MichaelA🔸 comments on Some history topics it might be very valuable to investigate

[MichaelA🔸]

I have a draft, which I’ll hopefully publish in the coming weeks/​months, on “Will humanity achieve its full potential, as long as existential catastrophe is prevented?”

I think an argument in favour of “Yes” is that it might be highly likely that, if we don’t suffer an existential catastrophe, there will be positive trends across the long-term future in all key domains. And I think that that argument could in turn be supported by the argument that such trends have been the norm historically, or that human agency will ensure such positive trends.

So I thought a bit about how true that seems to be. I’ll quote the relevant part of the draft, as it seems somewhat relevant here. (Note that I’m not an expert, and barely even did any googling; this was based on intuitions and what I happened to already know/​believe.)

---

• I believe there’s strong evidence that there have been positive trends in many domains in many periods and places before the Industrial Revolution. Relevant domains may include violence levels, the size of people’s moral circles, and use of reason and scientific thinking.

  • See e.g. The Better Angels of Our Nature.

• I believe there’s some evidence that this represents a fairly widespread pattern. But I’m less certain of that. And there’ve definitely been “negative” trends in certain domains, times, and places (e.g., [insert example here; I have some ideas but should Google them]).

• I believe there’s strong evidence that, since sometime around the Industrial Revolution, there have been positive trends across most of the world and in most domains that matter.

  • See e.g. The world is much better; The world is awful; The world can be much better, Three wild speculations from amateur quantitative macrohistory, and Enlightenment Now.

• But even since the Industrial Revolution, there have been at least some negative trends or stagnation in some domains, times, and places. And these might include some of the “most important” domains, times, and places in relation to evaluating the FINE hypothesis.

  • Here are some plausibly important domains where I think there’s at least some evidence of negative trends recently in the developed world:

    • Human-caused animal suffering (especially on factory farms)

    • Political discourse

    • Political polarisation

    • Respect for science, scientists, and/​or truth

    • Mental health [maybe also suicide rates? should google this]

    • Drug abuse

    • Incarceration rates (perhaps especially or only in the US)

    • Economic inequality

  • There were also some negative trends in particular domains, times, and places that were later reversed, but seem like they plausibly could’ve become quite lastingly bad. E.g., various trends in Germany and Russia leading up to and during WWII.

  • And there are plausibly important domains for which I’m not aware of evidence of substantial progress recently (e.g., democratisation in China).

Overall, I think historical trends are more consistent than inconsistent with the [argument that, if we don’t suffer an existential catastrophe, there will be positive trends across the long-term future in all key domains]. But that the matter isn’t totally clear-cut, and would likely benefit from much more detailed analysis.

[Stefan_Schubert]

“Will humanity achieve its full potential, as long as existential catastrophe is prevented?”

I think an argument in favour of “Yes” is that it might be highly likely that, if we don’t suffer an existential catastrophe, there will be positive trends across the long-term future in all key domains.

That there will be positive trends doesn’t necessarily entail that humanity (or some other entities) will achieve its full potential, however. It’s possible that the future will be better than the present, without humanity achieving its full potential. And the value difference between such a future and a future where humanity achieves its full potential may be vast.

I agree that there is an historical argument for positive future trends, but it seems that one needs additional steps to conclude that humanity will achieve its full potential.

[MichaelA🔸]

Yeah, I definitely agree. This was part of my motivation for writing that draft. (Also, even if just “positive trends” was enough—which I agree that it isn’t—finding that were positive trends in the past doesn’t guarantee there will be positive trends in the future.)

More broadly, my impression is that some EAs are very confident the answer to the titular question is “Yes”, and I feel like I haven’t seen very strong arguments for such high confidence.

The draft is not necessarily arguing in favour of “Yes” (or “No”) overall; it’s primarily intended to highlight the question and stimulate and scaffold discussion.

(Happy to share the draft, if you or others are interested.)

[Stefan_Schubert]

Thanks, yes I’d be interested.

[MichaelA🔸]

Ok, I’ve sent you a message :)