The article is engaging and well-written. The book quoted in the text, however, is gravely flawed in terms of it’s “dystopian” view of a post-apocalyptic society and its (we are told) concomitant and extreme selfishness (everyone for himself predisposition). No doubt there are ‘survivalists” out there who concur with this attitude and philosophy (not Kant, but ‘can’t’ as in ‘can’t be generous and cooperative)…But this is not at all reality; evidence from modern anthropology has shown consistently that human survival (from ancient hunter-gatherers to modern day urban go-getters) was and is dependent upon ‘pro-social’ behaviors, cooperative behaviors…We survive disasters and crises and times of great travail and turmoil by reaching out to others (even those we may have ignored or avoided) and helping and receiving help, being kind and accepting kindness in return (an ethics of reciprocity, if you will). But the point is to interact pro-socially — in ways that promote a society of mutual beneficence. We can do this via an ‘interface’ (computers), or, via actual face-to-face. The ‘survival of the fittest’ (Social Darwinist) mindset seems to pop up whenever we find out selves succumbing to anxiety and fear about the future. But all we need do is understand how we “survived” in the past, to find the key to a better (a “post-apocalyptic”) future.
