I too hoped for more from the discussed conversation. It’s just that I have heard the interior side of this before. I am more curious in how this will play out. In fact, I would have loved to have KW 2006 added next to Ray in the conversations at the end of the chapters of Singularity.

These advances will lead to unprecedented changes in power and wealth and how will it play out? How will corporations (orange) and governments (blue??) control this? Will integral leadership rise to power just in the nick of time? Is this II greatest concern?

I heard a podcast about the new ‘many faces of terrorism’ book. I didn’t catch it all, but it sounded like a storyline that predicted the future and some reference to the role of the ‘integral’ population. Anyone know when this book will be out?

thanks for the insightful comments. here’s my take on your points:

1. on reading membership… couldn’t agree with you more. so that makes both of us harsh seriously, yeah i understand the predicament of catering to your audience and all that, but last time i checked, there’s no room for idiot compassion on the “LEADING EDGE.”

2. personally i see a lot of value on their models. it helped me to be less of an a-hole that i used to be. but as of this writing, my understanding is limited to the vision-logic domain as i haven’t had any “transcendent” experience i can fall back on to counter or approve their insights. but then again, their stuff makes a lot of sense to me.

3. teaser. exactly.

yeah, please do write up on the singularity topic. i would love to hear your thoughts on it. also, the “Kurzweil/Wilber/Cohen/deGrey quad-ralogue” is a great idea. but i don’t think i’m savvy enough to pull it off. i wonder.

be well,
~r

Excellent post moonfrere.

I think you should put forward another post (the next one maybe? wink, wink…) that would simulate the Kurzweil/Wilber/Cohen/deGrey quad-ralogue. Or just your views on the subject.

I think in terms of the WIE piece, a couple of contextualizers:

1. The reading membership of the magazine (present company excluded) is not always the best and the brightest, intellectually and philosophically that is (read: New Age Boomers). For proof of this assertion, note who pays advertising in the magazine—holistic, metaphysical spirit-guide this, Vedanta-cosmology that and so forth. Or maybe I’m being a little too harsh?

2. On a more general point, tangentically related to this particular article, I’m less and less convinced that Ken and Andrew’s thoughts/systems/worldviews, whatever you want to call them, really line up in anything more than a (mostly) superficial sort of way–hence the dialogues, as I see them, are (mostly) superficial. Or maybe I’m alone on that point?

3. I think the dialogues function as what they call in the PR world as a “teaser”–the WIE version of the free IN-clip o’ the week if you will. And as such, they are fairly effective within that bubble. Much more than that, is really not (in my mind) to be expected from that format.

Anyway, if you like bro, I’ll give the topic some thought and maybe write up something on the Singularity, consciousness, quadraticism, etc. I’ll send it to you. But either way, I (and I imagine others) would like to see your thoughts on the issue.

Peace. CJ

What always seems to be avoided in such discussions is any question of who will control such technology and how it will be distributed.

yeah, i was a little bit disappointed because Kurzweil was interviewed in that issue of WIE. it would’ve been cool if Kurzweil rebutted.

but anyway, in fairness to Ken and Andrew, i think what they’re trying to address here are the stereotypical mentality of flatland scientists and mainstream idea of “immortality.” like i said, their discussion pointed out the flaws of life extension very well.

also a friend had mentioned that, “you know how long Ken can spend on one point! Can’t include everything in a less-than-one-hour conversation!” and yeah i agree with that, that’s the reason i quoted Ken in his Boomeritis interview to point out that he is aware of the singularity.

ok. now back to being non-geeky

~r