In his response, Dr. Davis leveled a grave accusation against me: he called me an optimist.
In many ways, I am not optimistic. I do not think our problems are small. I don't think they will be solved easily, or soon. I'm not even confident that we are on the right track to solve them. And I, too, am concerned about “the growing gap between our power and our wisdom.”
However, the question we were put to is: “Is technology actually making things better?” In the growing gap between power and wisdom, technology is increasing our power. Philosophy is failing to increase our wisdom proportionately. In other words, technology is making things better; but our lack of sufficiently advanced philosophy is creating risks and problems.
Why does it matter how we analyze it? If this gap is a problem, why quibble over whether technology or philosophy is to blame? Our diagnosis matters because it determines our prescription.
If technology is not “making things better”, then the solution is to rein in technology, to put our foot on the brakes—maybe even to go into reverse. Doing so would perhaps avoid risks from AI or genetic engineering (although I don't see how it would fix nuclear weapons or climate change). But it would also strangle any possibility of a much better future, for us and our descendants—one with much greater prosperity, health, comfort, and freedoms. We might never cure aging or explore the cosmos.
On the other hand, if we see that technology can make things better, much better, but only when used wisely—then the solution is obviously to get wiser about how we use it. I don't think we need biologically enhanced prudence for this, just philosophers who are willing to step up and do the job.
The only other alternative I can see is to give up. To resign ourselves to stagnation. To walk away from progress because we don't believe ourselves capable of handling it, as one would take a rifle out of the hands of a child.
So how do we get wiser? History, economics and philosophy—in short, progress studies. Understand how progress is made, where it goes wrong, and how we fix it. Get better at anticipating problems, and better at pre-emptive rather reactionary solutions. And devote the same intelligence and ingenuity to politics, education, and markets as we do to steel, power plants, and computer networks. I am not an optimist, but even more adamantly, I am not a defeatist. When Dr. Davis sees nothing but problems and offers no solutions, I hear defeatism. For my part, no matter how great the challenges, no matter how hard the effort, no matter how slim the chance of success, I will work for solutions.