Stratification by Biology

In the Cato Unbound discussion of Brink Lindsey's (excellent) book, Julian Sanchez writes:

On the economic front, since everyone seems to be focused on healthcare, it's not entirely clear to me which way technological progress in the medical sector is going to push. It may be that ever-rising costs make clear that public provision of cutting-edge care for everyone is unsustainable. But, paradoxically, medical innovation might also undermine the sense that we live in a "post-scarcity" economy, even in the colloquial sense. Suppose, for instance, that Ray Kurzweil is right that cascading and accelerating development will soon entail that buying a few more years of life with current state-of-the art tech allows people to survive until the next innovation, which will give them enough of a boost to reach the next horizon, and so on indefinitely. It might become possible to radically extend the human lifespan, but only at massive cost. Would we countenance a situation where the very wealthy enjoyed a century or more of middle-aged vigor while the rest of us were stooped and grey after a mere 80 or 90 years? Or would our conception of what constitutes an acceptable amount of "survival" expand to fill the available space? This may sound like sci-fi speculation, but again, if we consider the scale at which Lindsey's argument works, if it works, we need to consider the kind of changes we should anticipate by midcentury, not the next midterms.

I'm currently involved in finishing up what aspires to be a very sober and serious book about the Republican Party and class politics, and sober and serious books don't, by definition, traffic in Kurzweil-style theories about the coming availability of radical life extension. Nonetheless, I have a strong suspicion that something like what Julian summons up - some form of radical transhumanish innovation that's available to the rich long before it trickles down to the middle-class and the poor - is going to radically change the landscape of Western politics at some point over the next century or three.

I, of course, will immediately seek a leadership position in the Butlerian Jihad when that moment arrives - which again, isn't really something that you can say in a sober and serious book about public policy. That's why they invented blogs, I guess.

Update: Just to be clear - yes, as Matt says, the Butlerian Jihad was directed against thinking machines, not transhuman genetic engineering projects. But I think the spirit of the Butlerian Jihad would apply equally well to both. Clearly, this makes me a theological liberal.

Comments

Luddite bloggers of the world, unite!

Posted by LaFollette Progressive | July 25, 2007 10:11 AM

I'm currently involved in finishing up what aspires to be a very sober and serious book about the Republican Party and class politics

Is it a very serious, thoughtful, argument that has never been made in such detail or with such care?

Posted by Freddie | July 25, 2007 10:36 AM

i am struck by the fact that adam smith, david ricardo and thomas malthus simply could not anticipate the impact of technology on productivity and quality, even though they lived through one of the inflection points in social history mediated by just those changes.

Posted by razib | July 25, 2007 12:21 PM

Why on earth would radically life-altering technologies have no place in a sober and serious book about politics? Surely you've read F. M. Kamm's stuff about, say, limbo-man?

Posted by Bobcat | July 25, 2007 12:26 PM

Do you really not want to hang around and see your great great great grandkids?

The current US healthcare system is oriented toward expensive late life care to well off Americans. This really doesn't raise life expectancy very much because typically if you fix one problem another medical problem is coming real soon.

I am objectively pro-singularity, but we shouldn't confuse what we are doing now with radical life extending therapies.

Posted by Joeo | July 25, 2007 1:18 PM

Well, I disagree with your position on the Butlerian Jihad. Even after the update. Bene Gesserit's had life extending practices unrelated to spice that weren't part of the Jihad, same with the Cogitors, and the Tleilaxu.

Posted by crack | July 25, 2007 1:38 PM

Massive life-extension won't happen in the next few decades. I'd guess that the current 2 years more per decade in life-expectancy will continue. Medical research is an extremely slow process.

Posted by Steve Sailer | July 25, 2007 7:11 PM

I see a contradiction between being opposed to turning off a life-support machine in the 21st century and being opposed to turning one on in the 22nd century.

jenny

Posted by jenny | July 25, 2007 10:23 PM