strength" and "The Abolition of Man?" Lewis was a great thinker. He was equally enlightening in terms of the spiritual, moral, social, natural, political, and technical, and aesthetic worlds- and how they all come together. He was aware of their many pitfalls and tried to offer a true compass for humanity. He came from the ranks of other greats such as George McDonald (rarely mentioned today, sadly).
@@francescobruno-bossio537 Abolition of Man only gets more and more relevant by the day.
I'm glad people see this. He is a very relevant author.
I wouldn't praise the man too highly, he was in with the high society and also in the military, and most likely some club connections these people have. They are privy to information and knowledge not available to us plebs.
My vote for one of the top videos of 2021. Great job, Rob.
My #13 would be the Geo-engineering or Climate Engineering delusion. I don't deny it's been warming for more than a century, but the idea that politicians would be able to control the atmospheric temperatures of an entire planet, when they can't even get the simplest tasks completed, is laughably absurd. Never mind the harm to billions by banning energy from fossil fuels. Instead mankind will, as it always has, adapt to new conditions.
You will eat your bug protein, live in your pod, have no culture other than food preferences, no ethnic history, and you will consume the transnational products you're given, and you better like it!
@@Cinnamonbuns13 You will own nothing and you will be happy.
There are thousands of weather modification patents in existence... combine those with nano materials and nano tech in the atmosphere and towers that are way beyond 5g ... they even have them in the ocean apparantly which tells they are beyond 5g as 5g cannot penetrate... anything over 5g in the oceans will literally microwave the water and further heat the atmosphere
Cool we’ll see how you adapt to those new conditions when you’re already crying about gas going up a dollar.
Politicians sadly as they are rule societies.Societies can change way of living and eocnomy to be more favorable to climate.hence they can change things.
Regarding historical superiority, though I am an atheist, when I read City of God by Saint Augustine, I couldn't help but be impressed by what a keen intellect he had. If I could talk to any person from centuries ago, it would be him.
Absolutely man.
Meditations by ald Marcus is undoubtedly timeless
@@NothingHumanisAlientoMe yeah, I have that too! Another one I like are the Essays of Michel de Montaigne
Atheism is one of the most delusional worldviews you can have, if everything in our world started with an accident and the meaning we put into them isn’t real, then that is the case with you as well.
It’s actually sad to see so many people fall into this trap
@@kalgore4906 tell someone who cares
@@Tommykey07 no one ever has a answer to that one lol it’s almost to easy
On the 12th day of Christmas
Rob Ager sent to me.
12 red pills
For me to see...
One ...We aint going to space,
Two ..Humans wont be replaced...
Three..War is here to stay..
Four ..we're all different ..Yay!
Five ..communisim just wont work
Six..leave those kids alone you , you Jerk!
Seven..If that dude across the street is looking sketchy and eyeing you up and whispering to his buddy while quickly looking up and down the street for any potential witnesses, then discriminate..they mean to do you harm, listen to your intuition and common sense. ..They dont want you to do this. They want automotons. Discriminate ! which brings us to number ..
Eight...A.I is all just guff , they did not birth life ..it's all a bluff.
NIne..Whats a crime? who decides?..
or gets to define, and change over time? ,
or who gets fined , and gets confined?
Ten ..Offended ? I'm offended that you're offended!!!
All this offence is never ending...
Eleven. We're all gonna die, no use pretending..
one day this life, ...this earth .
.will have an ending..
Twelve...
where we delve
into oursleves
we once all lived in caves,
not much has changed
within our brains ,
but technology has has saved us, ?
thank fuck there are no aliens
they'd definitley enlsave us.
Hahahaha ... when I was writing this vid I had the twelve days of Xmas in mind at one point as a private joke. Didn't think anyone watching would follow that little strand of thought, but you did so beautifully.
Before replying to this pinned comment folks, if your reply isn't to do with the pinned comment itself then post it as a separate comment. Don't use the pinned comment as a sounding board for unrelated issues. Cheers. Rob :)
This was great! A new 12 days song perfect!
Outstanding Poem! Bravo!
@@citycrusher9308 I've been going through all the comments and replying to most (in many cases answering the kinds of statements you were making), so just create a fresh comment, thanks. Or I have a contact email on my site.
First and most disturbing delusion most people still hold onto in our decadent western society: trust/believe in politicians.
I still can't wrap my head around that one.
Only from the liberals.
The conservative people prefer to think for themselves and get the government restrained and out of our business.
Absolutely unfathomable. Truly. I honestly think this might be the first time I’ve seen such a comment online. I feel like I’m part of some colossal joke because the fact that people still trust a political system to benefit them (rather than realizing they must *make* it bend to their will) is truly inconceivable.
They told people that they made a telephone call to the moon and people believed them😭
ironically, if any of these were actually achieved, well, most of them, we'd end up with dystopia. the fact that these are the predominant goals of the powerful, and theyre being pushed on everyone, most people being adverse to the so-called ideals, says a lot for the world we live in today.
From one point of view this is already a dystopia. When there are problems to be solved, solving them can often create more problems, but it's all created a lot of quality of life improvement from one generation to the next overall.
I once read "If the sun was the size of a grain of sand, the nearest star would be another grain of sand 18 miles away"
Well ...
The zone of space where solar energy can be used to power civilization ends somewhere in between mars and Jupiter. That’s an enormous volume to inhabit, even if some sections are to be avoided for radiation, fast-moving rocks, etc. Now, the money tap needed to get to the moon was turned off in 1973, but the total amount needed wasn’t exceptional, set next to expenses incurred fighting wars of the past. Right now robotic devices haven’t yet reached their apex, which crippled human space flight to a small outpost at low earth orbit. To go to mars, you have to have a human-sustaining infrastructure from earth all the way to mars and back, and no individual country wants to bear that cost. However, without going into space-based mining that moment won’t happen - that means whichever country or country blocks that makes a net profit from space will expand exponentially in space. That’s a low barrier.
A second barrier that has to be broken is the production of large amounts of radioactive isotopes that can be used to make reactors that can be used in space beyond Jupiter. Given the violent radiation around Jupiter, it may make sense to skip Saturn as well and make a dash for Uranus and Neptune. The neat thing about frozen moons is that very little heat is needed to separate useful from less useful.
The last step will be to find a way to make space mining profitable beyond Pluto.
And at that point, mankind has made it out of the solar system. At each step, the veterans from the prior step will either see value and continue outwards, or stop and mine until exhaustion of resource occurs and then have to move outwards.
People are too "smart" for their own good. People are getting delusional and need to live more simply.
My Economic teacher tried to prove to us that we don't want to live simple lives because they can only buy one shirt color. He failed to understand that the simple concept of the simple lifestyle is a separation from such desires.
I wanted to argue with him so bad when he said that
@@zero1zerolast393 I dont get the point he was trying to make.
@@chickenflavor9880 people have desires for ephimeral things or something whcih precudle supposedly living simple life.
@@chickenflavor9880 consoom shirt color and get excited for next shirt color
@@kenshin891 lmao
Don't often comment on the videos I watch but this one deserves it. Great presentation on your thoughts, everything you said was digestible and given as a musing rather than a fact. Love your deep dives and this kind of content too. Nothing you offered was divisive or inflammatory, something which cannot be said for a lot of other media. Keep up the good work.
Appreciated :)
Point 12, historical superiority, the saying "It's [CURRENT_YEAR]" perfectly demonstrates the fallacious reasoning. Not only is it a vapid catchphrase that doesn't say anything of merit, thus showing the intellectual dumbing down of people, but it's intent is the opposite of what the people said it just demonstrated. Such people say it to mean that we shouldn't be grappling with such issues anymore, we have "ADVANCED" past them. They can't even articulate it in a manner that isn't just meme speak and shows a lack of actual thought, this is how far they have REGRESSED.
The use of capitalisation of a whole word in sentence level writing to emphasise a point or thing that indicates their resentment is basically a meme as well.
55:29 A much better example would be how past generations might react to modern extreme consumerism, or lack of interest in the fine arts, or the obesity epidemic, or exploitative global corporations (so much more powerful & controlling than any group in the past). Cases where an outsider would point out actual problems, not just cultural differences.
i'm sure a laundry list of items could be quickly drawn up lol
@@collativelearning My gut feeling is that if we as humans all fall in the trap like is described by the books of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell and don't come out of them the next 500 years. The ruling class would have the power to do extreme unethical experiments like what they did in concentration camps but with modern equipment like CRISPR and a longer timeframe.
Once scientists get the OK from the ruling class to do as many unethical experiments needed to understand the human body more, they will have at some point have enough understanding to completely modify humans, like making them more capable to survive better on place like the moon and travel in hibernation to other planets.
This kind of space colonization is i think possible because it will be paid by immense suffering and horror. I don't have Elon musk tier fan boys type ideas about space colonization.
I would argue that you don't need to be an outsider to point out these problems, because these problems are actually being pointed out a lot, especially in the recent decade, at least from my experience. (But simply not by the mainstream media). The problem is that not enough is being done about these problems, even with growing awareness.
@@johnnyquantum8125 You are not wrong about that.
I love how concisely and eloquently Rob exposes the fantastical thinking that is present today's arts and media. When this is not only not being discussed by other people but it doesn't even occur to most people to discuss these delusions.
Except the Equality and Capitalism sections were terribly vague strawmen.
Equality is expressed in every Union, and every Democracy, it doesn't say Jimmy is as good at Sports as Tim, it says Jimmy has the same rights as Tim.
The end of Capitalism doesn't demand the end of trade, it's about the means of production belongings to the laborers who do the work, because we know whenever Capitalists control the playing field they hijack democracy and end in monopoly, which was his strawman that State Ownership leads to, when it's not the only option. It's a bad faith argument.
Nothing delusional about either of those ideas at all.
@@uncannyvalley2350 Sorry but that's wrong. If Jimmy isn't as good at sports as Tim then he does not have the same rights. Jimmy will have less opportunity to compete in sports or earn a living from it. Tim will also be judged not as an equal, but as the greater sportsman etc.
The "means of trade belonging to the workers" argument is old hat jargon used by state monopolists as an excuse to acquire their own monopoly of industry. the truth is that when big corporations do acquire the level of power you speak of, it's more because of government interference suppressing the competition. In other words it's not really market capitalism, it's what's often referred to as corporate socialism ... you know, bailing out failing corporations instead of letting them die and be replaced by their competition who might do a better job.
@@collativelearning actually no, because the battle for equality is the battle for equal rights, equality under the law. You're trying to spin it as something egalitarian, equality of outcome, which is a lazy bad faith strawman
The fact you need to spin and lie to make your case is the admission that it's failing
@uncannyvalley2350 egalitarianism is exactly about equal rights and freedoms, not about equality of outcome. It's technocracy, and the idea of communis, which leads to state monopoly, that everyone should get the same outcome for the same job, planned economy, and planned production - same expected outcome, nothing more, nothing less. This is why there are no countries like that anymore, not even China
@@P.Aether
Its no idea of communsit either.we have diffrent paygrades in communism and in fact wer paid accordign to work hours,position , levele of education etc...
its completely manifactured capitslist propaganda trope.maybe some radlibs want it.
4. Equality. The day everyone can reach the top shelf at the supermarket.
Society can't lift 100 pounds but we think lifting 10,000 pounds would be really awesome.
It's refreshing to hear someone's opinion to be as objective and open as possible.
I firmly believe desillusions are some of the most valuable gifts people can receive, so thank you for this video!
Discrimination is a legal term, he argued a subjective interpretation.
So not as deep as the fanbois are pretending
There are also wars with little to no physical violence: companies doing underhand tactics to beat their competitors, clash of ideologies whose weapons are words and laws, also hybrid war involving sanctions and infiltration of another countries' groups and movements to alter the government.
> whose weapons are words and laws
Whose weapons are words and [more words].
I thought this was going to be a video on the UK show Utopia. Hope you do it some day but this new change to the channel is a welcome one for me. Hope there’s more videos like this.
Dude, thank you so much for this clarity. You are a rare gem.
Whether or not I agree or disagree with your points of discussion are beside my point which is that I very much enjoyed watching your video Rob. Thank you for taking the time to make and share this vid!
Lastly I'll second you in that these topics are utterly massive and imo require hours of discussion per section just to unpack them and debate.
At this point in human evolution there are certainly technological/social/economic etc. limitations/shortcomings that make a lot of these concepts delusional and practically impossible BUT there still remains that which we have not discovered (on purpose or by accident) which may open up the door of possibility.
Cheers
Cheers.
Wow, Rob's just leaped to the next level of basedness here..
"It makes no difference what men think of war. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way.
All other trades are contained in that of war.
Is that why war endures?
No. It endures because young men love it and old men love it in them. Those that fought, those that did not."
/Cormac McCarthy - Blood Meridian/
I wonder if Rob has read this great novel...
"Quasi Modo perdicted all dis" - Bobby "The Walking Calzone" Baccala
Rule one of my life: Deal with reality on REALITY's terms, not yours.
Thank you for making this video.
(Rule 2 is "don't be a bitch")
Right you cannot defy nature you can only work within t's rules to your benefit.
Excellent first rule :)
You See In This World There's Two Kinds Of People, My Friend - Those With Loaded Guns, And Those Who Dig.
Study of the natural world
@@ihavetubes “You may be bad, but I’ve got the gun.”
Hi Rob. Brilliant as always.
I think that we sit atop the cumulative effort, discovery and invention of all those that came and went before us. How lucky we are that a troop of proto humans at the dawn of our existence found that monolith and had the courage to first pick up and the throw the bone!
Transhumanists typically predict transhuman immortality before the year that they will turn 80.
Haha
Rob - I almost breathed a sigh of relief after seeing this. Rational, reasoned and critical thought is not dead! ... yep you're right on all of these points and the fact you've had to do a 'there there diddums" addendum really makes an ironic zeitgeisty point all of its own. Good stuff man!
Haha, cheers
One thing I dont understand is when people say that saving humanity would be too *expensive.* What? If everybody dies money doesnt mean anything
"Utopia Cancelled". Thanks for reminding me Utopia will never get a Season 3 :(
Lol I never saw the series.
We are literally living season 3 now! 🤯🤯🤯
I would switch the motivations behind the interstellar fantasy and the end of capitalism fantasy.
People don't believe we will inevitably be a space faring civilization, but that we need to become one to survive (look at Elon Musk's whole deal).
On the capitalism side, people don't think we need to get rid of capitalism but that it is inevitable (look at the "late stage capitalism" meme). Your point about the contradiction between being pro industrial nationalization and being against the nation state is a good one. There are a lot of people these days who go on about no borders but advocate for central economic planning and tax+welfare.
This will be more of an American one, but I think a common fantasy is that news media has some claim to objectivity and authority and hasn't been deeply infected by politics and special interests. On the times I've caught the news recently (always by accident) I am shocked that anyone could believe it is objectively reported. Just yesterday I heard on local news that inflation was high but that this was a good thing and it indicates a healthy economy. They went on to say that rate hikes (to address inflation) were bad because it would make it harder for people to borrow money. Media objectivity is the greatest delusion of our time.
If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading Jean Baudrillard. I would begin with Kellner's "Baudrillard: A Critical Reader." He predicted the future better than the rest, even Lyotard.
Lol
Why lol?
@@galahadsoundscape6365 Why read? I think that question answers itself.
@@jamesmeeker6933 No, no. Lol. He was replying to the other guy who said "lol"
@@SAziz-mv8sj I clicked the wrong person!!
I really admire you for the clear, unpretentious and unbiased analysis you bring to the table, whether it be film or other topics
Having lived in the SF Bay Area the past five years I can assure you magical thinking is the default mentality. It's not a creative artistic spirit where one gets the sense people are dreaming of how to make life better. Quite the contrary. The ethos is far more sinister. Under the guise of altruism one gets the sense that everyone is hellbent on making everyone in the world just like them. There is no rational debate. It's the most dangerous thing I've ever witnessed.
Liberals are conservatives with LGBT flags...
Mostly from religious people.
You should try living in a conservative area next. Forced births. Carrying firearms in church and at the store. Etc.
It's like that everywhere, it stands out to you living in the bay area because you're the outlier
I'm relatively new to this channel, but I have to say it's absolutely fantastic. Thanks!
Could have added that if most people start breaking a law the bureaucrats just remove it or the police stop enforcing it. Examples might be drugs in Bristol, shoplifting below £80 or FGM where no one in the UK (last I checked) has been sent to jail for
FGM can't be touched because it discriminates the total lack of outrage at MGM - an issue *nobody* touches for obvious, star shaped reasons
Brilliant. Continue. Don't be intimidated by the threat of being 'cancelled'. Great stuff.
50:16 it’s truly unfortunate that a loud minority of people leaning wayyyy too far into their ideas has made the very term “offended” or “offence” a joke and in some ways hard to legitimize, meaning expressing certain thoughts has become essentially pointless
Best video on and channel on youtube. You sir, are my best friend.
I love when you do these videos. I’ve thought about these things…I like how you’ve organized it and put your thoughts out there. Thank you. I definitely agree. Maybe I’m realistic. Not pessimistic. People today aren’t realistic and they don’t want to live in the real world.
Seems mostly to boil down to not wanting to face the paradox of cosmic poetic chaos and majesty of life ITself. Laziness and cowardice is catered to and playing the victim whilst enjoying outrageous luxuries is the name of the game these days... Accountability is the grim spectre of death to the average human. Also, ‘chartreuse’ is a wonderful color and delicious word to say.
Good thoughts on transhumanism, I believe it's difficult for many to truly understand what any of that means if it could even happen in the first place. People seem to think that simply building a mimic of life, somehow generates the spark of life itself within the mimic. Those are two completely separate things and one is eons beyond the other in reachability as far as technology and understanding is concerned.
You've read my mind. Seriously, I've met others who think like you, like me, in my decades long journey through life. It's always refreshing.
In all seriousness. Here are some thoughts about the points you raised:
Overall a lot of things you said are correct. For instance what you said about capitalism (not that I'm a big fan of it), war and equality. These things are probably going to be around forever in some form or another.
Except about capitalism I'd say it's feasible that we come to a point where everyone can have most of the things they need at a fairly low level without doing away with capitalism.
Ray Kurzweil and Peter Diamandis have a point when they say we can produce most things we need with 3D printers almost for free or very cheaply:
- Houses
- Clothes
-Most Items
- Cars could be made very affordable at the very least
Most of the earth is still empty. So there is enough space and there are ways to get cheap food and water. With the advent of atomically precise manufacturing it could become feasible to replicate food like in Star Trek. If we're lucky fusion energy becomes available. If not - there are other ways to power our civilization.
About AI:
A lot of the arguments you raised seem pretty flawed. For instance: "No one has done it so far. Ergo it won't happen." This could be said about any new technology.
Or: "AI isnt self-aware." This argument suffers from the same flaw as the first one. Also: AI doesn't need to be self-aware to produce most of if not all of the achievements of humans such as creativity, art, science, literature, having a natural conversation et cetera or even surpass them.
Check out this conversation with a new "AI" called GPT-3 for instance:
ua-cam.com/video/PqbB07n_uQ4/v-deo.html
I'd be convinced that this entity is intelligent, even though it's "just a program". It may not be self aware, but it just lies and says it is anyways. LOL. In any case. I've had less intelligent conversations than this with most humans. In fact: most people I talk to I find pretty boring and dull even compared to this program.
Somewhere else I've heard you say "None of the robots or AIs are alive or can reproduce." Again. Those things are probably irrelevant for these systems. They will still be able to surpass humans in more and more areas.
Similar things could be said about your "space delusion".
The ultimate flaw about both points - the "space delusion" and the "AI-delusion" are that there is nothing in physics or science that prevents either. They are just very, very hard engineering problems that are outside of the current scope of science. There is nothing in science that says intelligence has to be limited to biological circuits. In fact: electronic circuits work orders of magnitude faster. Biological evolution is just stuck with them because it's all its got to work with.
Similarly, there is nothing that prevents going to space and travelling to other planets and even terraforming them. It's just very, very, very hard and expensive and it requires a TON of energy that we currently are not able to produce. Again, though: it's more of an engineering problem.
Having said all this: we may never get to these technologies because our society is declining to rapidly. We re certainly not going to see manned space travel to other planets - let alone stars in our lifetime.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I think we're already at a point in the west where most things people need are more easily available than they have ever been before, though certainly room for improvement.
The stuff about 3D printing and so on ... interesting ideas. I'd have to look into the practicalities, though I don't think it conflicts with anything in the vid as a concept.
Regarding AI, I found that clip amusing. Just did a bit of reading up on GTP-3 and there are folks calling it out as a misleading, though I'm not familiar with the details yet. This one about not allowing research access suggests to me it's just another PR scam www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/22/1007539/gpt3-openai-language-generator-artificial-intelligence-ai-opinion/ I'd love to sit down with it and ask some highly specific curve-ball questions. I'd bet £10k the computer's "answers" are just generic waffle.
It's a shame you feel that way about real people. I find them far more interesting than computers. A lot of people have poor articulation, but if you manage to dig deep in conversation their thoughts are often wiser than their words. The subconscious mind, even of a low IQ person, is endlessly fascinating to me, but computers have no comprehension of symbols, metaphors etc. They can't dream. They're just programmed input output devices.
Your claims about what computers will be able to do in the future are ... well, they're just claims. As I said in the vid, such claims like that began in the 1950's and here we are half a century later. You even bring up a key point yourself - computers are a lot faster at sending signals and they still lack the versatility and consciousness of a human mind. We still simply do not know how the brain manages to be so massively parallel. How can we imitate the brain if we don't understand the brain. My suspicion is that brains work on very different principles to how computers do - they might be principles so complex or so different that a computer cannot imitate it. It's not just me saying this. Many in the field do. Chomsky, for example, has done some great lectures on the severe limitations of AI.
Re interstellar space travel, the evidence really isn't there that we can do it. We don't even know yet what challenges lie out there between our solar system and other ones. Is the space really completely empty? Does it require millions of times more energy to fully escape the gravity of our own solar system than we currently think it does? And there's the issues of how to sustain ourselves on the journey and how to find planets where we can actually survive. To pursue such an aim is rather pointless at thye moment and we're better putting our energy into more attainable endeavours. If our technology advances far enough in the future (and there's no guarantee it will always advance and not decline) then at that point maybe it would be worth considering the interstellar challenge. Until then it's pure sci-fi.
@@collativelearning Good point about GPT-3. Maybe it can't do as much as it seems in this clip.
I was under the impression that the conversation happened the way it was recorded. I.e. the guy from the video just asked it the question and the AI answered.
If this is what happened, I'd argue that this conversation demonstrates a pretty sophisticated level of understanding concepts.
Why would it be impossible to emulate parallel processes from the brain on electronic circuits? I'd say our brains are fundamentally about processing information. Computers do the same thing in principle. This is an interesting point. I just don't grasp it on an intuitive level.
About the space travel points you raised: The voyager probe is already leaving our solar system, so I'd say we have a good idea of how much energy it takes to leave our solar system. It's pretty much in agreement with Newtonian or Einsteinian physics.
All the other issues are raised are, again, engineering problems. I don't see how you demonstrated that they are impossible or why they even should be.
I'm just saying that these issues CAN be overcome if we become sophisticated enough. I'm not saying that we will do it. Just to be clear.
@@collativelearning Ok. So I've gone through your article and it raises some good points. I will say though, even if it doesn't infer that grape juice is a drink or that lawyers don't wear bathing suits - I don't think it's outlandish to think that a further improved version of it may learn to do it.
My larger point was that an AI does not need to be alive or self-aware or work exactly like the human brain to achieve these things.
'I'd be convinced that this entity is intelligent, even though it's "just a program". It may not be self aware, but it just lies and says it is anyways. LOL. In any case. I've had less intelligent conversations than this with most humans. In fact: most people I talk to I find pretty boring and dull even compared to this program.'
You come off like someone who loves the smell of your own farts lol
As Shakespear said, our faults lie not in our stars but in ourselves, and that's really the gist of the utopia problem. We are and always have been a very deeply flawed species. Hell, in a lot of respects, we're terrifying. How anyone could look at the totality of our history and still believe that we are in any way capable of creating utopia just leaves me gob smacked!
Human beings: just a freak of nature
Only addressing how much is spent on space travel: many technologies we now take for granted only exist because of the demands of space travel (or at least came into existence much sooner because of them) such as battery operated tools, and high efficiency solar panels as far as I know
I'm sure the ancient romans also thought that "live public executions via lion" was an intrinsic part of humanity that will never go away...
"Up there is death and down here is life."
- 😓 William Shatner
"And how we deal with death is as important as to how we deal with life, wouldn't you say?"
I discovered your channel yesterday and I just want to say I'm impressed. Great insights here!
Great topic, and delusions is a hot topic we aren't meant to really discuss. Glad you've got some big balls.
Especially with the new breakthrough on the "Robot" Bacteria /Cell that has recently been created.
I find it hilarious that people will say “discrimination is bad” but then not hire you because of a criminal record, or not want to date you because you are under 6 feet tall.
I find it 'hilarious' when a person, say myself, witnesses an event first-hand, and then immediately say, "I can't believe that just happened". I know it happened, I know it's real, why am declaring that I 'can't' believe what I just saw? Meanwhile, some people seem to be absolutely certain of something they've never seen for themselves.
just when ya think YT is drying up Ager drops more free treats ^^
For every Elon Musk there is a Rob Ager. This is not a bad thing. Always good to look at things with a different perspective.
This was a great video and I would love to see more like it in the future. It is a topic near and dear to my heart; I feel like an alien on hostile territory because my understanding of existence is totally antithetical to the modern world and mentality. I constantly experience a sense of nausea (to borrow a Sartrean term) and dread as a result. People like Julius Evola, Rene Guenon and others have explicated the delusions afflicting modern man in great detail and posited the counter balance in the man of Tradition and helped me to better understand myself and the crisis the world is in. As for whether this video is part of a stream of lower quality content, no, quite the opposite. It is tackling some of the most important topics possible. In Europe especially, if you go too in depth on these topics, you go to jail; that tells you everything you need to know about the importance of what is being talked about.
I just had my water cooler on my PC fail. Which fried my CPU. I replaced both of them, but my motherboard was also toast, so I replaced everything and now it's running. Only I now can't overclock my memory for some reason.
This is the most reliable computer I've ever owned.
So here's the deal....I'll listen to them talk about uploading my consciousness into a computer just as soon as they can make a computer that runs for 10 years without any hardware or software issues, and without needing maintenance.
By the way, Neil Postman's book "Technopoly" is extremely useful. In it he makes several observations about why computer brains and human brains will never be the same, and how the language we use about computers (ie "virus") tends to make us view them almost anthropomorphically.
Haha
Oh, that book sounds interesting. I have been quite familiar of technology generally being anthropomorphised in studying Videodrome. Things like UA-cam "thumbnails", lol. Cheers, mate!
28:00 or so: your definition of capitalism equates people bartering to capitalism. Not at all, capitalism (private ownership of the means and output of production) has only existed since the 1,300s and in this end-stage form since the industrial revolution. Someone trading for a bad deal does not mean that's capitalism.
Also, the basis of society was trade. Now it's greed, which is facilitated through capitalism.
You are coming from the position of "this is the way it is and no other system can exist".
As for your nation state / nationalizing industry comment, again - you seem to think it's entirely run by a government like a dictator or it's in private hands. There are other options. Community / co-operatively run is an option. Socialism, communism, post-scarcity are all options and we had merchantilism, feudal-serf, etc before too.
I can't believe i just found this. Awesome video, Rob!
Excellent views. Well grounded. I love your analysis.
my favourite Jungian Scouse film critic holds court for an hour! Couldn't ask for more haha, Merry Christmas Rob, all the best for the new year! Been putting out some bangers lately!
Funnily enough was listening to Jung interviews last week, cheers and best wishes
Happy new year Rob. Take care.
People generally don't seem to be able to understand the insane amount of time money and effort that has already been wasted on Space instead of investing in our own world.
Vague and incorrect. Consider, for example, that the "green industry" has outpaced every single other industry on the planet. Would that not be a investment in our own world? How about the fact that Obama cut NASA's budget almost entirely in the name of "green"? Then you have the results. NASA and space exploration have actually produced results. Just on the level of human achievement, it is completely unparalleled. Technology advancements far too many to list. Yeah, I disagree with you on this one.
@@gcarlson It is indeed unparalleled. But this spectacle blinds, and makes people forget that none of these unparalleled achievements are helpful in the areas that need it most.
@@crowstakingoff notice that if one were to split the US government’s budget from a dollar NASA takes half a penny and well over half of the metaphorical dollar is spent on welfare. The concern is the lack of whereabout in spending in the current US system. We have the CIA and it’s reoccurring “accidents” such as their more infamous child sex ring that was meant to be the bait but became a commercial use or the FBI using its money to start false flag operations throughout the country such as Governor Whitmer being threatened by anarchists when out of the 9 who were planning this kidnapping 7 of them were agents. The blind side here wouldn’t be our focus on space travel but the conflict amongst personalities mixing with hobbies
You should do a small amount of research into the benefits to our world that space exploration have delivered. Emergency foil blankets, ball point pens, LED lighting, memory foam, CAT scans, water purification systems, baby formula, artificial limbs, the computer mouse, camera phones and the list goes on.
When you push the envelope in exploration you will create new technologies and products, some of which will become ubiquitous and help/be adopted by the wider populace.
@@Satorotas89 And a happy New Year to you! Yes, yes and yes. Don't forget Tang!
There is a youtube channel "homemade documentaries" that covers most of the NASA missions, from Mercury to Apollo. When you see from his perspective how much this "wasteful endeavor" has contributed to mankind, it will bring a tear to your eye.
Thank you very much for covering these points. Could you do a part 2? I found the video really interesting and nutritious "food for thought."
Thought this was gonna be a video about the Channel 4 series lol.
Stumbled onto this channel. It's really good! Fantastic really.
Proud to be a Patreon supporter of your content. You're one of the most brilliant minds out there. Even though I don't agree with all your takes (growing up on an ashram, I'm much more open to things of a spiritual / fantastical / supernatural /metaphsyical nature), I always appreciate your intellect and articulation.
One thing that disturbs me specifically about the Human AI and other techno utopian concepts is that, unlike the other topics listed here (like equity, elimination of war, crime, abuse etc), it's virtually impossible to find any criticism or debunking of these topics.
I found plenty in the AI realm, though the news media and funders are overwhelmingly geared toward wishful belief.
Rob it's funny, these are things I always thought about and used to argue with people fairly regularly whenever they'd come up in some theoretical conversation. I think you also share a rather realistic, cynical (in a good way) view of humanity, in that we are creatures destined to repeat ourselves ad infinitum even if we do "change" in some ways over time.
Love your work, just gotta say one thing. EQUALITY is about EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW. Thanks so much.
Rob this is one of your best videos right next to “how to manage your boss” and you AI discussions I appreciate how respectfully you discuss 12 things that will never happen… hell of a follow up to your top 100 albums video :)
I'd replace the word war with conflict.
That way you remove the need for violence to be synonymous with the idea but keep the fundemental understanding of the concept.
Thanks Rob for another interesting video.
"#1 The Interstellar Delusion"
Perhaps there pop up some serious contenders for inhabitable planets in the next few years. I mean, they discovered exoplanets such as Kepler-62f quite recently of whom they surmise not being that extremely hostile to life as we understand it, or already contain life in one form or another.
Some of those planets aren't so far off from earth in astronomical dimensions. So I am curious about what future observations bring to light.
But of course you are right, even negotiating just four light years (which would be the distance to Proxima Centauri) cannot be done any time soon considering our current state of science and technology.
Always a pleasure smoking a fat spliff watching your videos. Happy New Year Rob!
Interesting video, Rob. I particularly liked your thoughts on the interstellar delusion. I really hate the ego-driven billionaire space race. It's an obscene waste of money and resources (in my opinion). When I was younger, the idea that space was an empty, cold void was depressing to me. Now, I really don't feel that way. I also agree with you on borders. As you say, we will always have borders. I can see gated communities becoming increasingly important.
Absolutely. I must find the article again, but one thing I read recently compared the philanthropic work of rich and powerful men in the past to guys like Elton Musk, who ignore that sort of thing in lieu of sending themselves into space, seemingly to fulfill some sort of wet dream fantasy they had as a teenager!
@@davidlean1060 That does sound interesting. There are so many things he could achieve with his resources. I don't get why so many people are obsessed with Musk. I used to think the Steve Jobs fanboys were irritating but the guys who love Musk really are the worst.
@@patrickdoherty4527 And my big question about Musk is, if he is so savvy about tech and so rich, why the hell did he pick a plastic surgeon that left him looking like he'd had a face lift done with a knife and fork?!
Seriously though, I read a great observation on a page about Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. Pardon me if you know the book and you're already aware of the themes etc, but just in case, like Dr Strangelove, the novel links 'the rocket' and sex constantly. The V2 is a fetish icon for some of the characters. Musk could be a modern day GR character (his name is as strange as the names Pynchon gives his characters already!) continuing the strange, lustful desire to be part of 'the rocket' and it's legacy.
@@davidlean1060 Holy cow, Musk as a Pynchon character is genius
@@Brubser_Jr_Reloaded I can't find the comment. I wish I could because I thought it was genius to suggest it too. It makes his fascination with the rocket even more perverse!
Happy New Year, Rob. This was an excellent presentation. Thank you.
Excellent list. Sadly, humanity needs its delusions. Of course, some delusions are relatively harmless. Others not so much. But they all bring me back to what Joseph Conrad said: "Life doesn't bear much looking into."
Thanks for this Rob. Did me good to hear the things i spend a lot of my day thinking about be spoken here. The world needs more of it desperately.
I enjoyed that very much, thank you! I've tried expressing some of these subjects to a few close people, but I don't have the vocabulary to have them understand what I'm trying to say. Now I am happy that I can refer them to you for clarification! 😁
I didn't have the time or the strength to go through all the comments. Probably someone else already mentioned this... Anyway, this is a year old video, so it doesn't even matter that much. But:
The words 'atheist' and 'agnostic' aren't actually mutually exclusive. You can be a gnostic theist, an agnostic theist, a gnostic atheist or an agnostic atheist. (A)gnostic refers to claims of knowledge, (a)theist refers to accepting the claims about god.
You can accept or not accept the claims about the excistance of god(s). If don't accept the claims, you are an atheist. The word means "without belief in a god" (a + theist in Greek).
You can then say, "I'm an atheist, that is, I don't accept what the religions claim about gods' excistance" but also add, "I'm an agnostic atheist, so I don't claim to know one way or the other", or, "I'm a gnostic atheist, so I claim to know that there are no gods".
It's often the case that these words are used a bit too carelessly.
If you don't readily accept the claims about god(s) of a certain religion, then you are holding the atheistic position towards that religion. If you don't readily accept any claims about any gods, then you are holding an atheistic position towards all religions. You are an atheist, in the very sense of the word.
But even so, you can say that you don't KNOW for a fact if there is a god or not. That means that you hold the agnostic position alongside the atheistic position.
Most people are atheistic about most of the religions in the world. But of course if you believe in any one of them (or if you have your own idea about a god), then you are a theist.
Even if you are a theist, you can say that you're either a gnostic theist or an agnostic theist - that is, you believe there is a god and you either claim to know that you're right or you claim that you don't actually know for a fact but you believe it to be true.
If you are altogether against the idea of having any kind of god-beliefs, because there really are no good evidence for the excistance of god(s), you can say that you're an anti-theist.
I myself am an agnostic theist, because I don't think we can ever say for certain if there is a god or not, but I don't accept any of the thousands of claims made about gods. I haven't found any of them even slightly convincing. But I am also kind of anti-theistic, since I consider almost all kinds of unfounded beliefs (and especially belief systems such as religions and churches) to be harmful. But that's just me.
If the Earth were the size of a basketball then the Moon would be the size of a softball and be about 4m away from it.
If the Sun were the size of a yoga ball then the Earth would be the size of a small marble and be the length of a football pitch away.
If the Sun were the size of a chick pea then the nearest star would be about 230kms and also be about the size of a chick pea (about as far as Liverpool from London or Seattle to Portland). In this model, the Earth would be nigh invisible and about 2 feet from the Sun.
If the Milky Way was the size of a grain of sand then the observable universe would still be about 1000m in every direction.
It's old hat to say space is unimaginably large; for my money it's more impressive how unimaginably empty it is.
Love your videos Rob I always come away from them having lots of thoughts about it for days after.excellent.
hey Rob you forgot the 'god is coming' delusion and also the 'royalty is superior' delusion 😱 😊
Yeah, plenty more could be added to the list.
@@collativelearning Thanks for keeping it real Rob.... you're the best 🥇
'By my calculations, god is coming at this date. Prepare for the END!'
Said at least once a year.
Man, I really applaud you. Simply talking about these things really stirs people on both sides of the isle; and it begs the question as to why… There’s a reason. I’ve always sat crisscross applesauce in that isle.
Not rlly related but Prometheus is one of the most underrated sci fis ever made, def one of Ridleys best work aside from some dumb typical horror movie scenes
It was a case of great idea, terrible execution
@@cigaweed88 funnily enough I actually only rewatched it last night on my new tv, I can definitely see the flaws it’s more of a guilty pleasure, that was def one of my most enjoyable first watches for a movie tho shame it never got a true sequel
If anyone takes offence… he is allowed to keep it…
So many of the science fiction authors of yesteryear-HG Welles, Gene Roddenberry-had such high hopes for humanity. But alas, they didn’t factor in our unlimited capacity for selfishness and greed.
HG Welles "Time Machine" is not exactly about "high hopes for humanity"
Soothing video, despite the content, that might not always be 'positive' but at least it's enlightening or (very) coherent. Good stuff. Sobering in a way.
Hey Rob, still watching the video but I just finished the Transhumanism part of the video, and I wanted to add that even if we could somehow find a way to make yourself fully and completely immortal... Would you enjoy it? I've started to think that not only does death contextualize life (if everyone is immortal than nothing means anything), but also that living forever would be a horrible burden on a mind... I imagine an immortal human mind would become so disconnected with the world around it after millions of years, even if the person was able to maintain a young, healthy human body for that time, that it would just be torturous... Not to mention can you imagine how awful it would be for society if tyrants, dictators, and other wealth empires (either business-wise or or government-wise) never changed leadership or ownership, and some people were able to accumulate incomprehensible amounts of wealth and power... As well as the fact that death provides a relief from old societal ideas... If nobody ever died then society would never progress because the same people with the same ideas would always be in charge and grow more and more detached from reality as time goes on... I don't fear death anymore (although I do fear dying), I think that death is not only a natural part of life, but a necessary part of life
Given how specialized society is now, it takes about 30 years to fully educate someone on a subject. Give another 10 years or so to be come competent, so about 30 years of full productivity, the majority of which will be with progressing cognitive decline.
Can't speak to immortality, but there is no doubt the lack of longevity screws us in immeasurable ways.
You could say the same thing about heaven. The length of the life has no connection with the fulfillment of the life.
Its the actions of the life that determine that. For example: living indoors alone in hate for the rest of your life. Living outside loving with friends and doing things to help people.
Absolutely brilliant video, mate. This video deserves 1 billion views.
Great perspective on cultural myths. The only one that's subpar is capitalism. Capitalism is defined well, also trade and markets and money existed waaaay before capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production are privatized. I agree on that there's doesn't seem to be an alternative to capitalism.
Cheers. As I said in the vid the problem with capitalism (and I do follow some anti-capitalist groups to hear their thoughts) is the monopolies that come out of it. But if you hand over that ownership to the state, that's just another form of privatization - capitalism by legal decree. There's no guarantee politicians would make better or more responsible decisions with it. Sometimes the result is worse.
@@collativelearning In my reading of the history, I have never found a case where a true monopoly formed without either a government mandate or charter, or the private firm in question explicitly using violence to prop up its monopoly claim--in which case, it is now just a criminal enterprise (or a little government, right? haha...) Kind of the flipside of the same coin to state ownership of capital like you mention.
More abstractly, treating the idea of capitalism as some kind of historical force which inevitably leads to things like monopoly is getting it all wrong. Its an explanatory theory of a system that is strictly value-free--and even though they didn't have the same terminology or theoretical framework to explain it, it has nevertheless been in use in some basic form or another and absolutely indispensible to even the most basic forms of civilization for millennia. You simply can't produce enough excess wealth without "capital", i.e. goods which are not consumed but used to produce more goods.
@@collativelearning Bingo, very well said. Your sentiment and OP's are practically identical to mine.
Like Zizek likes to say. People have an easier time imagining the end of the world than the end of capitalism. Thats some powerful propaganda. Your lives are totally dominated by the logic of capitalism so it seems impossible to find a better system.
Capitalist realism...
I think about downloading my consciousness into a computer the same way I think about cryogenically freezing myself.
There’s a very good chance that the company will go out of business or get bought out and the new owners decide it’s not worth the time and money to keep “you” alive.
I’ll take a pass on this fantasy and pass down my ideas, feelings and attitudes the way humanity has since the beginning. By having and raising children of my own.
I would say that we as a species are in the infancy regarding many of these 'delusions'. Who's to say what technological advances will come to pass in say 5000 years time that will aid interstellar travel for example. I think many of the 12 points raised are somewhat disingenuous as I don't think many seriousy think there will come a point in time where no conflict exists, but we are certainly on the road to where LESS conflict exists. This is demonstrably true judging by the data.
See pinned comment. There are people and organizations stating the absolutists outcomes as their aims.
What "data" says we're on our way to less conflict? Looks like business as usual to me. And now we have the increasing threat of biowarfare which could be more devastating than anything we've ever seen.
So you've entered the resigned stage of life. Some of the items on your list really are not delusions. Rather, they are goals that we humans have set for ourselves. Whether achievable or not is currently not a big issue, I will argue, as we humans have been domesticating ourselves for a very long time (in human lifespan measures), and setting idealistic goals is useful to continue that domestication.
I kind of agree. Part of what gets us through the day and through our lives is the idea things will get better. To strive is to be human. Hes a little too resigned/nihilistic in some of the topics. He did say not everyone would agree so hes def entitled to those opinions.
I can understand you seeing that way, but I did say at the start of the vid that it's not about being negative, it's about freeing ourselves of delusional distracting goals so that we pay more attention to other things that matter and are more attainable.
@@collativelearning i agree... get your head out of the clouds so you can deal with what's on the ground level. Problem is most (even the atheist/agnostic) need some created future to look forward to. The idea that well my life sucks maybe I can do good enough so the one after me has it better. I find a lot of delusions are rooted in that way of thinking for better or worse
the problem with ideas of capitalism vs communism is that we associate what we have experienced as what they actually mean. we don't have pure capitalism or pure communism. both ideas have merits and are inherently good. but what we have experienced is corrupt versions of them that are actually a mixture of both. we cannot say either is bad or good or that they work or don't work because we never experienced them as they are supposed to be