Microsoft Word Kurzweil, Ray The Singularity Is Near doc

Ich bin ein Singularitarian 
The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. 
—H.
L.
M
ENCKEN
Philosophies of life rooted in centuries-old traditions contain much wisdom concerning personal, 
organizational, and social living. Many of us also find shortcomings in those traditions. How could they not 
reach some mistaken conclusions when they arose in pre-scientific times? At the same time, ancient 
philosophies of life have little or nothing to say about fundamental issues confronting us as advanced 
technologies begin to enable us to change our identity as individuals and as humans and as economic, 
cultural, and political forces change global relationships. 
—M
AX 
M
ORE
,
"P
RINCIPLES OF 
E
XTROPY
" 
The world does not need another totalistic dogma. 
—M
AX 
M
ORE
,
"P
RINCIPLES OF 
E
XTROPY
" 
Yes, we have a soul. But it's made of lots of tiny robots. 
—G
IULIO 
G
IORELLI
Substrate is morally irrelevant, assuming it doesn't affect functionality or consciousness. It doesn't matter, 
from a moral point of view, whether somebody runs on silicon or biological neurons (just as it doesn't matter 
whether you have dark or pale skin). On the same grounds, that we reject racism and speciesism, we should 
also reject carbon-chauvinism, or bioism. 
—N
ICK 
B
OSTROM
,
"E
THICS 
F
OR 
I
NTELLIGENT 
M
ACHINES
:
A
P
ROPOSAL
,
2001" 
Philosophers have long noted that their children were born into a more complex world than that of their 
ancestors. This early and perhaps even unconscious recognition of accelerating change may have been the 
catalyst for much of the utopian, apocalyptic, and millennialist thinking in our Western tradition. But the 
modern difference is that now everyone notices the pace of progress on some level, not simply the 
visionaries. 
—J
OHN 
S
MART
Singularitarian is someone who understands the Singularity and has reflected on its meaning for his or 
her own life. 
I have been engaged in such reflection for several decades. Needless to say, it's not a process that 
one can ever complete. I started pondering the relationship of our thinking to our computational technology as a 
teenager in the 1960s. In the 1970s I began to study the acceleration of technology, and I wrote my first book on the 
subject in the late 1980s. So I've had time to contemplate the impact on society—and on myself—of the overlapping 
transformations now under way. 
A 

---

George Gilder has described my scientific and philosophical views as "a substitute vision for those who have lost 
faith in the traditional object of religious belief."
1
Gilder's statement is understandable, as there are at least apparent 
similarities between anticipation of the Singularity and anticipation of the transformations articulated by traditional 
religions. 
But I did not come to my perspective as a result of searching for an alternative to customary faith. The origin of 
my quest to understand technology trends was practical: an attempt to time my inventions and to make optimal tactical 
decisions in launching technology enterprises. Over time this modeling of technology took on a life of its own and led 
me to formulate a theory of technology evolution. It was not a huge leap from there to reflect on the impact of these 
crucial changes on social and cultural institutions and on my own life. So, while being a Singularitarian is not a matter 
of faith but one of understanding, pondering the scientific trends I've discussed in this book inescapably engenders 
new perspectives on the issues that traditional religions have attempted to address: the nature of mortality and 
immortality, the purpose of our lives, and intelligence in the universe. 
Being a Singularitarian has often been an alienating and lonely experience for me because most people I encounter 
do not share my outlook. Most "big thinkers" are totally unaware of this big thought. In a myriad of statements and 
comments people typically evidence the common wisdom that human life is short, that our physical and intellectual 
reach is limited, and that nothing fundamental will change in our lifetimes. I expect this narrow view to change as the 
implications of accelerating change become increasingly apparent, but having more people with whom to share my 
outlook is a major reason that I wrote this book. 
So how do we contemplate the Singularity? As with the sun, it's hard to look at directly; it's better to squint at it 
out of the corners of our eyes. As Max More states, the last thing we need is another dogma, nor do we need another 
cult, so Singularitarianism is not a system of beliefs or unified viewpoints. While it is fundamentally an understanding 
of basic technology trends, it is simultaneously an insight that causes one to rethink everything, from the nature of 
health and wealth to the nature of death and self. 
To me, being a Singularitarian means many things, of which the following is a small sampling. These reflections 
articulate my personal philosophy, not a proposal for a new doctrine. 
•
We have the means right now to live long enough to live forever.
2
Existing knowledge can be aggressively 
applied to dramatically slow down aging processes so we can still be in vital health when the more radical life-
extending therapies from biotechnology and nanotechnology become available. But most baby boomers won't 
make it because they are unaware of the accelerating aging processes in their bodies and the opportunity to 
intervene. 
•
In this spirit I am aggressively reprogramming my biochemistry, which is now altogether different than it would 
otherwise be.
3
Taking supplements and medications is not a last resort to be reserved only for when something 
goes wrong. There is already something wrong. Our bodies are governed by obsolete genetic programs that 
evolved in a bygone era, so we need to overcome our genetic heritage. We already have the knowledge to begin 
to accomplish this, something I am committed to doing. 
•
My body is temporary. Its particles turn over almost completely every month. Only the pattern of my body and 
brain have continuity. 
•
We should strive to improve these patterns by optimizing the health of our bodies and extending the reach of our 
minds. Ultimately, we will be able to vastly expand our mental faculties by merging with our technology. 
•
We need a body, but once we incorporate MNT fabrication into ourselves, we will be able to change our bodies 
at will. 
•
Only technology can provide the scale to overcome the challenges with which human society has struggled for 
generations. For example, emerging technologies will provide the means of providing and storing clean and 
renewable energy, removing toxins and pathogens from our bodies and the environment, and providing the 
knowledge and wealth to overcome hunger and poverty. 

---

•
Knowledge is precious in all its forms: music, art, science, and technology, as well as the embedded knowledge 
in our bodies and brains. Any loss of this knowledge is tragic. 
•
Information is not knowledge. The world is awash in information; it is the role of intelligence to find and act on 
the salient patterns. For example, we have hundreds of megabits of information flowing through our senses every 
second, the bulk of which is intelligently discarded. It is only the key recognitions and insights (all forms of 
knowledge) that we retain. Thus intelligence selectively destroys information to create knowledge. 
•
Death is a tragedy. It is not demeaning to regard a person as a profound pattern (a form of knowledge), which is 
lost when he or she dies. That, at least, is the case today, since we do not yet have the means to access and back 
up this knowledge. When people speak of losing part of themselves when a loved one dies, they are speaking 
quite literally, since we lose the ability to effectively use the neural patterns in our brain that had self-organized 
to interact with that person. 
•
A primary role of traditional religion is deathist rationalization—that is, rationalizing the tragedy of death as a 
good thing. Malcolm Muggeridge articulates the common view that "if it weren't for death, life would be 
unbearable." But the explosion of art, science, and other forms of knowledge that the Singularity will bring will 
make life more than bearable; it will make life truly meaningful. 
•
In my view the purpose of life—and of our lives—is to create and appreciate ever-greater knowledge, to move 
toward greater "order." As I discussed in chapter 2, increasing order usually means increasing complexity, but 
sometimes a profound insight will increase order while reducing complexity. 
•
As I see it the purpose of the universe reflects the same purpose as our lives: to move toward greater intelligence 
and knowledge. Our human intelligence and our technology form the cutting edge of this expanding intelligence 
(given that we are not aware of any extraterrestrial competitors). 
•
Having reached a tipping point, we will within this century be ready to infuse our solar system with our 
intelligence through self-replicating nonbiological intelligence. It will then spread out to the rest of the universe. 
•
Ideas are the embodiment and the product of intelligence. The ideas exist to solve most any problem that we 
encounter. The primary problems we cannot solve are ones that we cannot articulate and are mostly ones of 
which we are not yet aware. For the problems that we do encounter, the key challenge is to express them 
precisely in words (and sometimes in equations). Having done that, we have the ability to find the ideas to 
confront and resolve each such problem . 
•
We can apply the enormous leverage provided by the acceleration of technology. A notable example is achieving 
radical life extension through "a bridge to a bridge to a bridge" (applying today's knowledge as a bridge to 
biotechnology, which in turn will bridge us to the era of nanotechnology).
4
This offers a way to live indefinitely 
now, even though we don't yet have all the knowledge necessary for radical life extension. In other words we 
don't have to solve every problem today. We can anticipate the capability of technologies that are coming—in 
five years or ten years or twenty—and work these into our plans. That is how I design my own technology 
projects, and we can do the same with the large problems facing society and with our own lives. 
Contemporary philosopher Max More describes the goal of humanity as a transcendence to be "achieved through 
science and technology steered by human values."
5
More cites Nietzsche's observation "Man is a rope, fastened 
between animal and overman—a rope over an abyss." We can interpret Nietzsche to be pointing out that we have 
advanced beyond other animals while seeking to become something far greater. We might regard Nietzsche's reference 
to the abyss to allude to the perils inherent in technology, which I address in the next chapter. 
More has at the same time expressed concern that anticipating the Singularity could engender a passivity in 
addressing today's issues."
6
Because the enormous capability to overcome age-old problems is on the horizon, there 
may be a tendency to grow detached from mundane, present-day concerns. I share More's antipathy toward "passive 
Singularitarianism," One reason for a proactive stance is that technology is a double-edged sword and as such always 
has the potential of going awry as it surges toward the Singularity, with profoundly disturbing consequences. Even 
small delays in implementing emerging technologies can condemn millions of people to continued suffering and death. 

---

As one example of many, excessive regulatory delays in implementing lifesaving therapies end up costing many lives. 
(We lose millions of people per year around the world from heart disease alone.) 
More also worries about a cultural rebellion "seduced by religious and cultural urgings for 'stability' 'peace' and 
against 'hubris' and 'the unknown' "that may derail technological acceleration.
7
In my view any significant derailment 
of the overall advancement of technology is unlikely. Even epochal events such as two world wars (in which on the 
order of one hundred million people died), the cold war, and numerous economic, cultural, and social upheavals have 
failed to make the slightest dent in the pace of technology trends. But the reflexive, thoughtless antitechnology 
sentiments increasingly being voiced in the world today do have the potential to exacerbate a lot of suffering.