I admire Matt Webb in a lot of ways, but I’m also aware that we come at the world from very different positions. This post clarifies and specifies that difference:
Ought we take sides?
Like: if you’re not all in on eating the Sun for its total energy output to drive the turbines of humanity in a giant spherical megastructure capturing all available sunlight, does that make you a species traitor?
Secretly supporting the other team, some kind of Kim Philby of the Long Now.
I will make no secret of my support of that “other side”. Furthermore, I will point out that historically speaking, that “other side” would have been considered the default position; that switch in philosophical valence is yet another candidate for a marker of the era we have taken to calling the Anthropocene.
Or, to put it another way: if the figure of Philby stands for intellect seduced into betraying its origin culture by the appeal of transformative novelty valued purely for its own sake, and by the implied power of close association therewith, then I am not the Philby in this simile.
Leave a Reply