Thought Experiment 7

Here's another question for you. I really would love your answers:

Do you think the world will be a better or worse place 100 years from now?

That's a good question. Of course, no one knows. Anything can happen in an instant. Just look at Japan for example. Of course they live on 4 fault lines, and it wasn't a surprise that a big quake hit them, but how big it was, how it affected them, couldn't be anticipated properly.

I guess this question is more about the answerer than the asker. What kind of person am I?

Optimistic? Do I foresee a utopian society where everyone is happy and healthy like onboard the Starship Enterprise? Where basically everyone has all of their needs met, has satisfying work, has great healthcare, and has an exciting life?

Or Pessimistic? Is it going to be a dark, grim, distopian society where there are a few Haves and many more Have-nots? Where health is only for the Haves, as is good food, clean water, and justice. Where most of society is basically enslaved to the few Haves, and the lives of the Have-Nots are miserable and horrid.

Or, perhaps I am Pragmatic (ooh yes, that's me!) where I think things will probably be pretty much the same as they are now. Yes, that's how I see it. Although really it can go any direction, and I'm quite aware of that. But I think that there will still be some people with all the power and all the money, and most of us will be getting by here in the US. Other countries like China and India will probably change so drastically with their budding economies that no one can predict what they will be like.

What Scientific Concept Would Improve Everyone's Cognitive Toolkit?

Recently The Edge published their annual Question, "What Scientific Concept Would Improve Everyone's Cognitive Toolkit?" which they posed to 164 people.

"The term 'scientific"is to be understood in a broad sense as the most reliable way of gaining knowledge about anything, whether it be the human spirit, the role of great people in history, or the structure of DNA. A "scientific concept" may come from philosophy, logic, economics, jurisprudence, or other analytic enterprises, as long as it is a rigorous conceptual tool that may be summed up succinctly (or "in a phrase") but has broad application to understanding the world."

Here are just a few excerpts that I think you might find interesting:

Sam Harris: We Are Lost In Thought

...Thinking is the substance of every social relationship and cultural institution we have. It is also the foundation of science. But our habitual identification with the flow of thought — that is, our failure to recognize thoughts as thoughts, as transient appearances in consciousness — is a primary source of human suffering and confusion. ...
...Our religions are clearly false, even if certain classically religious experiences are worth having. If we want to actually understand the mind, and overcome some of the most dangerous and enduring sources of conflict in our world, we must begin thinking about the full spectrum of human experience in the context of science.
But we must first realize that we are lost in thought.

P.Z. Myers: The Mediocrity Principle

...The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. The universe does not revolve around you, this planet isn't privileged in any unique way, your country is not the perfect product of divine destiny, your existence isn't the product of directed, intentional fate, and that tuna sandwich you had for lunch was not plotting to give you indigestion. Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws — laws that apply everywhere and to everything, with no special exemptions or amplifications for your benefit — given variety by the input of chance.