Dangerous ideas
I’ve been reading “What is your dangerous idea?”, a book edited by John Brockman and comprising the dangerous ideas of so called leading thinkers. Some of the texts are certainly thought-provoking, but I don’t believe scientists possess any privileged information regarding the “deeper meaning of our lives”, as Brockman seems to imply in the introduction; in some cases, the opposite might be true, because of an obssessive focus on narrow subjects. That right there would be my first dangerous idea: scientists may know enough to take over the world, but I doubt they will figure what to do with it. Secondly, I don’t think humanity has felt the full force of Darwin’s idea yet, and even some of those who grasp the concept tend to worry about fitness, surrendering to the selfish gene; the theory of evolution stripped organic life of meaning, granting us the freedom to choose our own meaning. We had already done that, to an extent, by building a cultural layer on top of our raw selves, and that leads to the third idea: memes supersede genes, and as soon as the former can be encoded in a reliable and durable way, mankind will be obsolete, for all practical purposes.
(Fortunately, practical purposes allow us to live but are not what we stay alive for, as Keating said in Dead Poets Society.)