- 21 Jun 2013 00:04
#14258194
We like to discuss the economics of post-scarcity a lot, but we don't discuss the social impacts of how a Post-Scarcity Society (PSS) would evolve. Given that our culture of scarcity favors wealth accumulation as a status-signaler and motivator, these mechanisms would disappear and be replaced as a driving force for society. Other factors would come into play, particularly for selecting status, and this would have a major impact on how such a society operates. Now, as we have no examples of a PSS to date, this is can not be confirmed. However, I think it's worth bringing up the ideas of how society would evolve in a PSS.
Prior to discussing how such a society would unfold, I think it's worth mentioning gene-culture coevolution (Dual-Inheritance Theory; DIT). As a general principle, culture is in part shaped by the genes within the society, which can have varying impact on what behaviors are adaptive or acceptable; in turn, changes in society change the environment in which humans operate, changing mate-selection processes and, as a result, genes. What may be defined as more adaptive behavior in a society has an impact on allele frequencies, so that hobos and criminals tend to reproduce less than office workers (presumably).
One trend we're seeing today is the rise of Zero-Marginal Product (ZMP) labor; more work is making more workers redundant. This would normally lead to decreased fitness for ZMP workers; women simply tend to dismiss the perpetually unemployed. However, this trend is concurrent to a separate trend wherein those individuals better adapted towards accumulating wealth are choosing to dedicate themselves to it rather than raising kids; furthermore, ZMP is a recent and increasing phenomenon. Under such a transition, cultural and biological inertia would favor wealth-accumulation as a mechanism for mate-selection and status; however, as our cultural perception adapts, wealth accumulation would appear less and less important aside from biological impulse. Since, as stated, career-oriented people tend to have fewer children, some outright not at all, they aren't passing along those genes that favor being career-oriented, and typically not passing that cultural quirk on, either.
Those who acquire status, instead, would be academics, engineers, artists, and adventurers. Similar to how celebrities exist today, they'd exist in a PSS; however, rather than a market-dependent music/film industry, success would be reached from along parallel channels. More likely would be the singer who gains renown from reverbnation than sucking up to music execs. In layman's terms, we'd be selecting the music we find most aesthetic w/ out bias given us from Music City. In that regard, such a status as "rock star", wherein a person of musical or artistic talent accumulates great wealth as well, would be replaced. Their attraction would lie in their physique, music, and character. As such principles trickle down to more normal society, the "wealth-status" mechanism would reflect a different diversity of peoples; to some extent, character would take a much bigger role, or claim to be. However, women have always loved men in uniform, and someone whose "job" is important or influential would receive more attention and be rated higher in status. Similarly, having a lot of stuff, or expensive stuff, would become tacky; rather than being able to afford $100 shirts, we might see those who can find or develop more aesthetically pleasing clothing to take precedence.
Since part of life is status driving reproductive success, it seems logical that we'd seek adventure. Those who are capable of renovating technology and producing new ideas, such as "DefCAD", will receive more attention, as would risk-taking or social enhancing behaviors. We'd end up selecting for more inventive and adventurous types, as well as more socially-supportive types.
Given that, presumably, a PSS would allow for cloning and GE, we could expect to see gene-culture coevolution to increase at a rapid pace. Certainly in vitro would be non-limited, having no financial barriers to it; this could provide a mechanism for adding new alleles into our society. For instance, the fitness of Tas1r2 in humans, which would potentially eliminate our sweet buds, could be tested on up to 100 in vitro babies, which either increases their fitness or doesn't. Should it encourage a healthier diet, it's likely the reproductive fitness of those children would increase, spreading the allele; as the allele frequency increased, our dietary standards would change and our cuisine would adapt to it. That, of course, being one particular and minute example. It's worth pointing out, though, that the potential for highly adaptive mutations/alterations would increase rapidly w/ equitable access to genetic modifications. I do not believe, however, that the hype about "artificial/indentical/etc." humans would arise, as we've had contraception for 50-100 years and most of us are still accidents.
Prior to discussing how such a society would unfold, I think it's worth mentioning gene-culture coevolution (Dual-Inheritance Theory; DIT). As a general principle, culture is in part shaped by the genes within the society, which can have varying impact on what behaviors are adaptive or acceptable; in turn, changes in society change the environment in which humans operate, changing mate-selection processes and, as a result, genes. What may be defined as more adaptive behavior in a society has an impact on allele frequencies, so that hobos and criminals tend to reproduce less than office workers (presumably).
One trend we're seeing today is the rise of Zero-Marginal Product (ZMP) labor; more work is making more workers redundant. This would normally lead to decreased fitness for ZMP workers; women simply tend to dismiss the perpetually unemployed. However, this trend is concurrent to a separate trend wherein those individuals better adapted towards accumulating wealth are choosing to dedicate themselves to it rather than raising kids; furthermore, ZMP is a recent and increasing phenomenon. Under such a transition, cultural and biological inertia would favor wealth-accumulation as a mechanism for mate-selection and status; however, as our cultural perception adapts, wealth accumulation would appear less and less important aside from biological impulse. Since, as stated, career-oriented people tend to have fewer children, some outright not at all, they aren't passing along those genes that favor being career-oriented, and typically not passing that cultural quirk on, either.
Those who acquire status, instead, would be academics, engineers, artists, and adventurers. Similar to how celebrities exist today, they'd exist in a PSS; however, rather than a market-dependent music/film industry, success would be reached from along parallel channels. More likely would be the singer who gains renown from reverbnation than sucking up to music execs. In layman's terms, we'd be selecting the music we find most aesthetic w/ out bias given us from Music City. In that regard, such a status as "rock star", wherein a person of musical or artistic talent accumulates great wealth as well, would be replaced. Their attraction would lie in their physique, music, and character. As such principles trickle down to more normal society, the "wealth-status" mechanism would reflect a different diversity of peoples; to some extent, character would take a much bigger role, or claim to be. However, women have always loved men in uniform, and someone whose "job" is important or influential would receive more attention and be rated higher in status. Similarly, having a lot of stuff, or expensive stuff, would become tacky; rather than being able to afford $100 shirts, we might see those who can find or develop more aesthetically pleasing clothing to take precedence.
Since part of life is status driving reproductive success, it seems logical that we'd seek adventure. Those who are capable of renovating technology and producing new ideas, such as "DefCAD", will receive more attention, as would risk-taking or social enhancing behaviors. We'd end up selecting for more inventive and adventurous types, as well as more socially-supportive types.
Given that, presumably, a PSS would allow for cloning and GE, we could expect to see gene-culture coevolution to increase at a rapid pace. Certainly in vitro would be non-limited, having no financial barriers to it; this could provide a mechanism for adding new alleles into our society. For instance, the fitness of Tas1r2 in humans, which would potentially eliminate our sweet buds, could be tested on up to 100 in vitro babies, which either increases their fitness or doesn't. Should it encourage a healthier diet, it's likely the reproductive fitness of those children would increase, spreading the allele; as the allele frequency increased, our dietary standards would change and our cuisine would adapt to it. That, of course, being one particular and minute example. It's worth pointing out, though, that the potential for highly adaptive mutations/alterations would increase rapidly w/ equitable access to genetic modifications. I do not believe, however, that the hype about "artificial/indentical/etc." humans would arise, as we've had contraception for 50-100 years and most of us are still accidents.
"We learn to shield ourselves from sleights and veiled abuse with our massive balls. Hope you all have them."- Igor
- By Tainari88
- By litwin
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Deutschmania