Customer Reviews

Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies -- and What It Means to Be Human

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(15)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Imagine a world in which human beings no longer worry about procuring food. Imagine a world in which disease becomes a thing of the past. Imagine a world in which mortality gives way to human/machine hybrids that can live for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Sounds good, doesn't it? If so, imagine a different sort of world, a world in which a small class of people in possession of this sort of technology genetically engineers babies. Imagine a world in which these same people turn traditional humans into slaves. Imagine, even, the technology in this possible future spiraling out of control and turning the planet into gray sludge. Sounds scary, doesn't it? These two scenarios play a central role in Joel Garreau's "Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies--And What It Means to Be Human." Another scenario plays out in the book, one in which human beings prevail over sudden technological changes and, by doing so, accept or reject which forms of "radical evolution" to adopt. The subsequent conversation on these three themes fills pages with marvels that boggle the imagination. Could even a fraction of these events really occur in the next twenty to thirty years?

Garreau thinks so, and he begins his examination of GRIN (Genetic, robotic, information, and nanotechnological) advancements by seeking out the wunderkinds working at DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency). These are the folks brainstorming such projects as vaccines to prevent pain, suits that can allow soldiers to carry hundreds of pounds of weight with ease, and dozens of other incredible inventions. It was their predecessor, ARPA, which created what we now know as the Internet. As amazing as the ideas flowing out of DARPA sound, it's nothing compared to what inventors such as Ray Kurzweil see in our immediate future. Garreau's conversation with this scientist ushers in the first of our three possible destinies, something the author labels the "Heaven" scenario. In this situation, human beings essentially become deities. Immortality thanks to nanotechnology and genetics research becomes the norm. Computers emerge with the power of hundreds of human brains. Heady stuff, indeed. Unfortunately heaven must have a hell, and that's where people like Bill Joy and Francis Fukuyama enter the picture. They see our future as a bleak existence in which out of control nanotechnology devours every resource on the planet, or one in which humans use this fabulous technology against one another.

Both the heaven and hell scenarios paint human beings as a passive force in the face of increasing technology. The "Prevail" scenario takes the human factor and places it center stage. A position advocated by a guy named Jaron Lanier and others, prevailing over the rise of GRIN essentially means people take a hands on role in new technologies. Rather than losing control of robots and genetic engineering, argues Lanier, humans will use them to strengthen the connections between individuals. The example of cell phones, where people use them to stay in constant touch with others in ways unanticipated by their creators, serves as a prime example of how we bend technology to our will instead of the other way around. No new social classes will arise in the prevail scenario based on technology, nor will the world give up the ghost because of nanotechnology run amok. One assumes that genetic engineering will not sink to the sort of eugenics programs National Socialist Germany dabbled in during the 1940s. Prevail means humanity will change, since change is essential to the human experience regardless of culture or time, but we all will still keep that nebulous essence that makes each of us human.

Intriguing ideas and predictions abound in Garreau's study, far too many to document in a short review. It is possible, however, to point out the flaws in the book. There are several. Perhaps the most annoying aspect of "Radical Evolution" is the author's penchant for a "gee whiz" writing style. It's like reading a book written about Superman by cub reporter Jimmy Olsen. Then there is Garreau's almost unquestioning assumption that the marvels documented in the book constitute an absolute future reality. Sorry to burst your bubble, Joel, but a list of futurists proved incorrect over the ages would run the length of a New York City phone book. The truth is that none of us can adequately predict what will happen two weeks from now, let alone what sort of things could occur in twenty, thirty, or one hundred years. Then there's a troubling emphasis in the book on simply documenting the things science could do for us instead of on the possible problems that could sidetrack any one of these advancements. Garreau does examine a few potential roadblocks to the march of GRIN, but the focus definitely falls on the wonderful and awesome.

I'm happy to see another reviewer identify what is surely the most egregious problem with the book, namely a lack of discussion on transportation in general and fuels in particular. How will any of this stuff come to pass if a substitute for oil does not emerge? Petroleum products aren't just important in transportation; they also provide a number of synthetics and lubricants that technology cannot function without. How can we solve the food problem if we cannot invent a means of transportation that runs on something other than gasoline? Anyway, I'm being a bit harsh on Joel Garreau. "Radical Evolution" is an entertaining and informative read that also poses fundamental questions about our relationship to technology. If the section at the back of the book is any indication, Garreau isn't the only guy writing about what GRIN might mean to the future of the human race. I imagine this book would serve as a good introduction for those seeking to learn more about our possible technological future. I give this one four stars for sheer interest.

Garreau takes a scenario planner's view of what he considers some inevitable advancements in the GRIN technologies (genetics, robotics, information technology, and nanotechnology), which will enable humans to exert radical and powerful upon themselves, each other, and the environment. These four technologies are interacting synergistically, therefore multiplying the power and impact of each. But even more importantly, according to Garreau, the pace of change itself is accelerating faster than a lot of people realize.

For Garreau, the result is that there will shortly (within 30 years) arrive a massive tide of change that will sweep a substantial portion of humanity up, and leave others behind. Garreau wonders if the different portions of humanity will even recognize each other as human. Should we call it the geek's version of the fundamentalist Christian idea of The Rapture?

This coming tide is called by some the Singularity, and by others the Spike (think of the graph that slopes gradually and then curves up to the top right at the end). Garreau tries to be present both sides of the debate about whether this can and should happen, but he's unsuccessful.

For instance, there is some contrary evidence to the accelerating returns argument. Yes, computing hardware follows Moore's law, and so do several other technologies. But do those lead to radical social upheavals? If things are really accelerating, they should. Look at the changes introduced between 1900-1950 (roughly): the combustion engine, the automobile, the airplane, the jet engine, the rocket, the telephone, the radio, the television, nuclear power & weapons, and the computer. Each of them had a massive impact.

If we're really experiencing radical evolution, the subsequent 50 years should have been even more radical. Yes, we have the personal computer, the Internet/web/email, but those are each more than 30 years old. The human genome project is a magnificent achievement, and though the cost of sequencing a base pair has followed the similar price/performance curve of the computer processors, it hasn't spawned any radical changes yet. The CD has now been around longer than the 8 track (good thing too). And we're still travelling via car and plane with combustion engines, and we aren't doing much with our rockets.

I think it's possible we're in a curve, but I'm not convinced. I think Garreau could have grappled with the contrary evidence a little better.

He does give a fair amount of attention to the respectable naysayers like Bill Joy and Francis Fukayama who think we should voluntarily or legislatively forswear certain lines of research and the use of certain technologies. He gives less attention (and I think it's a mistake) to the darker currents to the luddite movement, like Islamic and other forms of violent religious fundamentalism, or the violent environmentalists like some members of PETA, ELF, and Earth First. He mentions Ted Kazynsky (the Unabomber) in passing, but doesn't really connect his sentiments to the radical violence it spawned, and could spawn again.

I loved reading about Jaron Lanier (who is basically the hero of the book), and also the personality profiles of Bill Joy and the wizards at DARPA. But he leaves a large part of the community out. I don't think he gives enough attention to religious thinkers and ethicists (he briefly talks about Leon Kass and Michael Sandel, both on the President's Bioethics committee); he complains that traditional religions don't have anything to contribute to the coming Singularity. That's probably true, so perhaps this omission is more due to the fact that most religious leaders' haven't really grappled with the implications of the Curve, but I don't get the sense Garreau really tried. Just one example that occurred to me when reading the book was the Heaven Scenario bears a marked resemblance to the Christian notion of the Millenium, where the lamb lays down with the lion, men live to the age of a tree, and everyone dwells in peace, prosperity, and freedom. (See the Old Testament prophet Isaiah, for instance.)

So while this book is a much broader tour de force than the more geeky focus of Kurweil's or Gilder's books (which I enjoy), it still ends up being a conversation between geeks--Kurzweil on one side, Joy on the other, and Lanier in the middle.

Most of my points here are quibbles. It's a very insightful book, one that I highly recommend, no matter where you land on the can/can't;should/shouldn't quadrant.

Sometimes you'll hear people say that science and technology have outrun morality and ethics. Not true. The futures outlined in Garreau's book have all been anticipated by decades of science fiction and elsewhere. Technology has only outrun our morality because we've surrendered it to the cult of the new. We have outsourced our ethics to professionals and those with vested interests. We have abdicated our right to moral judgement as humans, preferring to be entertained and served by our tools, without really thinking carefully about what they will make us.

We can influence events. Yes, there are powerful forces that can influence the direction of events, but I truly believe the future doesn't just happen passively and inevitably, like the course of some river. The future is CREATED, it is imagined and realized by visionaries who work and sacrifice for it. We need to stand up for timeless human values like love, honesty, loyalty, respect for life, and caring for the weak and disadvantaged. And if we believe in those things, then we must also oppose those who argue that these values are obsolete, meaningless, or a hindrance to progress. We have a chance to create a future we want to live in. But only if we pay attention.

I've admired Joel Garreau ever since I read and reviewed his really insightful The Nine Nations of North America. I am glad to have bought and read this book, it is certainly worth reading, but it is somewhat unbalanced. However (this is an edit of the original review), now that I have read Ray Kurzweil's book, The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology a techno-geek rendition of the same technologies and their future, I have to give Garreau higher marks--while this book may lack soul, it does come closer to its titular objective than does Kurzweil's. Both are worth buying and reading together.

He focused on four technologies abbeviated as GRIN: Genetics, Robotics, Information, and Nano. Others have focused on the integration of Nano, Information, Bio-Technology and Cognitive Science (NIBC), and I would have been happier with this book if it focused more on the thinking side of the future rather than the bio-mechanical side.

The other area where I felt the book was disappointing was in its almost total acceptance at face value of all that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is doing to elevate soldier-humans, giving them super human strength, acute mental perception almost to the point of telepathy, and so on. I could not help but feel, over and over as I read this book, that if DARPA were to apply its considerable talents to waging peace and addressing poverty, disease, water scarcity, energy independence, and the urgent need for global education that does not require packing kids like rats into a stiffling anti-creative environment (and making them get up at 0600), that we would all be better off.

The author talks about the implications for human transformation in all of this, but missing from his schema is the moral dimension. This is closer to a comic book super-hero depiction than it is to a renaissance man's moral and cultural enlightenment, and that, in my view, is where this book falls short--it lacks soul.

I recommend that readers consider the books by Tom Atlee, The Tao of Democracy: Using Co-Intelligence to Create a World That Works for All and Margaret Wheatley Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World as well as the book The World Cafe: Shaping Our Futures Through Conversations That Matter to gain an alternative perspective on what it might mean to be human in the future, despite the over-whelming incursions of technology into our humanity.

I first read Mr. Garreau's previous book "The Nine Nations of North America." At the time I was trying to decide where I wanted to live. He pegged me like an entomologist peggs a bug with a pin to it's place in the collection. (If you're curious, I found my home in the Big Empty.)

Then his next book Edge Cities, about the definition of new and growning centers of culture, business, etc around the edge of the Big Cities that have become too big, too crime ridden, too expensive again helped define what I was looking for.

Now he's done this one on what the future may hold. He investigates a lot of leading edge scientific projects and examines what the future may be like if they truly come to pass bringing the 'benefit' that they promise. He then ties these into three senarios that he calls Heaven, Hell and Prevail.

His descriptions of where science may be going is great. His forecasts of the future remind me of the old saying that 'Predicting the future is easy, it's being right that's difficult.'

Whatever the future holds, it won't be as forecast. It'll be something different. Perhaps, indeed, almost certainly it will contain elements of all three senarios Mr. Garreau is describing. But it will also have big changes forced on it by the every increasing shortage of oil. The AIDS pandemic is just getting a good start, and so far at least I don't see any immediate end. Warfare is changing with al-Qaida on the one hand and the nuclear aspirations of North Korea and Iran.

This book is a great attempt at laying out one direction the world can go, it's worth reading for that alone. Just keep an open mind.

This book has a lot of meat for those futureheads who are hungry for knowledge about the possibilities for wired cyborg posthumans and transhumans of the ultra future, but for the general interested reader there is little to really chew on. Joel Garreau has compiled some impressive research into cutting edge technologies that will either improve or disrupt the lives of humans (depending on one's point of view), and emerging theories into how human nature will adapt or collapse in the face of superadvanced technology. Especially prevalent here is coverage of the most futuristic trends in computing and genetic engineering, which may and will seriously impact what it means to be "human." This is all good brain candy, but Jarreau's philosophical goals in the book never really come together, and his writing style mostly consists of rapid-fire examples with little flow or continuity, the hyping of isolated incidents and inventions as trends, and vast generalizations about human nature. That makes this attempt at deep philosophy feel more like a shallow stream of disconnected ideas.

The book is built around three pretty well-defined scenarios that Garreau has named Heaven, Hell, and Prevail. These, respectively, are the technological utopia of the rosiest sci-fi novels, the anti-human dystopia of the darkest cyberpunk, and a scenario in which humans ably adapt and improve upon technological trends. These three scenarios are each fairly believable in themselves, but Garreau's construction of them here is based on limited data, mostly utilizing the pontifications of just one leading theorist for each of the three (Ray Kurzweil, Bill Joy, and Jaron Lanier, respectively). Also, Jarreau appears to assume philosophically that the real future will consist of just one of these, or maybe some plausible combination of the three, with no exploration of other possibilities. Another especially exasperating aspect of Garreau's philosophy is that he tends to briefly mention the problems with his future theories, especially the tendency of humans for infighting and leaving each other behind, but then ignores these very real issues while formulating the book's theories. That makes this book more inclusive, but less useful, than the typical technological cheerleading of technogeeks. So while this book is possibly a treat for those who crave knowledge of cutting edge gadgets and futurist theorization, Garreau has not succeeded in his intended philosophical exploration of how humans can remain human while becoming better than human. [~doomsdayer520~]

To my mind this book is about the most important subject mankind has on its agenda , that subject is the very nature of humanity itself, what it is , and what we should strive to make it to be. Because of the remarkable developments in several different areas of scientific and technological research Mankind is now facing kinds of decisions that it has never faced before. In this present work Joel Garreau talks to a wide variety of key researchers and thinkers and tries to understand the shape the human future might take, or rather be made into. He proposes a number of different scenarios, one called Heaven involves enhanced, 'perfect' human beings living forever in perpetual happiness. The second called Hell involves one or many of the Technologies getting out of hand, and Mankind perhaps through creation of hungry little nanobeings being eaten up by one of its own laboratory productions. The third scenario which Garreau calls ' prevailing ' involves Mankind somehow contending with both positives and negatives and emerging strengthened if transformed in incredible ways, and going on the development of its history and interaction with the Cosmos.
It is important to note that Garreau is not predicting anything with certainty , telling us in Hegelian, Marxian or any other ideological terms what the future and Mankind must be . He very much gives a sense of an incredible mix of alternatives whose outcomes are uncertain. He does however suggest a principle that whatever can happen will happen, and that the future will somehow contain a mix of all the alternatives taken together.
My own feeling is at the moment anyway slightly less than euphoric. It is not simply that the nuclear nonproliferation treaty is as I write this about to be broken open by North Korea and Iran's going openly nuclear. It is not simply that is that we are to face a greater danger from nuclear disaster than we faced even at the time of the cold war, when there were only two sides. That is one element. The development of a fanatic radical Islam whose religion is totalitarian closed- minded terrorism and whose aim is to dominate the world, is another major human development not considered in this book. Another one as another Amazon reviewer has pointed out is the rapidly accelerating fossil fuel crisis facing mankind as a whole, and the widening poverty- gap given by globalization. In other words these radical technological developments are occurring in a world in which there is increasing geopolitical chaos.
The ' old mankind' is in this very much alive , and ready I am sure to make use of whatever destructive technologies ' the new mankind' can provide to possibly enslave us all.
Genetics, robotics, information technology, nanotechnology ,all these are that is, not developing in a vacuum. And mankind which is in such great disorder now may go into ' the next phase of its evolution ' dragging along with it a mass of people who will make the transition to a brave new world of lesser significance.
All this is to say that when Ray Kurzweil's mind becomes a computer chip and an immortal machine the rest of us may still be suffering from various physical and nervous disorders including the Depression which so many researchers say is increasing dramatically in our own time. It appears that the more perfect the future becomes for a few of us, the worse it is for many of the rest.
I very much want to read this book more deeply as I know there is a great deal of information , and perspective I have missed.
I must admit however , that I have a certain skeptical relation to promises of perfect futures , especially when I have such a strong sense not only of the conflicts between good and evil, but between ideal ends and ' human goods ' themselves.
In other words whatever will be ten or twenty or fifty or five hundred years from now we must hope that the ' ruling creatures' of this earth and surrounding regions use their own God - given freedom and power of decision to enhance truth , goodness and beauty , eternal values.
Whether that is possible, whether what I am saying even makes sense or will make sense , I can't be sure.
For now anyway I am going off to ' davven Minchah' ( pray the afternoon prayer of Judaism) i.e. Whatever our condition and however we push our own power I believe that we will still need the appeal to a Transcendent Power to make our lives ultimately meaningful and fulfilling.

Joel Garreau's provocative new book, RADICAL EVOLUTION, begins with a thought experiment. Sometime in the future, your young daughter returns from her first year at law school. She comes home talking not about torts or civil procedure or the Rule in Shelley's Case, but about her classmates. And these classmates, as it turns out, are a bit different. Many of them have been, in some way or another, "enhanced." She ticks off the various ways that the enhancement takes effect --- internal wireless modems that download any piece of information needed directly into the brain, something akin to telepathy, self-healing, and (at least in theory) immortality in its own self.

Garreau uses this thought experiment to ask the serious questions about the coming revolutions in genetics and technology that are radically changing human evolution --- and whether such radical changes are beneficial or possibly ultimately harmful to the very idea of humanity itself. My question is more basic: why are all these smart, talented, "enhanced" people choosing to go to law school?

Garreau doesn't answer that one (as well he might not). Instead, he makes the point that if anyone in the real world really had these sort of powers, we would actually have a referent for it in the pages of Marvel Comics, in the person of Captain America. Garreau visits the super-secret defense laboratories of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), where they're working on super-suits that could do for the soldiers of the future what Captain America got with an exposure to "vita-rays." And since the most well-known product from DARPA research is this Internet on which you are reading this very book review at this very moment, it's a good bet that at least some of the gee-whiz technologies they're working on will pay off, and pay off big.

The best and most intriguing parts of RADICAL EVOLUTION are the parts about laboratories and the people who work in them, and the different applications that the new genetic and nanotechnology scientists are coming up with. The research --- which is either promising or horrifying, depending on your point of view of any given issue --- is compelling and important, and could change our world forever. There's no one better than Joel Garreau to explain this.

Garreau is an underappreciated national treasure. His first two books were landmarks in their fields. THE NINE NATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA is more timely now than it was when it was published in the early 1980s; it does more to explain the so-called "red state/blue state" divide than pretty much all the political commentary written since the 2000 election. And EDGE CITY described the ongoing revolution in city and suburban planning. RADICAL EVOLUTION purports to do the same for the technologies that promise to change our bodies, our genomes, and possibly even our nature as human beings.

That RADICAL EVOLUTION doesn't quite meet the gold standard of Garreau's earlier works may have more to do with the unsettled nature of the technology than anything else. Both NINE NATIONS and EDGE CITY had to do, largely, with maps, with tracking the course of the shifting borders between East and West, North and South, downtown and suburbia. There aren't any maps to speak of with the emerging technologies --- or if they are, they're of the fragmented, medieval variety. Here there be monsters.

Garreau's work is divided into different scenarios. One that he calls "Heaven" is largely the vision of Ray Kurzweil, one of the founders of modern assistive technology. (About half of the technologies discussed in RADICAL EVOLUTION are designed to be assistive technologies to help make people with disabilities more independent.) Kurzweil imagines a future where the positive aspects of the new technology are available freely to everyone, allowing each of us to customize our own selves to the point where immortality --- or complete spiritual freedom from the body, if that's what you want --- is more than a promise or a legend or a fable. Countering Kurzweil's vision are the prophets of doom, led by Silicon Valley pioneer Bill Joy, who worry that unrestricted experimentation with self-replicating nanobots could result in the entire planet --- you, me, and everything around us, right down to the core --- turned into food for invisible, ravenous robots. This "grey goo" nightmare is cataloged by Garreau in his "Hell" scenario, along with other dystopias of the "Brave New World" variety.

C.S. Lewis wrote that the greatest evil "is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lit offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices." This is almost entirely the environment in which RADICAL EVOLUTION takes place, in the laboratories, in the offices, in the academies. We do
not, as of yet, know the nature of these technologies or what they will do for us --- or to us. The promise is that they will help us, cure us, or possibly even assist us in transforming into something beautiful and splendid. The danger is that they will destroy us totally or take away some of that which makes us human.

Garreau brings up two other scenarios --- "Prevail" and "Transcend," which posit that there will be a struggle in dealing with the new technologies, but that the worst of the "Hell" scenarios can be avoided. But there is no way, now, to know which of these scenarios will win out. Perhaps the most frightening thing about the impact of these new technologies is that they leave Garreau --- one of the brightest, most perceptive people out there --- not knowing what will happen next. RADICAL EVOLUTION, if it does nothing else, helps us realize that there's a lot left to understand, and an uncertain future ahead.

--- Reviewed by Curtis Edmonds

Garreau sheds a definitive light on the subject of technology, and our current human endeavors that may not be known by the masses. Too often after college or grade school people separate themselves from academic reality, and even more so, especially in America, from reading in general. Some may say all of this is "fantasy" or science-fiction posited as constructive journalism, with those I have to dissent. This book gives credible references and attempts, by my interpretation, to draw forth a biased perspective. Those that naysay on the subject matter of this book are overlooking the fact that everything we as humans have created started off as a thought, and subsequent to that thought we achieved the fiscal support and intellectual minds to experiment, persevere and manifest that thought through trial and error into reality. I think by far, one of the most vivid elements of this book is how well it shows how close the gap of science-fiction and reality really is. The thing that elicits the most fear is the fact that these are the items of technology that are declassified or been around for a while; what about those that are classified? How far are we ahead in the realm of technology when it comes our inconspicuous technology?

The book itself is a gem for the possibility of the future and current expeditions in technology, both theoretically and practically. All of this is presented in a very eloquent fashion that exemplifies Garreau's superb writing skills that can even appeal to the laymen. The level of detail that Garreau delves shows how well researched the book actually is. Within the first forty pages of the book there is a myriad of examples showing the foresight of the human population and its technology. This piece of literature is also a very good initial point to begin in reference to our technological endeavors, because it harnesses so much of it. With thirty-four pages of end notes and references, along with thirty-three pages of suggested reading, Garreau gives those that are interested in learning more about the subjects, and/or those interested in refuting his work, plenty of information to vet the information at hand.

The only negatives I can bring are: Garreau over extends the need for "painting" the picture. There is a lot of excessive and unnecessary supplemental writing in the book, but in his defense, keeps it from being so dry; also, it lacks pictures, I would think that would be essential for investigative reporting.

Some quotes that standout throughout the book that exhibit profundity on the subject at hand:

Pg.42 "It is a snapshot of one small portion of one organization is working on in the first decade of the 21st century." - This is in reference to DARPA and their technological plans.
Pg. 52 "...it's not clear that there are any practical limits represented by quantum physics, human ingenuity and the market...Whether our will can shape limits is the core issue..."
Pg. 106 "In every civilization, in every era, we have given the gods no peace." - On human ingenuity and intellect

In the end this book caused me to revisit much more than my conception of technology. Our human culture is being transcended, by my opinion, by it and we need it to expand into the cosmos. Garrea's book caused me to think about a number of things and from this reading I have written thirteen pages of notes, so it definitely causes one to think. - D.R.Thomas

This is about the so-called GRIN technologies: Genetic, Robotic, Information, and Nano. Properly speaking the title should be "Extreme Cultural Evolution," or perhaps "Accelerated Technological Evolution." "Radical" is used here in the sense of "extreme." Regardless of what we call it, for better or for worse, we will be enhancing our minds and bodies and changing the life forms around us, especially those we use for food. In fact we have already done so through computers, surgery, artificial limbs, genetically engineer agricultural products, etc. The difference to come is all about the acceleration of change coming from these technologies.

What happens when your daughter's brave new genetic endowment gives her a prodigious memory and makes her smarter, prettier, and stronger than you? No problem. We love our children. Ah, but what happens when she realizes that at age eighteen she is like an Australopithecus creature compared to the new genetic and nanotechnological enhancements bestowed upon her classmates just a few years younger?

What happens is the end of the world as we know it, and most critically the end of human beings as we know ourselves. The question is, is this is a good thing or a bad thing?

Joel Garreau has several answers in terms of scenarios of the future. There is the "Heaven Scenario," the "Hell Scenario," the "Prevail Scenario," and the "Transcend" possibility. Garreau interviewed a number of experts in many fields in an effort to find out not only what the prospects are, but to count noses, so to speak, and see who's optimistic and who isn't.

Put Ray Kurzweil, author of The Age of Spiritual Machines (1999)--see my review on Amazon--in the camp of those who see marvelous things happening, in fact a glorious singularity of advancement. Put Bill Joy, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, in the camp of those who believe we are headed for a right awful hell on earth. And put polymath Jaron Lanier in the camp of those who think we can prevail over our creations. And put Michael Goldblatt of the US military's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the platoon of happy warriors just having fun with the prospect of new and more amazingly advanced weaponry (or defenses from weaponry).

After reading this dense and fascinating book I have a few observations. First, regardless of whether we like it or not, or whether Luddites and social conservatives manage to slow down or even halt some of the research, nothing but nothing is going to stem the tide, or alter The Curve, as Garreau calls the shape of things to come. If we don't do stem cell research or explore replicating nanobots, you can be sure that somebody else--in Korea, in China, in Russia, even in Pakistan--will. Any nation or culture that chooses to not explore these brave new worlds will be in danger of not only being left behind economically and militarily, but in grave danger of living a sub existence like that of pets or zoo animals.

There is some debate about this point. Garreau explores the idea that nothing will stop the tsunami and does find some people who think we can put up a wall or at least quiet the rampaging waters. Still others are asking, why should we? Think-tanker Francis Fukuyama, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution (2002)--see my review at Amazon--believes there is something precious in humans as presently constituted. He is fearful that we will lose that human nature through biological engineering. Personally, glancing at the history of human kind, I think that human nature could use some altering, and indeed believe that unless human nature does change, we won't be around much longer. Fukuyama believes that, were we to become as immortal as the gods, we would stagnate. He "doesn't think immortals will ever have a new idea again" and only the death of people allows new ideas to take root. (p. 163)

What if we do conquer all and end up with this so-called heaven on earth? What will it consist of? Will we pursue endless delights from brain chemistry? Are we creatures ruled by the gods of pleasure and pain, or is there some transcendental aspect to us? Garreau explores this question near the end of the book with help from Martin E.P. Seligman's three levels of happiness: "the pleasant life, the good life, and the meaningful life." Here I think Garreau, along with Seligman is whistling Dixie in the dark. The "meaningful life" is what? According to what I could gather on pages 261-262, the "meaning consists in attachment to something bigger than you are." Seligman finds such attachment in various activities from raising children to saving the whales to being a terrorist. I think a more lasting attachment may be to something like exploring the cosmos.

But would humans really have sufficient desire to do that? Recalling some famous dystopias from literature, H.G. Wells's The Time Machine or Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, for example, I suspect that creatures such as ourselves (as currently constituted) can only exist in environments not that far removed from the savannah. Cities are tough enough for the couch potato obese of the Western world. If we gain everything our biology desires, we may become (further) degenerate and fall victim to something untoward and unpredictable. Or we may just end up examining our navels as the perfect mixture of chemicals courses through our bodies. If we conquer all and have no challenges left, what will we do? What does a perfectly satisfied and perfectly serene creature do? We don't know. Transcend human nature perhaps?

Reading Radical Evolution is like reading a "How to" column - you are always surprised what can really be done. The book opens with a number of mind boggling bits of research talking about things from telekinesis to a device that gives soldiers x-ray vision; the funny thing is that these things are really occurring in laboratories as we speak. The purpose of the book is to provide an understandable, digested version of the work that is happening in Futuring land. Futuring, for those who are not in the know, is simply the study of trends and projections in an effort to forecast the future. Much like a meteorologist predicts the weather, futurists attempt to predict the social, political, technological, and economic climate 50 to 100 to a 1,000 years in advance. The book tries to stay neutral, explaining the possible horrors and terrors of advancing technology, but it clear from the first page to the back cover that its author, Joel Garreau, is a big supporter of advancements in technologies. Beyond the first couple examples, he goes further to describing how technologies can affect every bit of our being. Surveying the thoughts and opinions of numerous, credible futurists, he talks about how little robots can allow us to live in to our 200 hundreds and how we may have space colonies on the moon before we know it. The title, Radical Evolution, comes from the idea that through these advancements in technology, we, as humans, are creating a radical chain of evolution that is pushing past any boundaries that nature had set for us. It is even argued that we are actually transcending our humanity through these changes.
In the middle of the book he presents a point/counter-point discussion of the future technology, appropriately labeled "Heaven" and "Hell"; the greatest possible outcomes pinned against the most devastating consequences force the reader to ponder the benefits of new technology. As a compromise, Garreau offers a scenario in which humans simply prevail, this is neither a scenario of humanities grandeur or it's defeat, but rather a median between both extremes. Finally, Garreau admits the limited view that even the greatest researchers have in terms of looking at the future. People can make predictions to their hearts content, but in the end chance happenings and unplanned events can transform the course of any one prediction. All that any futurist can do is take the best information available and make a thorough forecast off with that data, supporting the argument until the next trend arrives.