What is more likely to come - A dystopia or a utopia?

 

But Humanity, in its desire for comfort, had over-reached itself. It had exploited the riches of nature too far. Quietly and complacently, it was sinking into decadence, and progress had come to mean the progress of the Machine — E. M. Foster

Arun Kumar

Entropy is often cited as a fundamental principle of nature. As time progresses, physical systems tend to move towards a state of greater disorder. This principle subtly ensures that after birth, as I get nourishment from my mother’s milk, I grow and defy the principle of entropy. However, my cells will eventually disintegrate, and at some point, I shall cease to exist.

Entropy is the guarantor that I am mortal.

The core idea behind the concept of increasing entropy is that as time progresses, there are far more ways for physical systems to become disordered than ordered.

Take a set of coins. If you shuffle them on a tabletop, they could all land heads up. While this is a completely plausible state and could occur, the likelihood of it happening is much smaller than having a mix of fifty heads and fifty tails.

An unsettling possibility is that in the room where you are sitting, all the air molecules might randomly end up in one corner, leaving you gasping for air sitting on the other side. It is not a conscious decision on their part, but rather a result of random causality.

Although the chances of the above scenario happening are, once again, minuscule, they are not zero. The scenario could happen. It is improbable but it is not impossible.

Perhaps it is one of those unsolved mysteries of a healthy person sitting in a closed room being found dead that no one has been able to crack the mystery. Given eight billion people living over one thousand generations, who knows what rare events can occur? If something can, given enough time, it shall.

The tendency of physical systems to transition from an ordered to a disordered state is the reason a movie (a sequence of events) viewed in reverse appears strange. In our past experiences, we have not seen a bald head slowly sprouting hair and ending up with a head full of lush hair.

If entropy is the ultimate guardrail that gently propels physical systems in the direction of chaos, it is intriguing to consider the potential futures for human progress. The specific question is whether, starting from our current state, in the long run would we end up in a worse state (i.e., a dystopia) or a better state (i.e., a utopia), and if one is more likely than the other?

Consider a utopia, or a future that is better than our present. Although history tells us that we are better off in many ways than we were before, this may not be the norm. A malnourished and mistreated baby will still grow, but beyond a certain point, it will lag behind its peers who were treated better.

So, even though we have historically moved towards a better state, this trend may not continue. For humanity to keep improving its lot, much more from us would be required. The characteristics we would need for the masses to possess are wisdom, cooperation, equity, sustainable practices, tolerance, a growth-oriented mindset etc.

Do we have the psychological wherewithal for these qualities to flourish?

If there are any indications, such as a decline in average IQ, heads bent over smartphones engaged in endless scrolling, the answer may be a no.

Unfortunately, evolution also prefers the path of least resistance and does not optimize our behavior for the future (which requires wisdom). Coupled with a notion that technological advances can override the basic tenets of natural selection (e.g., higher IQ and better fitness may no longer be an advantage to survive and reproduce), two could be a fatal combination and could set the stage for our downfall.

Now, let us consider chances for dystopia, i.e., a state of humanity that would be worse off than it is now.

The increasing complexity of our society, combined with the challenges posed by technological advancements and the competition for limited resources, could potentially steer us in this direction. There are far more ways for humanity to devolve into a state that is worse than to evolve into a state that is better.

Initially, the condition of society might appear to be improving, but beyond a certain point, it may find ways to limit its progression.

So, while it is possible for society to evolve towards either a utopia or a dystopia, the principle of entropy working with human nature would suggest that without conscious effort and cooperation, moving towards dystopia is a more likely future.

Ciao.

Evolution of average IQ and what is more likely - A dystopia or a utopia?

 Why did we become blind, I don’t know, perhaps one day we’ll find out, Do you want me to tell you what I think, Yes, do, I don’t think we did go blind, I think we are blind, Blind but seeing, Blind people who can see, but do not see — Jose Saramago

Arun Kumar

Where would be end up?

It is interesting to speculate how the average IQ of humanity would evolve and what its consequences on the possibility of the emergence of a dystopian or a utopian world might be?

Granted, such speculation could all be science fiction but then I am not the first one to delve into fantastical worlds of future possibilities.

A hypothesis about the evolution of the average IQ of a society is that it could be self-limiting. The basic premise of the hypothesis is not hard to formulate.

Increasing IQ would lead to technological advances that in turn could be a negative feedback interfering with the upward trend in the average IQ.

Natural selection prefers traits that increase the chance of survival and reproduction, higher IQ being one. Technological advances, however, can provide artificial crutches that can blunt the advantages of having a higher IQ and disrupt the natural process of natural selection.

At least this part is not entirely speculation. There is already evidence IQ is declining.

Now consider how evolution of IQ can affect the possibility of a society evolving into a dystopia or a utopia?

There is a natural tendency to follow the path of least resistance. Why waste energy doing things the hard way? Technological offerings combined with biology’s tendency to prefer the path of least resistance could lead to a dystopian future where the majority is made up of low (or just adequate) IQ people. Everywhere we have seen heads bend over staring at the screen of smartphone scrolling through endless feeds of distractions. That sure looks like a recipe for evolving towards a dystopian future.

This path could lead to a dystopian world similar to the one depicted in the movie Matrix, where humans are enslaved by machines and happily live in a simulated reality.

What would be a possible trajectory for a Utopian world?

One scenario is that people are mindful of their acts, are growth oriented, and value cooperation and harmony. There is equity, justice, and respect for diversity. People use technology to enhance their well-being and protect the environment, rather than exploit it. They are inspired by ecotopian (eco + utopia) visions that imagine a sustainable and harmonious relationship with nature.

Sounds good but it sure does not sound like us.

Which one is more plausible — dystopia or a utopia? Looking around and the way technology may be blunting our IQ, if I were to guess, the answer would be dystopia.

But then, one person’s dystopia could be another person’s utopia, so the answer may depend on who has the podium.

Ciao.

See also:
Western IQs drop by 14 points in last century
An intelligence crisis could undermine our problem-solving capacities and dim the prospects of the global economy

Would Nietzsche agree?

 

Is there joy in an ordinary life, unsung and plain?
An existence that does not dwell in questions arcane,
Life’s purpose, life’s meaning, no need to explore,
No thoughts of mortality or what lies beyond death’s door.

No questions about free will, or its implications vast,
Was today merely a shadow of the past?
A life that simply awakens, lives, under the sun's light,
And later, in the evening, drifts into an innocent night.

Sounds wonderful, serene, free of unfathomable mysteries,
But one wonders, would Nietzsche agree?

Is average IQ self-limiting?

 “The years passed, mankind became stupider at a frightening rate. Some had high hopes the genetic engineering would correct this trend in evolution, but sadly the greatest minds and resources where focused on conquering hair loss and prolonging erections.” — from the movie Idiocracy

Arun Kumar

Average IQ hits a glass ceiling

Once upon a time, Hollywood produced a movie titled Idiocracy, centered around the notion that as societies progress, they may ultimately be dominated by individuals with mediocre intelligence.

The fundamental premise of this concept was elucidated within the initial five minutes of the movie. The scene depicted a high IQ couple engrossed in their careers and aspirations, consistently postponing the idea of starting a family to an indefinite future (which never happens).

This portrayal was contrasted with a lower IQ family where children seemed to multiply without restraint.

The protagonist of the movie, waking up five hundred years into the future after a flawed government hibernation experiment, discovers himself in a society overwhelmingly governed by individuals with diminished intellectual capacities. Adding to the tendency for high IQ individuals to have less children, the devolution toward lower IQ was further expedited by corporations providing technologies that render intelligence and physical prowess obsolete for survival.

In this dystopian realm, technological exoskeletons empower everyone with artificial strength and principles of nature are overridden.

Is such a scenario of a decrease in IQ plausible?

There already exists evidence suggesting a decline in average IQ, particularly in developed countries. Two factors can be hypothesized to contribute to this decline. Firstly, individuals with higher IQ do tend to have lower birth rates. Secondly, technological tools can nullify the evolutionary advantages associated with heightened intellect and physical fitness.

Thus, it is conceivable that in the centuries to come, a growing fraction of the global population may be dominated by individuals with lower IQ. While the average IQ of societies might initially rise at the beginning of civilization, it could subsequently decline as already indicated by current trends.

This downward trajectory may even culminate in the self-destruction of civilizations implying that IQ and progress of civilizations could be a self-limiting process. Speculating on the possibility that extraterrestrial visitors are absent due to a similar decline in their intelligence adds an intriguing layer for the plausibility for this hypothesis.

If this conjecture holds true, envisioning the future of humanity becomes a fascinating exercise.

The future world may resemble the one in the movie Matrix, with the majority of the population tethered to virtual reality sets and sustenance provided through feeding tubes, each person existing in their individually constructed, alternate realities. In this disconnected existence, the remnants of humanity continue to navigate a world that has surrendered to the seductive allure of simulated experiences.

Yet, in the shadows of this virtual dystopia, a select few control over the intricate workings of the Matrix. These few manipulate the narratives of billions, dictating their perceptions and experiences in the fabricated realms. As the masses unknowingly follow the whims of the puppet masters, the line between reality and illusion is blurred, leaving humanity caught in a web of simulated consciousness, controlled by those who hold the keys to the virtual kingdom.

Who knows, that is what we are.

Ciao.

Also see:
Western IQs drop by 14 points in last century
An intelligence crisis could undermine our problem-solving capacities and dim the prospects of the global economy