This is a special post for quick takes by AugBro. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
My main disagreement with Futurism or Transhumanism is that technological progress does not correlate strongly with satisfaction and happiness. And if there isn't a strong correlation, then, what's the point? Every additional technological step is another faustian bargain.
I guess I would just like to observe that silicon valleys innovation mindset of relentlessly questioning assumptions does not allow for the questioning of itself. If you disagree, kindly direct me!
This is my first post and my test of the waters so to speak. Hope to discuss.
Sometimes human happiness does not track how things actually improve.
For example, imagine that today some terrorist group would release a virus that would make 2/3 of children die before they reach adulthood. And there is nothing you can do about it; if we don't want to die, we just need to have more children and get ready to see most of them die young. That would make many people extremely right, wouldn't it?
But that's just describing how things worked in the past. Most kids died young. Now they don't. But the fact that they don't doesn't create a similar wave of happiness. People don't celebrate the fact that their children survive; they just take it as a new normal.
So, I could rephrase your question as: what's the point of the progress keeping most children alive, if parents find other reasons to be unhappy anyway. We could just as well let the kids die...
And, my perspective is that the world is a better place if the kids don't die, even if their parents' emotions adapt.
Why is every Libertarians response to critiques about free market capitalism:
"Yes yes but, it's better than the alternative".