Will Human Evolution Pay Toll for Gadget Reliance?

Dr Oliver Curry is an evolutionary theorist at London School of Economics. For a broadcast on Bravo! Network, he gave a report on the future of human evolution - and it doesn't look good for the long term.

According to him, In the next 1000 years people's height will swell to as high as seven feet, and they'll live for some 120 years. But there will be a split within the next 3000 years between two genetic classes (probably also driven by socio-economic classes). A taller, handsome upper class will evolve as healthy, creative, attractive and smart. But another sub-species of human will evolve into what Dr. Curry describes as a dim-witted, short, squat, and ugly goblin-like version of the human race.

This class distinction will be made by our choices of sexual partners today, and can already be witnessed. Have you ever seen the Super K-Mart in Melvindale MI? If you need evidence for Dr. Curry's version of H.G. Wells "Time Machine" prophecy, observe the Wonder Bread and Hostess Twinkie aisle at the local discount grocery store. I could see a child keeping Hostess in business with allowance money, but an adult buying a box of plastic cakes to go home and sit down in front of some reality TV, is just asking to begat future "goblins".

According to Dr Curry it doesn't get much better for the rest of us. We're all destined to resemble domestic animals, as our reliance on technology will become our long term genetic downfall in around 10,000 years. He feels we'll be so spoiled by gadgetry that we'll have lost all social skills, we'll appear more juvenile and we'll start to have severe health and genetic problems.

It's an interesting study, Dr Curry. But I put it up there with contemplating the chances of an Ontario hockey team one day winning a Stanley Cup. Dr. Curry is simply a Technophobe, albeit a well-educated one. Physical evolution says nothing of the human spirit or the evolution of our consciousness. Technology doesn't exist to simply serve our creature comforts; the most fantastic advances in the most recent decades exist to serve our sense of soul and connectedness to things that matter in a deeply personal matter. Robert Whithead postulated that evolution existed to serve perception (or sensation) rather than survival. It's a more nuanced view of evolution that essentially says we like experiences more than life. The point of the last decade of high tech gadgetry has been to experience, not to simply survive.

Curry's pedestrian views are already explicitly outlined by anyone who's read H.G. Wells. If you've read any modern science fiction, you've seen far more enlightened speculations on the direction of human evolution.

As for the dual human sub-species, what Wells called Eloi (the taller handsome race) and Morlocks (Dr Curry's short, dim witted goblins) are going to be interdependent economically and socially. It's ironic that Dr. Curry says the Eloi will be the creative ones, since creativity and struggle are often intertwined. Future 'Morlocks' will likely be the true artists and the teenage Eloi will imitate famous Morlock artists much to the chagrin of Eloi parents. Of course, when the Eloi teenagers grow older those Morlock artists will be forever enshrined.

5 comments
Posted by Wayde on October 18,2006 at 12:13 PM
Interesting topics -

If you were severely disabled or had serious brain injury. Medical science could injected nanites to rebuilt and replace pieces of your brain to restore not only physical functions but cognizant ones. The recipient of that procedure would be living a form of virtual reality? Part of his/her mind is now a 'machine'.
Posted by Nokkar on October 18,2006 at 10:55 AM
I don't know if I believe we'll ever be completely virtual, not even in 3000 years. I think there's something in the human psyche that's so attached to the notion of realness and authenticity - I'm not sure we'll ever get past it, whether we accept that it's all based on perception or not. What's the point of living in a physical world if we can't experience it directly? Then again, if the lines between organic and machine do keep blurring, then maybe physical reality and virtual reality will be one in the same...
Posted by Alissa on October 18,2006 at 10:09 AM
Wow, good job Wayde.  I love the idea that 'we like experiences more than we like life', and that those experiences are what define us.  Like anything nowadays, with technology it's simply a matter of how you use it.  It doesn't have to make you lazy, isolated, or retarded in all things social and intellectual - in fact, if you pay close attention and integrate it properly into your life, your knowledge base and your character, it can bring you even further in all those areas.

It's such an incredible thing to have made all these advancements and to continue to make them - but it's only logical - and really, a part of human nature - that some will exploit them. Goblins and Eloi, i don't know if it will ever come to that.  In fact, i doubt it ever will. But the important thing is that we have a choice to use all these advancements to better ourselves if we want to...while still paying attention to the sunset.
Posted by Wayde on October 17,2006 at 5:28 PM
Not to get all "Aquarian" on you - but technology has taken the place of evolution. We are pretty much stuck where we are with these bags of mostly water we walk around in.

The idea that we won't grow the body of our choice from a tube in a few decades doesn't get it.

Got news for you Dr. Curry
Technology > Evolution

Want blue feathers? Cat's eyes? Vampire teeth? They'll be a simple pill away.

But blue feathers and vampire teeth miss the point. Technology seems to demonstrate that we like interconnectedness. We love being part of this emergent conciousness. In 3000 years we may forgo the whole idea of a body at all. The lines between organics and "machinery" will be completely blurred. And it won't matter.

I have no doubt that in 3000 years sentient lives will be lived complely virtually, forgoing physical 'reality' alltogether. Because ultimately what is reality but a flavor of perception?

It's connectedness to something 'real' we crave that we can 'touch' it is irrelvant. Can you touch a sunset or has a sunset touched you?
Posted by Nokkar on October 17,2006 at 2:13 PM
Curry's definitely read too much Wells. Every few years a speculative study like this comes out from some traditionalist who's afraid of the future. Last one I heard mentioned saw us as giant brains with atrophied bodies, living plugged into our computer survival networks. Not that our species is exactly crowning itself in glory, but theories like this aren't helping. And yeah, it's not just about survival anymore.