Neo-Anthropo-Something-or-Other

Previously, the concept of Neo-AnthropoGenic Psychology, or NAG Psych, was considered as the natural outgrowth of a childhood filled with science fiction dreams and real science wonders. But where is the science? What is the science that can fuel this new engine for relevant study? Here’s barely a starting point, though a strong one. Over the years, I have given much attention to futurists like Ray Kurzweil and have been fascinated by the idea of exponential change that is largely proving true, as Moore’s Law continues to meet and exceed its namesake’s own predictions. Kurzweil’s record on predictions is exceptional, second only to his very optimistic and insightful promotion of a coming Singularity. He is not alone in painting this picture: Aubrey de Grey’s approach to death as a disease that needs an effective treatment, if not a cure; Peter Diamandis’ crowd sourcing incentives to press inventions and his positive outlook on a future with great abundance; Stuart Hameroff’s Quantum Consciousness Theory and its activist Amit Gotswami; Hiroshi Ishiguro’s work in robotics; George Church’s genomics and synthetic life creation, and so many more make up the parade of technology believers. This group, however, does not fulfill the criteria for a complete study in Neo-AnthropoGenic Psychology.

To the recipe there must be added the brilliant skeptics like Miguel Nicolelis, MIT neuroscientist and pioneer of brain-activated devices, who says a brain cannot as simple as an algorithm, which is at the the core of the Singularity; Joseph Weizenbaum, Rogerian psychotherapist and inventor of ELIZA, an early chatbot that behaved as a Rogerian psychotherapist would and fooled many, which made Weizenbaum a lifelong opponent to the development of AI, and still more. It should be noted that Nicolelis does believe that machines will be integrated into humans over time to augment their abilities, and Weizenbaum’s invention launched research leading to virtual therapists today that studies show people interacting with the VR therapist share deeper issues more readily. These are in keeping with NAG Psych’s mapping of two sometimes intersecting paths of human-generated evolution: machine-based (or AI) and bio-based.

As all the concepts began arranging themselves visually, it became clear in the works of the current technologists and futurists where optimism reigned that an objective study into the psychological impact of not only present-day media, but also predicted changes was lacking. The few psychological discussions dealt mainly with ethics–and that, too, remains a very essential element–but no one was testing theory under these new conditions with a specific goal to understand the effects of the current and coming advances, not as a means of measuring whether we should pursue these high technology goals of strong AI or longevity with the potential for immortality. Neo-AnthropoGenic Psychology seeks to understand how classical offline theory like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Erikson’s stages of development, and many more apply to an online world.

My fundamental argument assumes these movements are inevitable. Our choice in the scientific and social communities is whether it will only be the fringes that follow these paths, or mainstream science will play the major role and as such have greater say in the ethical direction it takes. The human psyche is trapped within its physical constraints of evolution for the time being. We are learning the brain is far more plastic than once believed, but where do the limits lie? Will we be able to adapt to the world and lives we are developing in petrie dishes and assembly lines? How will we respond to strong AI (AGI) years hence when the supposed Singularity arrives? Will being “upgraded” become a necessity to stay competitive? If there is a growing income inequality gap now, how will that figure into a world where money can buy an improved brain? Finally, as noted in the TED e-book Homo Evolutis, are we witnessing speciation within the hominid family as Homo sapiens begins a new branch?

All these questions fit neatly under the umbrella of Neo-AnthropoGenic Psychology. Do you have any to add?

Conceiving Neo-AnthropoGenic Psychology

Ever wonder what it would be like if the science fiction of your childhood were real? Well, that’s the way it is for me and other members of my generation caught between the tidal waves of Boomers and Millennials. We didn’t have a war to rally behind or protest. Our war was Cold, and it was leftovers at that. We’ve generated few world leaders as yet who have risen to the heights of historical. Instead, we’re made up of a lot of impossible dreamers, weaned on Pong, PacMan and Space Invaders, and determined to get to Mars. Our future was laid out for us on the big screen in movies like Star Wars, RoboCop, 2010, and Blade Runner. And we took it seriously.

We were the dreamers turned explorers as we set out on ancient digital ships like the Commodore 64 and the Apple IIC, boards that would shake the confidence of any surfer today. We had no fear, and that served us well in navigating toward lands better left alone, trailing thread behind us, as we sewed together the Web envisioned by our forebear engineers. As more people came aboard, something wonderful happened. Instead of shrinking what was available, it only increased the possibilities. The framework may have been laid by others, but we built the Internet and an even larger “we” continues to define it today: A global intelligence. From this new speed-of-light collaborative intelligence have come new technologies across all fields that reach beyond the personal contribution. The possibilities in medicine, longevity, computer and space sciences, to name a few, have become whatever we can imagine collectively. We have taken control of our own evolution. And there are billions more waiting to join.

New technologies can increase physical and mental abilities. They can ease the rigors of life, and not only extend life, but make that extension more palatable and enjoyable. What it cannot do is accelerate the evolution of the psyche, or the mind. Understanding how these changes impact us as people is the central tenet of Neo-Anthropogenic Psychology. There have been decades of research devoted to the developmental bases of behavior, but somehow they forgot the chapter on the once-disabled, now-augmented super-human. Take Nigel Ackland. With a prosthetic hand that can hold an egg, turn 360 degrees, and shake (or crush) your puny human hand, it is hard to decide who is disabled. Perhaps as this technology progresses, there will be elective surgery for augmentation.

Neo-Anthropogenic Psychology seeks to understand why it is when we see a mechanical “dog,” we can alternately fear it and feel sympathy for it, despite its lack of resemblance to an actual dog. Further, after using drones and their partners on the battlefield, what happens when the robot soldier returns home from war? How do they find job satisfaction competing with other soldiers for jobs? There are calls for more autonomy in the field of war, yet are we ready to grant them their independence?

But NAG Psychology doesn’t concern itself with just the battlefield or the augmented human. There is also the prospect of the deep reaches of space, where many elements of new technology literally mean the difference between life and death. Even studying the impact of social media as the primary connection between a Mars-traveling spacecraft and their human family and friends at home can create a baseline of sanity necessary to complete the mission. As a species, we are moving further from the Earth in more than the literal form.

Technology is a fundamental learning, and building the foundation for what this does to our developing psyche can set us on a strong trajectory for this inevitable change. Ignoring it can leave our civilization open to the erosion seen onscreen only a short time ago, an erosion that cedes our temporary self-evolution to the machines we’ve built to enable it.