Humans have subconsciously derailed from the route to utopia. The derailment coincides with humans voluntarily, yet still subconsciously, turning life into a miserable, depressing thing. The vast majority of human convening results in a convergence on an incorrect consensus, or a consensus that was correct at the time but has not changed with the increase of time. In relation to utopia, humanity has been reaching higher highs and higher lows but my intuition tells me that neither our highs nor lows are quite as high as they could be or have been.
Mass, iterative convergence is not only unlikely, it is near-impossible. If mass, iterative convergence were currently taking place in the world, it would be taboo to consume animal products, the world would operate on solar, and maybe white rhino’s wouldn’t be extinct in a few years. Sadly, this is far from how the world operates due to the odd, inherent bias for the modern day human to be averse to change. I think that a silver lining there potentially exists in this which is that a small group of us humans could band together and iteratively re-converge our consensuses in order to perpetually reach higher highs with minimal downside.
There is both an immoral and moral conclusion that can be achieved through this relatively small band of humans that would live in a different world than the majority of humans, but on the same planet. The immoral conclusion would be, assuming that the band’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the rest of the world, hike the birth rate so that eventually all new humans are born acclimated to the way of life — I’m not a fan of this one and it even induced physical unease while writing it. The far more moral conclusion would be to make a significant, obvious amount of progress in the band’s way of life to the extent that an outsider would feel drastically outdated in their way of life — The band then creates a bridge between the two ways of life in order to acclimate the outdated.
Of course, the acclimation process will create a bit of a barrier since the ways of life would intuitively be quite binary. As previously mentioned, humans have turned life into a relatively depressing thing. As the utmost intelligent species on the planet, an innumerable amount of man-made constructs place artificial burdens on the shoulders of the modern person. No one likes burdens, but they become accepting of them. The transition from a world of burden to a burden-less world creates a threat to the burden-less world caused by the individual high initiated from the eradication of the burden. I suppose the acclimation process is neither here nor there, especially considering the fact that I don’t yet have specific answers as to how the process could be streamlined and the burden-less world be protected.
Post-scarcity soul searching is the most descriptive explanation of my mind’s model of the burden-less world created by the relatively small band of humans that iteratively re-converge their consensuses. Post-scarcity is derived from the same root (if you will) that burden-less is. Specifically, I imagine scarcity to be overcome by solar-powered, net-zero automation. Of course, automation will overcome scarcity but only if built to optimize for universal basic needs, which is what I view as a more wholesome and economically sound version of universal basic income. Soul searching (broadly speaking — not constrained to spirituality) comes from what I suspect to be the prevailing way people spend their time while not having to provide for themselves.
The utopian sub-world has no possibility of coming into fruition solely from iterative re-convergence. Innovation is required to progress the society so that it has new customs to re-converge on. If I’m not mistaken, Peter Thiel’s famous contrarian question, “What great thing is nobody doing”, incites the maximum amount of innovation in the modern world. The only potential problem that I believe arises from that problem is that it incites innovation through the perceived discovery of secrets when secrets aren’t necessarily the tipping point to achieving utopia.
So long as the “utopia through the automated fulfillment of universal basic needs” proves to be a viable means to a post-scarcity soul searching world, then it can be achieved through radical globalization, meaning iterating upon current means to find the permutation that correctly scales in terms of a specific ethos. Radical globalization is not a sustainable way of life for the curious but it provides a means to an end, where the end is theoretically infinite vertical progress. In order to incite this obscure form of radical globalization, the default question needs to change to something along the lines of “What is the correct contrary consensus that society should converge on?” followed by “How do we achieve that?”.