TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

The intellectual instability of our species

Supposing that our species is collectively Insufficiently intelligent (or intellectually stable enough) to now protect our ecosphere. Correspondingly, this situation risks our survival, at least, as we are now constituted.
Central questions these implications give rise to then are:
What are the fundamental causes of this inadequacy?
Can we then attempt to sponsor a Worst Case Scenario solution, such as work towards the highest possible assurance of surviving seed populations to evolve some successor human species more fit to steward a healthy natural world?

At least twice, science indicates, our sspecies has passed through bottlenecks of ten thousand or so people. during the last 800 centuries.

The Gotterdammerung I hypothesize is now surely upon us, I claim. We are going to, willy-nilly, establish sanctuary alcoves all over the world (hopefully well-designed ones) for a long period of climate catastrophe. My topic begins with our evolution within whatever we are stuck with for coming centuries of inhospitable climate.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jan 14 2013: Maybe identifying independent vs dependent variables in the real world is not as easy as we were taught early in university mathematics. Now what to do? Why wouldn't there be other intelligent life? And why didn't we find signals with SETI. Oh no, you could be right about a slightly different problem. Intelligence may be self-correcting. Besides there have often been humans with larger brains than the average for modern man. Look at Neanderthals extra 100cc's.
    • Jan 15 2013: It's clear brainsize, per se, is not the answer. Establishing appropriate saving-type knowledge happens to be. The prophets who recommended "good stewardship of the Earth and its denizens " are the ones I want to be the philosophical fathers of our possible species successor-continuations.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.