My latest summary is for Deep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World by Nick Bostrom, a former Oxford professor in philosophy. The books explores the question of what utopia could look like if technological progress goes as well as it possibly could, and what problems might still be left.

As usual, the key takeaways are below, and you can find the full summary by clicking the link above.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Bostrom explores what utopia could look like if we reached a state of technological maturity:
  • At technological maturity, our control over nature would be close to the maximum possible. We could even have “autopotency” — the ability to modify ourselves and our own internal states.
  • There would still be limits to what is possible—both physical limits and limits arising from the nature of our values. Status, for example, would remain limited.
  • Getting to utopia would require overcoming a host of coordination and governance problems (but that is not the focus of this book).
• If we reach technological maturity, what problems might be left? This raises questions about what could give our lives meaning and purpose if AI can do almost everything better than humans can:
  • Most discussions just focus on shallow redundancy—what happens when humans lose their jobs to AI and become unemployed.
  • Bostrom goes further and looks at deep redundancy—many of our leisure activities (e.g. shopping, exercising, learning) have instrumental value. Will those still hold appeal if AI can do everything better than we do?
• Bostrom explores various possible answers:
  • Hedonism alone could be a sufficient answer. While most people find ideas like wireheading or drugs unsatisfying, at technological maturity our pleasures will not have to come with bitter aftertastes.
  • We could also engage in autotelic activities, like games, art, and relationships, that are valued for their own sake. This may require cultivating a true leisure culture.
  • We could also create artificial purposes (e.g. sports competitions) if we want.
  • There are also some tasks cannot be outsourced, perhaps because it involves our connections to other people and requires some sort of sentiment.
• Many people worry that utopia might be “boring” or lacking in diversity.
  • We want lives that are good, not stories that are dramatic.
  • Diversity and interestingness depend on the scale. At the largest scale, any person’s ability to contribute interestingness seems extremely small, but at smaller scales that doesn’t matter.
  • Autopotency could increase our capacity to find things interesting or beautiful.
  • Utopia doesn’t need to be static but can be ever-changing like a living kaleidoscope.

You can find the full detailed summary on the website. If you found this summary useful, consider forwarding to a friend you think might enjoy it.

Thanks for subscribing! Until next time,

​To Summarise​