Homo Deus

"I lis to this on audio. Fascinating."

"Some good ideas and stimulating observations, but even more oversimplifications and faulty logic. Harari conflates political systems (democracy, totalitarianism) with economic systems (free market capitalism, socialism) ignoring the existence of say democratic socialism. His lengthy chapter on the flaws of humanism and liberalism use definitions many would disagree with (that humanism is all about glorifying “feelings” for example). Likewise his equating of “dataism” and humanism with “failed religions, and his contempt for Islam in particular give one pause.<br/><br/> Yet there is a lot worth pondering. Do states insitute social welfare programs merely to breed healthy armies and worker bees? Once the majority of workers are replaced by AI, will that mean these dispensable humans will be…dispensed with? Writing in 2014-16, Harari was prescient about the anxieties we now face as AI becomes<br/>more entrenched in our lives, threatening dozens of professions and occupations. The most frightening of his predictions is not the elimination of humanity by machines but the elimination of our sense of purpose. Harari’s imagined future of nonproductive humans spending their lives playing virtual reality games is the true horror."

"Compelling and so pragmatic, I love this author and his brilliant insight. I love this book."

"**** Deus is a provocative but ultimately scattered, shallow, and incorrect analysis of liberal political history and what recent developments in our scientific understanding mean for the future of our society. It's a frustrating book to review. There are a few great frameworks in here that changed how I saw the world. But there's a liberal slathering of hype and statements that are just wrong.<br/><br/>Let's start with the good stuff. His most interesting observations are about the relationships between meaning, power, religion, and science. Harari claims that until a few hundred years ago, religion offered a deal where people accepted their place in the social hierarchy in exchange for meaning in their lives - "Meaning and authority always go hand in hand." But the deal changed as we transitioned to modernity...<br/><br/><blockquote>Yet in fact modernity is a surprisingly simple deal. The entire contract can be summarised in a single phrase: humans agree to give up meaning in exchange for power.</blockquote><br/><br/>And then he makes an extraordinary claim:<br/><br/><blockquote>It is customary to portray the history of modernity as a struggle between science and religion. In theory, both science and religion are interested above all in the truth, and because each upholds a different truth, they are doomed to clash. In fact, neither science nor religion cares that much about the truth, hence they can easily compromise, coexist and even cooperate.... Religion is interested above all in order. It aims to create and maintain the social structure. Science is interested above all in power. Through research, it aims to acquire the power to cure diseases, fight wars and produce food. As individuals, scientists and priests may give immense importance to the truth; but as collective institutions, science and religion prefer order and power over truth. They therefore make good bedfellows. The uncompromising quest for truth is a spiritual journey, which can seldom remain within the confines of either religious or scientific establishments.</blockquote><br/><br/>Some pretty bold words. I'm really not sure he is correct here (what is the "collective institution" of science?) but this is a fascinating way of viewing the relationship between science and religion. As he says at the end of the chapter:<br/><br/><blockquote>Being able to distinguish fiction from reality and religion from science will therefore become more difficult but more vital than ever before.</blockquote><br/><br/>I can't help but notice parallels between his thinking here and <a href="http://books.max-nova.com/unqualified-reservations/">Moldbug's conception of the "Cathedral"</a>... makes me wonder if Harari has been reading some of the alt-right manifestos...<br/><br/>Harari also has a reasonable narrative around the development of liberal political philosophy (<i>"This is the primary commandment humanism has given us: create meaning for a meaningless world"</i>). His stuff on evolutionary humanism is pretty radical but thought-provoking (<i>"According to evolutionary humanists, anyone arguing that all human experiences are equally valuable is either an imbecile or a coward"</i>). Where he starts to go off the rails is in his interpretation of recent developments in neuroscience and his vision of our political future.<br/><br/>Harari begins by claiming that humanity's future will be geared around a few key projects: <br/><br/>* Conquer mortality<br/>* Find the key to happiness<br/>* Acquire divine powers<br/><br/>The rest of the book speculates about how these quests will upend our current liberal humanist social structure. Harari quickly dismisses the viability of liberalism because "recent psychological research" has shown that we have "multiple selves" and liberalism is apparently incompatible with having different moods sometimes. Oh, and he also settled the question of whether or not we have free will too. This guy is on a roll! I was pretty dismayed by his cherry-picking of the literature and his reliance on pretty flimsy anecdotes to argue that liberal humanism is doomed. I remain unconvinced. See <a href="http://books.max-nova.com/the-beginning-of-infinity/">"The Beginning of Infinity"</a> for a much more thoughtful approach to future political organization.<br/><br/>Harari really lost credibility when he went on his "Data-ism" kick. Apparently this is the new "dogma" that is "taking over" the sciences. This is essentially the idea that all organisms are just glorified data-processing machines. A quick Google search reveals that the only major proponent of "data-ism" besides Harari is NYT journalist Steve Lohr. Ahem. Another example of Harari's extraordinary claims and lack of extraordinary evidence.<br/><br/>There are a few other interesting ideas in this book:<br/><br/>* Medicine shifting from healing the sick to upgrading the healthy (and implications for social equality)<br/>* Intelligence vs. consciousness (does it matter?)<br/>* Corporations as gods - what would it mean for an algorithm to be a truly autonomous agent that could own property?<br/><br/>While these ideas made the book worth reading, Harari's hype and his cavalier treatment of the facts left a bad taste in my mouth.<br/><br/>Full review and highlights at <a href="http://books.max-nova.com/****-deus/">http://books.max-nova.com/****-deus/</a>"

"Did not enjoy it as much as **** Sapien Too scientific and theory based "

"Did you read this book?"

"Perplexing and so sure of itself, but a smooth read."

"Friend said it was life changing, it was not life changing"

"One of the most enlightening books I've ever read. No text better outlines the prospects, challenges and potential realities of the near future in the context of modernity's trajectory. A+"

"Listened to it"