For the Permanent Survival of Humanity—Question and Answer by Anthropologist Hu Jiaqi
I.You have been engaged in the study of human problems for nearly 40 years. What makes you persist in and never give up?
Answer: I studied in the primary school and middle school in the period of the Great Cultural Revolution of China. Education was neglected in the period and my hometown was in a remote rural area, so I knew very little about science and technology. The environment around me changed after I entered university in 1979. There were a lot of books in the library and many learned teachers. Soon after I entered the university, I learned about a relativistic formula E=mc² that is the mass-energy equality of special relativity. According to the formula, the energy contained in a gram of matter is equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT equivalent. It weights about the same as a peanut kernel. 20,000 tons of TNT is enough to destroy a city. I came to know that the former Soviet Union once exploded a hydrogen bomb whose power was 56 million tons of TNT equivalent. No matter theoretically or technically, they had no problem in developing more massive nuclear weapons. I thought science and technology were too powerful. Would they destroy mankind some day? I thought it was a question worth pondering. So I turned to the data to study it. Soon a concept came into my mind. It was since the beginning of the industrial revolution in mid-18th Century that human beings have really devoted their enthusiasm to the development of science and technology. It took human beings only over 200 years to develop science and technology from a very low level to such a high level. I intuitively felt that science and technology could destroy human beings. As a 17-year-old young man, I had no idea whether the intuitive feeling was true or not. If science and technology destroy mankind in thousands of years, we do not need to worry about it for it is a problem for the future generations to solve. If science and technology destroy human beings in the near future, what should we do? Is there anything more important than it? Is there any other crisis that is more worth worrying about than this one? If so, can we prevent it from happening? And how? I thought it was worth studying. I thought it was lucky for a person to do something meaningful in his life. I decided at that time that I would only do one thing well in my life. That is to say, I would devote myself to the matter and then disseminated my research results. I have been engaged in the research for nearly forty years. With the deepening of the research, I was more and more aware of the seriousness and urgency of the problem. So far, I have not only regarded the research as a career but also as my responsibility as a human.
II.You hold the view that science and technology will soon destroy mankind if they develop continuously. What is the basis?
Answer: In fact, nuclear weapons are one very powerful means to destroy mankind. But nuclear weapons are unable to destroy human beings. There is such a conclusion in the scientific community. If all the world's nuclear weapons explode in a nuclear war, billions of people will be killed. The explosion will lead to nuclear winter but mankind has the opportunity to start again because some people will surely survive. In fact, many other technologies are even more powerful than nuclear weapons. Some technologies will be able to destroy humans if they are further developed. For example, many scientists worry that bioengineering is likely to destroy humans. Bioengineering can re-edit and reorganize genes. It can also make genetic recombination for biological toxins as biological weapons so that they have the ability to attack the deadly organs of human beings. It is the spread of super plagues. Others worry that nanotechnology will destroy human beings. If the programs running the nano-robots developed by nanotechnology run out of control and they replicate infinitely, they can not only completely destroy us but also completely destroy our planet. At present, more people are worried that AI will destroy mankind. If the programs of intelligent robots developed by artificial intelligence technology run out of control or their self-consciousness awakens, they may destroy human beings. These examples are very destructive. Besides, there is another thing that makes people even more worried. As for nuclear weapons, it needs the power of a nation to develop them. But it is easy for an enterprise or a high-level scientist to independently acquire the technologies that I enumerated just now. Compared to the behavior of a country, the individual's behavior is more difficult to control. The continuously developing science and technology will surely destroy mankind soon. It may happen in two or three hundred years, or just in the century.
III.If science and technology really could destroy mankind, what should we do?
Answer: I have got several big views and a series of small ones from my years’ research. The first big view of mine, which I think is the most acceptable point of view, is that the continuously developing science and technology will soon destroy mankind. It may happen in two or three hundred years, or just in the century. Even if bioengineering, nanotechnology or artificial intelligence can not destroy human beings, as long as science and technology continue to develop, there will surely be something more powerful. Therefore, I think we must limit the development of science and technology to avoid the extinction of mankind. This logical relationship is very simple. The continuously developing science and technology will soon wipe out human beings. We must limit the development of science and technology to avoid the extinction of mankind.
IV.All of us can not do without science and technology. Is your view a complete negation of science and technology?
Answer: Of course not. We should treat science and technology in a dialectic manner. Science and technology are a double-edged sword. They can both benefit mankind and destroy mankind. The stronger they benefit mankind, the greater power they have to destroy mankind. We are worried that the infinitely expanding destructive force will destroy us. Without human survival, all our values are worthless. We should not limit the obviously safe and mature science and technologies, but also extend it to the whole world for the benefit of mankind. However, for those dangerous science and technologies, we must strictly limit them because our human survival is above anything else.
V.What can we do to limit the development of science and technology?
Answer: At present, it is impossible for us to limit the development of science and technology. The social form of today's society is state society. The United Nations is not the highest power body, but states are. There is a competitive relationship between different countries. Of all the competitions in economy, military or others, in the final analysis, competition in science and technology is fundamental because science and technology are the primary productive forces. The competitions between countries are always very cruel. They are often shown in the form of war. The loser of a war will face the danger of subjugation and genocide. Therefore, no country belittles the competition and no country restricts the development of science and technology for the sake of human interests.
I think human beings must go to the grand unification so as to limit the development of science and technology. The development of science and technology shall be limited by the force of the world government because it is the only government in the world without any competitors. The world government only represents the interests of mankind. Therefore, it is possible to rely on the strength of the world government to limit the development of science and technology.
VI.From the long term consideration, unification and disintegration always occur alternately. If the grand unification of mankind is realized, what should we do if we split up again?
Answer: I think it is a very good question. I find it is the most difficult problem to solve after years’ research. Unification and disintegration always occur alternately. It is also possible for the grand unified society to split up. How can we solve this problem? I consider to solve the problem from two dimensions in my study. The first dimension is the attitude to science and technology. I think that science and technology should not only be strictly restricted but also permanently seal up the already formed science and technology, especially the scientific theories, which may endanger human security, so that they can be forgotten. Science and technology should be developed to a certain height when the grand unified society splits up again some day. It is a course in which it is hoped that human beings awaken again to realize the grand unification again. The same thing will have to be done again if the grand unification is realized (again).
The second dimension is a series of systems designed by us. They should be conducive to the long-term stability of a grand unified society. We human beings have a long way to go in the future. We hope that in the future of mankind, the time of unification will be as long as possible and the time of disintegration will be as short as possible. How can we do this? My research is like this. I have designed a series of political, economic, military, cultural and social systems. I think a grand unified society should be a peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society. In a peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society, it is conducive to social stability that people are friendly to each other. Our society is full of competitions now. People are agitated in a competitive society. There are more factors to cause social disintegration. A peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society is not only conducive to the long-term stability of a grand unified society, but also conducive to people's happiness. How fierce the social competition is now! Maybe we can get a lot of material wealth, but we have a lot of psychological pressure and we do not have a strong sense of happiness.
Besides, I have a design for the political system of the future society. Each country has its own political system. I summed up these political systems and roughly divided them into two categories. One is centralized political system and the other is decentralized political system. I can not tell which political system is better because each has its own merits and demerits. For example, the decentralized political system is more democratic. Because of power checks and balances, it is not easy to lead to autocratic dictatorship. The system is also conducive to orderly change of regime. But it also has shortcomings including weak implementation capacity and weak continuity of policy. It's not easy for them to make a decision because they argue about one thing over and over again. The current leader often denies the policies of the previous leader. The merits and demerits of a centralized political regime are just the opposite. They act without delay because of its very strong implementation capacity. It has strong continuity of policy, too. The current leader may have been designated by the previous leader or the current leader may have participated in a lot of work led by the previous leader. Its main shortcoming is that it easily leads to autocratic dictatorship due to lack of checks and balances in power. In addition, regime change can not be carried out scientifically and orderly and it is also difficult to replace a leader, even a very dull one. The merits and demerits of these two political systems have been integrated into the political system I designed.
I believe the series of the designs I have made can well solve the matter, which you asked a moment ago, that is, unification and disintegration always occur alternately.
VII.Mankind has been in a state of divide and rule. Is it possible to realize the grand unified society?
Answer: It will damage to many people's interests to realize the grand unification of mankind. When I talked about the grand unification of mankind to some people, a friend of mine joked, “ The grand unification of mankind will not be realized unless aliens invade us.” I said, “What you said is reasonable.” Everyone knows that we will be exterminated by aliens if we do not unite to fight against them when the aliens invade us. In fact, we are facing the same problem now. If we do not move towards unification to limit the development of science and technology, mankind will become extinct. But it is intuitive and easy to understand that we will be eliminated when we encounter the invasion from aliens if we do not unite to fight against them. We will also become extinct unless we try to realize the unification of mankind to unanimously limit the development of science and technology. But the issue needs considering deeply because it is not intuitive. So I think an awakening movement is necessary. I want to tell this to everyone in the world, especially to the human elites. It is possible for mankind to achieve the grand unification if the idea is understood by human beings, especially the human elites.
VIII.Your research on human problems for years has not been well received and has met resistance. Your company also conducts research on science and technology. Is this contradictory?
In fact, mankind is now facing a huge crisis, an unprecedented one. It is the crisis of extinction. So I have done a lot of work because I am sometimes very worried. Mankind needs saving. Who can save us? We can only rely on ourselves to save us. I believe the leaders of great powers can play the most important role in Saving Humanity. My first monograph Saving Humanity was published in Chinese Mainland in 2007. It was the Chinese version of the book. I took the opportunity to write An Open Letter to the Leaders of Mankind to the leaders of great powers, such as the president of the People's Republic of China, President of the United States, Russian President and others. I took this letter as the preface to the book. I have written to the leaders of different countries many times. I published several books then. My articles were published both in magazines and on the Internet most of which were in Chinese and English. I seize every opportunity to spread my views because I think they are very important. I gave speeches in many universities and research institutes. I am a member of the CPPCC. I have many friends who are members of the CPPCC. I talk to them. I run a business and many of my friends are entrepreneurs. I talk about my views with them. I also talk to many of my friends who are scientists and writers. I hope to influence them and let more people accept my ideas through them. To tell you the truth, I haven't had much success in so many years. Most of the time, they consider my views ridiculous and even regard them as a joke. As science and technology develop, things are becoming better these years. Because of the rapid development of AI in recent years, some people are vaguely worried that science and technology are extremely harmful to human beings. Time is pressing. I feel that fate has left us little time for human beings. Sometimes I am very anxious but I don't know what else I can do. Sometimes I feel helpless and disappointed.
In fact, our enterprise has been engaged in traditional industries. Why shall we enter the high-tech industry? The reason is that if we do not carry out scientific and technological research, others will. If we can do a good job in scientific and technological research, maybe we can give some help if human beings are really in danger in the future. There is no more than that.
Answer: I studied in the primary school and middle school in the period of the Great Cultural Revolution of China. Education was neglected in the period and my hometown was in a remote rural area, so I knew very little about science and technology. The environment around me changed after I entered university in 1979. There were a lot of books in the library and many learned teachers. Soon after I entered the university, I learned about a relativistic formula E=mc² that is the mass-energy equality of special relativity. According to the formula, the energy contained in a gram of matter is equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT equivalent. It weights about the same as a peanut kernel. 20,000 tons of TNT is enough to destroy a city. I came to know that the former Soviet Union once exploded a hydrogen bomb whose power was 56 million tons of TNT equivalent. No matter theoretically or technically, they had no problem in developing more massive nuclear weapons. I thought science and technology were too powerful. Would they destroy mankind some day? I thought it was a question worth pondering. So I turned to the data to study it. Soon a concept came into my mind. It was since the beginning of the industrial revolution in mid-18th Century that human beings have really devoted their enthusiasm to the development of science and technology. It took human beings only over 200 years to develop science and technology from a very low level to such a high level. I intuitively felt that science and technology could destroy human beings. As a 17-year-old young man, I had no idea whether the intuitive feeling was true or not. If science and technology destroy mankind in thousands of years, we do not need to worry about it for it is a problem for the future generations to solve. If science and technology destroy human beings in the near future, what should we do? Is there anything more important than it? Is there any other crisis that is more worth worrying about than this one? If so, can we prevent it from happening? And how? I thought it was worth studying. I thought it was lucky for a person to do something meaningful in his life. I decided at that time that I would only do one thing well in my life. That is to say, I would devote myself to the matter and then disseminated my research results. I have been engaged in the research for nearly forty years. With the deepening of the research, I was more and more aware of the seriousness and urgency of the problem. So far, I have not only regarded the research as a career but also as my responsibility as a human.
 |
| For the Permanent Survival of Humanity——Question and Answer by Anthropologist Hu Jiaqi |
II.You hold the view that science and technology will soon destroy mankind if they develop continuously. What is the basis?
Answer: In fact, nuclear weapons are one very powerful means to destroy mankind. But nuclear weapons are unable to destroy human beings. There is such a conclusion in the scientific community. If all the world's nuclear weapons explode in a nuclear war, billions of people will be killed. The explosion will lead to nuclear winter but mankind has the opportunity to start again because some people will surely survive. In fact, many other technologies are even more powerful than nuclear weapons. Some technologies will be able to destroy humans if they are further developed. For example, many scientists worry that bioengineering is likely to destroy humans. Bioengineering can re-edit and reorganize genes. It can also make genetic recombination for biological toxins as biological weapons so that they have the ability to attack the deadly organs of human beings. It is the spread of super plagues. Others worry that nanotechnology will destroy human beings. If the programs running the nano-robots developed by nanotechnology run out of control and they replicate infinitely, they can not only completely destroy us but also completely destroy our planet. At present, more people are worried that AI will destroy mankind. If the programs of intelligent robots developed by artificial intelligence technology run out of control or their self-consciousness awakens, they may destroy human beings. These examples are very destructive. Besides, there is another thing that makes people even more worried. As for nuclear weapons, it needs the power of a nation to develop them. But it is easy for an enterprise or a high-level scientist to independently acquire the technologies that I enumerated just now. Compared to the behavior of a country, the individual's behavior is more difficult to control. The continuously developing science and technology will surely destroy mankind soon. It may happen in two or three hundred years, or just in the century.
III.If science and technology really could destroy mankind, what should we do?
Answer: I have got several big views and a series of small ones from my years’ research. The first big view of mine, which I think is the most acceptable point of view, is that the continuously developing science and technology will soon destroy mankind. It may happen in two or three hundred years, or just in the century. Even if bioengineering, nanotechnology or artificial intelligence can not destroy human beings, as long as science and technology continue to develop, there will surely be something more powerful. Therefore, I think we must limit the development of science and technology to avoid the extinction of mankind. This logical relationship is very simple. The continuously developing science and technology will soon wipe out human beings. We must limit the development of science and technology to avoid the extinction of mankind.
 |
| For the Permanent Survival of Humanity——Question and Answer by Anthropologist Hu Jiaqi |
IV.All of us can not do without science and technology. Is your view a complete negation of science and technology?
Answer: Of course not. We should treat science and technology in a dialectic manner. Science and technology are a double-edged sword. They can both benefit mankind and destroy mankind. The stronger they benefit mankind, the greater power they have to destroy mankind. We are worried that the infinitely expanding destructive force will destroy us. Without human survival, all our values are worthless. We should not limit the obviously safe and mature science and technologies, but also extend it to the whole world for the benefit of mankind. However, for those dangerous science and technologies, we must strictly limit them because our human survival is above anything else.
V.What can we do to limit the development of science and technology?
Answer: At present, it is impossible for us to limit the development of science and technology. The social form of today's society is state society. The United Nations is not the highest power body, but states are. There is a competitive relationship between different countries. Of all the competitions in economy, military or others, in the final analysis, competition in science and technology is fundamental because science and technology are the primary productive forces. The competitions between countries are always very cruel. They are often shown in the form of war. The loser of a war will face the danger of subjugation and genocide. Therefore, no country belittles the competition and no country restricts the development of science and technology for the sake of human interests.
I think human beings must go to the grand unification so as to limit the development of science and technology. The development of science and technology shall be limited by the force of the world government because it is the only government in the world without any competitors. The world government only represents the interests of mankind. Therefore, it is possible to rely on the strength of the world government to limit the development of science and technology.
 |
| For the Permanent Survival of Humanity——Question and Answer by Anthropologist Hu Jiaqi |
VI.From the long term consideration, unification and disintegration always occur alternately. If the grand unification of mankind is realized, what should we do if we split up again?
Answer: I think it is a very good question. I find it is the most difficult problem to solve after years’ research. Unification and disintegration always occur alternately. It is also possible for the grand unified society to split up. How can we solve this problem? I consider to solve the problem from two dimensions in my study. The first dimension is the attitude to science and technology. I think that science and technology should not only be strictly restricted but also permanently seal up the already formed science and technology, especially the scientific theories, which may endanger human security, so that they can be forgotten. Science and technology should be developed to a certain height when the grand unified society splits up again some day. It is a course in which it is hoped that human beings awaken again to realize the grand unification again. The same thing will have to be done again if the grand unification is realized (again).
The second dimension is a series of systems designed by us. They should be conducive to the long-term stability of a grand unified society. We human beings have a long way to go in the future. We hope that in the future of mankind, the time of unification will be as long as possible and the time of disintegration will be as short as possible. How can we do this? My research is like this. I have designed a series of political, economic, military, cultural and social systems. I think a grand unified society should be a peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society. In a peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society, it is conducive to social stability that people are friendly to each other. Our society is full of competitions now. People are agitated in a competitive society. There are more factors to cause social disintegration. A peaceful, friendly and non-competitive society is not only conducive to the long-term stability of a grand unified society, but also conducive to people's happiness. How fierce the social competition is now! Maybe we can get a lot of material wealth, but we have a lot of psychological pressure and we do not have a strong sense of happiness.
Besides, I have a design for the political system of the future society. Each country has its own political system. I summed up these political systems and roughly divided them into two categories. One is centralized political system and the other is decentralized political system. I can not tell which political system is better because each has its own merits and demerits. For example, the decentralized political system is more democratic. Because of power checks and balances, it is not easy to lead to autocratic dictatorship. The system is also conducive to orderly change of regime. But it also has shortcomings including weak implementation capacity and weak continuity of policy. It's not easy for them to make a decision because they argue about one thing over and over again. The current leader often denies the policies of the previous leader. The merits and demerits of a centralized political regime are just the opposite. They act without delay because of its very strong implementation capacity. It has strong continuity of policy, too. The current leader may have been designated by the previous leader or the current leader may have participated in a lot of work led by the previous leader. Its main shortcoming is that it easily leads to autocratic dictatorship due to lack of checks and balances in power. In addition, regime change can not be carried out scientifically and orderly and it is also difficult to replace a leader, even a very dull one. The merits and demerits of these two political systems have been integrated into the political system I designed.
I believe the series of the designs I have made can well solve the matter, which you asked a moment ago, that is, unification and disintegration always occur alternately.
VII.Mankind has been in a state of divide and rule. Is it possible to realize the grand unified society?
Answer: It will damage to many people's interests to realize the grand unification of mankind. When I talked about the grand unification of mankind to some people, a friend of mine joked, “ The grand unification of mankind will not be realized unless aliens invade us.” I said, “What you said is reasonable.” Everyone knows that we will be exterminated by aliens if we do not unite to fight against them when the aliens invade us. In fact, we are facing the same problem now. If we do not move towards unification to limit the development of science and technology, mankind will become extinct. But it is intuitive and easy to understand that we will be eliminated when we encounter the invasion from aliens if we do not unite to fight against them. We will also become extinct unless we try to realize the unification of mankind to unanimously limit the development of science and technology. But the issue needs considering deeply because it is not intuitive. So I think an awakening movement is necessary. I want to tell this to everyone in the world, especially to the human elites. It is possible for mankind to achieve the grand unification if the idea is understood by human beings, especially the human elites.
 |
| For the Permanent Survival of Humanity——Question and Answer by Anthropologist Hu Jiaqi |
VIII.Your research on human problems for years has not been well received and has met resistance. Your company also conducts research on science and technology. Is this contradictory?
In fact, mankind is now facing a huge crisis, an unprecedented one. It is the crisis of extinction. So I have done a lot of work because I am sometimes very worried. Mankind needs saving. Who can save us? We can only rely on ourselves to save us. I believe the leaders of great powers can play the most important role in Saving Humanity. My first monograph Saving Humanity was published in Chinese Mainland in 2007. It was the Chinese version of the book. I took the opportunity to write An Open Letter to the Leaders of Mankind to the leaders of great powers, such as the president of the People's Republic of China, President of the United States, Russian President and others. I took this letter as the preface to the book. I have written to the leaders of different countries many times. I published several books then. My articles were published both in magazines and on the Internet most of which were in Chinese and English. I seize every opportunity to spread my views because I think they are very important. I gave speeches in many universities and research institutes. I am a member of the CPPCC. I have many friends who are members of the CPPCC. I talk to them. I run a business and many of my friends are entrepreneurs. I talk about my views with them. I also talk to many of my friends who are scientists and writers. I hope to influence them and let more people accept my ideas through them. To tell you the truth, I haven't had much success in so many years. Most of the time, they consider my views ridiculous and even regard them as a joke. As science and technology develop, things are becoming better these years. Because of the rapid development of AI in recent years, some people are vaguely worried that science and technology are extremely harmful to human beings. Time is pressing. I feel that fate has left us little time for human beings. Sometimes I am very anxious but I don't know what else I can do. Sometimes I feel helpless and disappointed.
In fact, our enterprise has been engaged in traditional industries. Why shall we enter the high-tech industry? The reason is that if we do not carry out scientific and technological research, others will. If we can do a good job in scientific and technological research, maybe we can give some help if human beings are really in danger in the future. There is no more than that.
评论
发表评论