A decade since 'Sapiens': Scientific knowledge or populism? | Hacker News Reader

A decade since 'Sapiens': Scientific knowledge or populism?

english.elpais.com

43 pointsgeox7 comments

> “Whenever his facts are broadly correct, they are not new, and whenever he tries to strike out on his own he often gets things wrong, sometimes seriously,” the anthropologist wrote in a scathing review […] When a computer scientist sees that Mark Zuckerberg is calling not him, but Harari, to consult on the effects of technology on humanity, he’s understandably mortified, just as an epidemiologist likely is, when he finds out that UNESCO has asked Harari about the effects of Covid on international scientific cooperation. For a long time now, Harrari hasn’t been a simple essayist: he has become the Oracle of Delphi.

There was a post here the other day titled “A blog post is a long and complex search query to find people”. [0]

Well, perhaps a book is a long and complex motivation letter to get public speaking engagements and a career promotion.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38137377

Like the article author, I have always found Harari's work and ideas, if not facile, then uninsightful, and the size of his following unwarranted. But a passage in the article stood out to me:

> According to this notion, our mastery of the world is due to our talent for fiction, for constructing (and believing) stories about things that only exist in our imagination. It’s undoubtedly a simple and easy idea to buy into. But the question is whether this idea is also another one of those stories about things that don’t exist [emphasis mine].

To me, what the author is complaining about here would, in light of the size of his reception and following, in fact be a recursive demonstration of Harari's thesis.

Not quite so - Harari’s thesis makes specific anthropological claims (for example, about the development of cities, agriculture). Downstream of the central conceit of stories, but confident and specific nonetheless.

I think the author is making a cute, ironic parallel, and perhaps suggesting that it may have warranted more reflection from Harari.

After I read this “Sapiens” book, I re-read once again “The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence” by Carl Sagan.

The contrast is stark, Sagan is so much more insightful and at the same time, more careful with his conclusions.

It's like comparing an amateur with an accomplished professional.

Science communication is lossy and people aren't using Harari's work as a reference textbook.

I haven't read his material on AI but I can't imagine it's any more sensationalised than what Sam Altman, Elon Musk, or Nick Bostrom have written.

I recently read Nick Bostrom's "Superintelligence" and it's the most speculative and abstract piece I've ever encountered. Seemingly intelligent people can be so shallow and disconnected from reality it's not even funny. He defines his own analytical models sitting on abstract, intangible terms and then carries on with wild speculations and extrapolations, picturing a sci-fi dystopia.

There's an AI cult who's apocalypse prophesy is the coming Singularity. My hope is that they'll get less annoying as their year 2012 comes and goes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com