8 Comments
Aug 17Liked by Siguna Mueller, Ph.D., Ph.D.

Vitalistic biosociology in policy (=humanistic management) is not the solution. It is the starting point for repeating the pattern from the 20th century. If it's turned into political monism, the fight between the good, the bad, the ugly, then eugenic thinking is here again.

Eugenic thinking was always humanistic thinking. It's a not good knowns connection. It's very unlucky that Germany and Austria are not aware of. But the Brits.

There is really nothing new around the phenomen of vitalism and evolutionary spirituality. transhumanism, nooshere, super-intelligence, singularity, ... the Übermensch.

If the societal pressure rising up, it can lead into barbarism again.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1103847/full

Boosting up social capital with behavioral science into human brain capital as ressource and investment-object for economic growth in the 21st century is deeply frightening.

And they do it.

The only question is: Will it be a surveillance (algorthmic) capitalism or socialism? Or both: capitalism for the 1%, profiting with the futures and socialism for the 99%?

Expand full comment
author

Thank you. I agree, it's tragic. Will check out the article. The eugenics agenda is also intimately linked to the genetic shots, albeit, as you point out, not necessarily for depopulation. If the plan is to create the Übermensch, then no price is too high! I am afraid people have been lured into believing it's a good thing to eradicate all diseases and to create the perfect human being. Yet, to do this via genetic therapies, lots of trial subjects are needed. The last few years have shown people are more than willing to step up, not knowing the role they are playing in this overall scheme. In this sense, it seems, it may be both, or a mix of what you are describing. Thank you again for raising all these tragic issues.

Expand full comment
Aug 17Liked by Siguna Mueller, Ph.D., Ph.D.

Neuroeconomic and behavioral science have already used AI in modelling the pandemic and the measures. In 2018 there was a warning of losing dignity and welfare. I think it happened since 2020 in a lot of societies.

The process of self-constitution is the decisive existential task with which every human being is confronted (Korsgaard 2009). However, if our own active decisions are outsourced sys-tematically through excessive delegation to politicians, companies or algorithms that are supposed to nudge us in all situations in life, our personality threatens to fragment. In the end, we no longer know which of our consumption and life decisions we actually made of our own free will and which were dictated to us by external authorities. One serious consequence of this could be a loss of respect for our own self, which Waldron (2014) warns of in his review of Sunstein's work. Waldron warns that too many external decision-making aids can lead to us no longer knowing the value of our own decision-making power. The resulting uncertainty - Waldron speaks of the “loss of dignity” - can lead to a considerable impairment of life satisfaction because we no longer have the feeling that we can lead our lives in a self-determined way (Deci and Ryan 2000). This type of loss of welfare, combined with the question of how to delegate everyday decisions in a meaningful way, has not yet played the role it deserves in the debates on libertarian paternalism in general and nudges in particular.

https://elibrary.duncker-humblot.com/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=article/9839/10_3790_vjh_87_1_29_01723907124.pdf

Expand full comment
author

Yes indeed! The loss of respect for our own self is KEY, totally! It seems the battle of humanity, but in recent years, it's been so cleverly masqueraded that the masses are falling for it.

Expand full comment
Aug 17Liked by Siguna Mueller, Ph.D., Ph.D.

The know exactly what they are doing and what they are risking. . .

In an ideal world, independent oversight of AI systems, which are high risk and have the potential to

have a negative impact or unintended consequences on people and planet, such as

large foundational models, ought to be mandatory.

Digital Humanism, developed in Vienna

https://eprints.cs.univie.ac.at/7948/1/978-3-031-45304-5.pdf

Fullfilling the ideas of 1974: Technocracy and humanism. Prospects. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02206528

Fullfilling the old technate, the technocracy idea of the 1930ies. In sience we trust. https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/longform/technocracy-incorporated-elon-musk/

Every totalitarian regime closes the gap between policy and science and melting it to one unity.

Science missions FOR sustainability. https://council.science/our-work/science-missions/

As education FOR sustainabilty, which started in 2002. Then the reform of education system coming up.

A lot of new sciences. A new modell of order of science - politics - society - individual (now mostly the human animal - evolutionary thinking is here again in policy.

OMG. Repeating the pattern of Europe in the 20th century with the aim to solve the problems of the 20th century. It's really mad.

Expand full comment
author

A very sobering summary. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Jul 6Liked by Siguna Mueller, Ph.D., Ph.D.

Simply excellent article!

Expand full comment
author

Thank you!

Expand full comment