A while back, recovering from surgery and desperate for books, and I was tricked by Audible's recommender system into buying Jordan Peterson's book. In my defence, I didn't know who he was then. I think before the end of chapter one, I went from ‘lobsters had complex social hierarchy, interesting!’ to ‘OMG, I’m inadvertently reading trash!' It was the only time I've asked for a refund from Amazon, and I escaped unscathed, and wiser.

Fast forward to recently, when I spotted #WilliamMacAskill's #WhatWeOweTheFuture, which is all about how we owe it to future generations to not screw up the present. It recognises that humanity can now drive itself to extinction, and tries to figure out some strategies for avoiding that.

It seemed like it might press my armageddon fascination buttons but offer some rays of hope, and maybe suggest concrete actions.

Initially, it played out like that:

WWOTF: OMG for the first time in history we can annihilate ourselves in multiple ways!
Me: Yep!
WWOTF: We should try to avoid that!
Me: I don't want my descendants living out Mad Max. How can I be a Good Ancestor?
WWOTF: The nuclear threat hasn't gone away!
Me: I know! Philomena Cunk does too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zabCBnUHLA
WWOTF: Climate Change!
Me: Yeah, I have to scroll quickly past COP27 headlines to preserve my mental health…
WWOTF: Pathogens!
Me: Topical.

Philomena Cunk finds out that nuclear weapons still exist

YouTube
WWOTF: AI apocalypse!
Me: … well. I mean, not ‘the singularity’ like Terminator or Matrix. …but yeah, it's locking in some bad prejudice, and is being used as a tool for evil. So, yeah, kinda.
WWOTF: What doesn't kill us might nevertheless destroy civilisation, it's happened before!
Me: Sure. Kinda like the last half of Threads, right? https://youtu.be/FDmrFjQFQ38
Threads (1984) | Post-Nuclear War Harvest

YouTube

I mean, I know philosophers are, and should be, open to considering things that seem ridiculous, and maybe I should charitably assume that there's an intelligent pay-off at the end.

But I'm getting that sinking feeling that's I'm a sucker tricked into reading trash again.

Has anyone out there finished #WhatWeOweTheFuture, and thinks I should forge ahead?

Wow! A timely toot from the amazing @timnitGebru has led me to this confirmation of my suspicions:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2021/07/the-dangerous-ideas-of-longtermism-and-existential-risk

I think I can stop wasting my time on #WhatWeOweTheFuture

The Dangerous Ideas of “Longtermism” and “Existential Risk” ❧ Current Affairs

<p>So-called rationalists have created a disturbing secular religion that looks like it addresses humanity’s deepest problems, but actually justifies pursuing the social preferences of elites.</p>

Current Affairs

Another thank you to @timnitGebru this time for a retweet of the following Twitter thread with yet more things wrong with #WhatWeOweTheFuture - I sure dodged a bullet

The thread summarises this by Émile P Torres:
https://thebulletin.org/2022/11/what-longtermism-gets-wrong-about-climate-change/#post-heading

What “longtermism” gets wrong about climate change

A new movement and a popular new book argue that climate change is not an existential threat to humans. That’s a dangerous claim.

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Émile P. Torres 🏳️‍⚧️ on Twitter

“NEW ARTICLE of mine on some of William MacAskill's outrageous claims about climate change in "What We Owe the Future." It's in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Let's take a quick look at what I write. A short 🧵: https://t.co/6VSSrNUpMO”

Twitter