Greetings and Salutations!
The last couple of weeks have been particularly exciting for science and technology: Turing test almost solved, Deepmind solving the protein folding problem; Ethereaum 2.0 Launch; SpaceX Starship hopping to 50,000 feet;MrnA vaccines achieving incredible efficacy in what seems to be an unprecedented achievment in the history of vaccines. To reach stage three of trials on humans would take years in previous times. I bet if it weren’t for the strict regulations in place, things would have happened even faster, but then, ensuring utmost safety before the deployment process is crucial.
Speaking of progress, today I’d like to talk about one of the most interesting books I’ve read in 2020: The beginning of infinity.
Before I begin, here is a picture illustrating how I felt reading this book:
Drawing on concepts from physics and philosophy, David Deutsch paints a clear picture of why he thinks humans,the universal explainers as he calls them, are the only species that can,through the reach of their knowledge,itself born from the woom of good explanations(hard to vary), criticism,and creativity_qualities that define the dynamic societies of the enlightenment, Athens,say, as opposed to static societies, Sparta, say_ produce beginnings of infinity, launching pads for ever expanding reach of innovation and knowledge. It is a beginning of infinity, because, in an infinity hotel( a thought experiment in the book) you're always at the start of the corridor of rooms. On your journey to an infinity of progress, you face obstacles( problems), you solve those problems, which precipitates more problems, ad infinitum.
Our understanding of the biosphere as the cradle for humanity is fallacious. If it weren't for humans and their knowledge, the biosphere would have annihilated humanity, David argues. A long time had elapsed without any significant progress in the way humans conduct their lives, and a lot of possible beginnings of infinity were snuffed out. What happened? Static societies lived according to creeds mandated by the authority. Human creativity was being harnessed mostly to keep things "sustainable" in the face of change. Things changed only when humanity adopted fallibilism aka the principle of optimism: A kind of optimism where the creation of knowledge/science is not subject to the whims of any authoritarian figure; a fallibilist espouses the idea that any problem he or she faces is the result of lack of knowledge on his part, and the future will be better for, he will either have created that knowledge themselves or acquired it by other means.
David articulates several interesting concepts in the book: Contrasting Darwin's idea of the selfish gene that uses the human body as a vessel to propagate through subsequent generations, David Deutsch's replicators( genes,memes) have this life’s goal of beating other genes( or memes), a goal that comes with side benefits like keeping the body healthy and what not. Memes differ from genes in that they have to compete with other memes in the brain of the meme receiver,beat them and then have the human( the vessel) delivers them to other brains. The author also points out what he thinks is a weak argument in Jared Diamond’s book, Guns,Germs, and steel, wherein, the author posits the theory that the main cause of the unequality and the partitioning of the world into developed and developping countries is Geography. Deutsh’s counter argument is that, although geography might play a role in shaping the future of its residents, it is not the key reason behind their prosperity. Again, the author argues, prosperity originates from the creation of knowledge and its reach.
Parochial terms like Lamarckism, empiricism_it is mind blowing realizing that all knowledge is originated in the human brain( conjecture) in contrast with the prevailing fallacy of empiricism( knowledge is discovered first by observation)_,inductivism, instrumentalism, Neo Darwinanism, and anthropic considerations( like in the case of the fine tuning problem) irks the author because he thinks they inadvertently impede the progress of knowledge creation.
Other interesting topics in the book includes like the possibility of deriving objective truths from art, objective beauty, quantum computing, Popper's criterion, a physical world containing multiverses, the existence of different explanations at different layers of emergence, the socratic problem( that chapter wherein Socrates is conversing with a deity of sorts not knowing whether it is a dream or a figment of his imagination is fascinating), and the universality principle... etc etc..
What I’m left with is this: The potential for a beginning of infinity in humanity is laying dormant waiting to be awakened. How does a beginning of infinity happen? The beginning is planet earth and infinity is an unstoppable expansion through the unknowable, the universe and the oceans.
A beginning of infinity can be spearheaded by fallibilists who advocate a culture of critcism, creativity, and coming up with good explanations that are hard to vary, and even then, they should be looking at the knowledge they created as misconceptions that await another sort of slightly better misconceptions. Problems are soluble,providing their solutions don't defy the laws of physics. Humans must seek creating knowledge faster and expand throughout the galaxy and beyond.
Such an Excellent book. Definitely influenced my thinking in ways i wouldn’t even begin to comprehend.
Okay, Class dismissed for now.