Will the next century be glorious or ghastly?
Much of our world remains messy. Despite two centuries of tremendous progress in economics and human rights, led mostly by science and reason, over two billion people remain impoverished, surviving on less than two dollars per day, the very edge of existence. The optimist promptly notes that “only” about 25% of the world is in deep poverty, versus at least 75%, and by some measures as much as 90%, a couple of centuries or so ago. The pessimist retorts the world population crossed the one billion mark around 1800 CE, hence the last two centuries of amazing progress has doubled the absolute number of those who live in great material suffering. The deep-pessimist can credibly argue the high point of human existence was about 30,000 years ago, although this is a stretch for us moderns to accept [hij-dilworth-TSOG-p204].
To the degree we can call it progress, will it continue, perhaps even at a moderated pace? What of the billions lifted out of poverty due to such progress? At present, the top one billion who live in zones of prosperity have lives that are materially as rich as the wealthiest 1% of the pre-industrialization era. Yet, there remains a surprisingly high level of discontentment, as witnessed by high rates of depression, suicide, addiction and incarceration in modern societies, such as America or England. If we could go back in time and attempt the impossible task of constructing a comprehensive measure of happiness, it is not clear whether our modern lives are substantially better than that of our ancestors’, especially because our expectations are so much higher.
A Dark Fate?
Some eminent pessimistic philosophers warn us great suffering will occur within a century or two. By 2150 it is possible that world population could collapse to less than 1 billion, from its current 7.5 billion and a forecasted peak of 10 billion in 2050, a warns a leading philosopher [hij-Gray-SD-11]. The causes — human folly that periodically promotes bad ideology, nuclear war, epidemics and climate change. Should we fear these dismal scenarios or dismiss them as no more likely to materialize than other bold but discredited predictions, such as Malthus’ population theory of the 18th century, or the successor population bomb theory of the 1960s, or Hubbert’s prediction that oil output would peak in the 1970s? An eminent cosmologist opines on the human species, “much of its behaviour through out history, has been pretty stupid, and not calculated to aid the survival of the species…. Maybe it says something about human nature, that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive” [hij-Hawking].
Another public intellectual views the modern industrialized world as illusory, lost to consumerism and corporatism, and a debauched and dying civilization. He warns Americans that, “the world that awaits us will be painful and difficult. We will be dragged back to realism, to the understanding that we cannot mold and shape reality according to human desires, or we will slide into despotism. We will learn to adjust our lifestyle radically, to cope with diminished resources, environmental damage, a contracting economy, as well as our our decline as a military power, or we will die clinging to our illusions.” [hij-Hedges-EOI-p191].
The apex award for pessimism goes to a philosopher who says “we are insignificant specks in a vast universe that is utterly indifferent to us. The limited meaning that our lives can have is ephemeral rather than enduring.” [hij-Benatar-THP-p2]. He advocates anti-natalism, a preference for not giving birth to the next generation of humans. “Every birth is a death in waiting. When one hears of a birth, one must know that it is but a matter of time before that new human dies. Sandwiched between birth and death is a struggle for meaning and a desperate attempt to ward off life’s suffering. That is why a pessimistic view of the human condition leads to the anti-natalist conclusion that we ought not to procreate.” [hij-Benatar-THP-p207].
BioIslamic Optimism
The first generation of Muslims (and Christians) appear to have been dire pessimists, and expected an imminent apocalypse, according to many scholars [hij-Donner-apocalypse-pXXX]. When the apocalypse did not arrive in the Prophet’s lifetime, some slipped into a depressed state, which in turn led some like Hasan al Basri to practice asceticism, which was the start of the Sufi movement [hij-Schimmel-MDI-pXXX]. In contrast, BioMuslims read the Quran as a call for cautious optimism and believe better days are yet to come, especially if we adopt a pro-science stance and use it to help solve the Big Five problems.
To this end, other scholars have laid out cheerful scenarios to inspire us — a leading historian believes our scientific progress will elevate us to extraordinary heights and extended lifespans. “Having raised humanity above the beastly level of survival struggles, we will now aim to upgrade humans into gods, and turn Homo sapiens into Homo deus. In the twenty-first century humans are likely to make a serious bid for immortality” [hij-Harari-HD-p24]. Estimates for when this might occur range from between 2100 to 2200. This is more than just talk. One visionary investor is funding projects that enable a five hundred year life span [hij-Maris]. The less ambitious seekers of immortality suggest that since we doubled life expectancy in the 20th century to about seventy years, we can again double to age 150. Other visionaries agree. “Humanity is now entering a period of radical transformation in which the technology has the potential to significantly raise the basic standard of living for every man, woman and child on the planet. Within a generation, we will be able to provide goods and services, once reserved for the wealthy few, to any and all who need them. Or desire them. Abundance for all is actually within our grasp. In this age of modern cynicism, many of us bridle in the face of such proclamation, but elements of this transformation are already underway.” [hij-DK-A-p9].
These polarized long-range forecasts, from Gray/Benatar at the pessimistic end to Harari/Maris at the optimistic end, are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps our elevated powers, spawned by the demi-god status Harari predicts, and the hubris that will accompany, will pave a path to Gray’s dystopia. Or perhaps, being wise to this possibility, we can work to avoid it — forewarned is forearmed.
Which of these futures will arrive and when? The gravity of the questions overhwhelms our ability to answer. As Muslims say, only God knows, allahu alam.