Can We Save the Human Race?

We aren’t doing enough. The human race is in more danger than it might seem.

We aren’t doing enough. The human race is in more danger than it might seem.


The human race has always faced a certain amount of what Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom calls “existential risk.” Existential risk—or “x-risk”—is the risk that something might completely wipe out the human race or destroy human civilization. It's the risk of just about the worst thing most of us can imagine: the destruction not only of everything that we know and love but the loss of the entire future potential of the human race.

But as Bostrom says—and as I explain in greater detail elsewhere—until recently we faced a fairly low level of existential risk. Prehistoric humans certainly may have struggled to compete with other hominids and survive. In fact, genetic evidence suggests that we came close to extinction at some point in our history. Even after we established ourselves around the planet there was always some danger that a supervolcano or a massive comet could do enough to damage to our environment to wipe us out. But from what we know the risk of that kind of exogenous catastrophe is fairly low.

Unfortunately, the development of modern technology and the spread of human civilization has introduced anthropogenic existential risks. For the first time in recorded history, in other words, there’s a real chance that human beings could trigger—whether accidentally or by design—a catastrophe large enough to destroy the human race. In the last century, for example, the development of nuclear weapons raised the possibility that we could destroy the human race in a single military conflict— a risk that subsided but did not disappear with the end of the Cold War. There is likewise the possibility that our emissions of greenhouse gases could trigger runaway global warming too rapid for us to stop.

New technology means new, less obvious catastrophic risks. Bostrom suggests the greatest risk may actually be from the release of destructive, self-replicating nanomachines—a technology that is beyond us now but may not be that far out of reach. A similar danger is the release of a destructive genetically-engineered biological agent, a scenario that becomes more plausible with the spread of technology that makes it possible for ordinary people to create designer organisms. Another danger—which sounds like science fiction, but is worth taking seriously—could come from the creation an artificial intelligence we cannot control. Some even argue that there is chance that a high-energy physics experiment could trigger a catastrophe. Based on our best theories, this kind of catastrophe seems extremely unlikely. But of course the reason we conduct these experiments in the first place is that our best theories are incomplete or even contradictory. We experiment precisely because we don’t really know what will happen.

It’s difficult to evaluate these kind of risks. British Astronomer Royal Martin Rees pessimistically estimated that we have just a 50% chance of surviving this century. Other risk experts are more optimistic, but even a miniscule chance of this kind of catastrophe should be enough to spur us to take precautions. That's why a handful of academic institutes and non-profit organizations like the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute and Cambridge’s Centre for the Study of Existential Risk have begun to focus attention on the existential risks to humanity.

It's hard to imagine that we can really stop the spread of potentially dangerous technologies, or—given their potential to save and improve lives—that we would necessarily even want to. But it seems clear that we can and should do more to mitigate existential risks. At the very least, we need to develop meaningful international regimes to reduce and counteract the damage we’re doing to our environment, create protocols for the responsible scientific research, and formulate contingency plans to respond to potential dangers. The future of the human race is quite literally at stake.

You can read more about existential risk on my new blog Anthropocene. You can also follow me on Twitter: @rdeneufville

Image of the Earth seen from Apollo 8 courtesy of Bill Anders/NASA

3D printing might save your life one day. It's transforming medicine and health care.

What can 3D printing do for medicine? The "sky is the limit," says Northwell Health researcher Dr. Todd Goldstein.

Northwell Health
Sponsored by Northwell Health
  • Medical professionals are currently using 3D printers to create prosthetics and patient-specific organ models that doctors can use to prepare for surgery.
  • Eventually, scientists hope to print patient-specific organs that can be transplanted safely into the human body.
  • Northwell Health, New York State's largest health care provider, is pioneering 3D printing in medicine in three key ways.
Keep reading Show less

An organism found in dirt may lead to an anxiety vaccine, say scientists

Can dirt help us fight off stress? Groundbreaking new research shows how.

University of Colorado Boulder
Surprising Science
  • New research identifies a bacterium that helps block anxiety.
  • Scientists say this can lead to drugs for first responders and soldiers, preventing PTSD and other mental issues.
  • The finding builds on the hygiene hypothesis, first proposed in 1989.

Are modern societies trying too hard to be clean, at the detriment to public health? Scientists discovered that a microorganism living in dirt can actually be good for us, potentially helping the body to fight off stress. Harnessing its powers can lead to a "stress vaccine".

Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder found that the fatty 10(Z)-hexadecenoic acid from the soil-residing bacterium Mycobacterium vaccae aids immune cells in blocking pathways that increase inflammation and the ability to combat stress.

The study's senior author and Integrative Physiology Professor Christopher Lowry described this fat as "one of the main ingredients" in the "special sauce" that causes the beneficial effects of the bacterium.

The finding goes hand in hand with the "hygiene hypothesis," initially proposed in 1989 by the British scientist David Strachan. He maintained that our generally sterile modern world prevents children from being exposed to certain microorganisms, resulting in compromised immune systems and greater incidences of asthma and allergies.

Contemporary research fine-tuned the hypothesis, finding that not interacting with so-called "old friends" or helpful microbes in the soil and the environment, rather than the ones that cause illnesses, is what's detrimental. In particular, our mental health could be at stake.

"The idea is that as humans have moved away from farms and an agricultural or hunter-gatherer existence into cities, we have lost contact with organisms that served to regulate our immune system and suppress inappropriate inflammation," explained Lowry. "That has put us at higher risk for inflammatory disease and stress-related psychiatric disorders."

University of Colorado Boulder

Christopher Lowry

This is not the first study on the subject from Lowry, who published previous work showing the connection between being exposed to healthy bacteria and mental health. He found that being raised with animals and dust in a rural environment helps children develop more stress-proof immune systems. Such kids were also likely to be less at risk for mental illnesses than people living in the city without pets.

Lowry's other work also pointed out that the soil-based bacterium Mycobacterium vaccae acts like an antidepressant when injected into rodents. It alters their behavior and has lasting anti-inflammatory effects on the brain, according to the press release from the University of Colorado Boulder. Prolonged inflammation can lead to such stress-related disorders as PTSD.

The new study from Lowry and his team identified why that worked by pinpointing the specific fatty acid responsible. They showed that when the 10(Z)-hexadecenoic acid gets into cells, it works like a lock, attaching itself to the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR). This allows it to block a number of key pathways responsible for inflammation. Pre-treating the cells with the acid (or lipid) made them withstand inflammation better.

Lowry thinks this understanding can lead to creating a "stress vaccine" that can be given to people in high-stress jobs, like first responders or soldiers. The vaccine can prevent the psychological effects of stress.

What's more, this friendly bacterium is not the only potentially helpful organism we can find in soil.

"This is just one strain of one species of one type of bacterium that is found in the soil but there are millions of other strains in soils," said Lowry. "We are just beginning to see the tip of the iceberg in terms of identifying the mechanisms through which they have evolved to keep us healthy. It should inspire awe in all of us."

Check out the study published in the journal Psychopharmacology.

For most of history, humans got smarter. That's now reversing.

We were gaining three IQ points per decade for many, many years. Now, that's going backward. Could this explain some of our choices lately?

The Flynn effect appears to be in retrograde. (Credit: Shutterstock/Big Think)
popular

There's a new study out of Norway that indicates our—well, technically, their—IQs are shrinking, to the tune of about seven IQ points per generation.

Keep reading Show less

Lama Rod Owens – the price of the ticket to freedom

An ordained Lama in a Tibetan Buddhist lineage, Lama Rod grew up a queer, black male within the black Christian church in the American south. Navigating all of these intersecting, evolving identities has led him to a life's work based on compassion for self and others.

Think Again Podcasts
  • "What I'm interested in is deep, systematic change. What I understand now is that real change doesn't happen until change on the inside begins to happen."
  • "Masculinity is not inherently toxic. Patriarchy is toxic. We have to let that energy go so we can stop forcing other people to do emotional labor for us."
Keep reading Show less