Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Publication
Harper Perennial (2018), Edition: Illustrated, 464 pages
Description
History. Science. Sociology. Nonfiction. HTML: Yuval Noah Harari, author of the critically-acclaimed New York Times bestseller and international phenomenon Sapiens, returns with an equally original, compelling, and provocative book, turning his focus toward humanity's future, and our quest to upgrade humans into gods. Over the past century humankind has managed to do the impossible and rein in famine, plague, and war. This may seem hard to accept, but, as Harari explains in his trademark styleâ??thorough, yet rivetingâ??famine, plague and war have been transformed from incomprehensible and uncontrollable forces of nature into manageable challenges. For the first time ever, more people die from eating too much than from eating too little; more people die from old age than from infectious diseases; and more people commit suicide than are killed by soldiers, terrorists and criminals put together. The average American is a thousand times more likely to die from binging at McDonalds than from being blown up by Al Qaeda. What then will replace famine, plague, and war at the top of the human agenda? As the self-made gods of planet earth, what destinies will we set ourselves, and which quests will we undertake? Homo Deus explores the projects, dreams and nightmares that will shape the twenty-first centuryâ??from overcoming death to creating artificial life. It asks the fundamental questions: Where do we go from here? And how will we protect this fragile world from our own destructive powers? This is the next stage of evolution. This is Homo Deus. With the same insight and clarity that made Sapiens an international hit and a New York Times bestseller, Harari maps out our fut… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member MarthaJeanne
I gave up. This is pure opinion, and he is too sure of his opinions.
LibraryThing member cbl_tn
A historian author makes predictions of the future based on the life sciences. He warns us at the outset that we tend to view the world in terms of the predominant technology. So, for example, industrial age philosophers tended to view the world and its systems as machines. According to the author,
Show More
today’s life scientists view humans, as well as other life forms, as a set of algorithms, which leads to dataism. Roughly 400 pages later, in which he predicts the irrelevance and obsolescence of Homo sapiens in comparison with artificial intelligence that will outperform them at virtually every endeavor, he concludes that humans may not in fact not be algorithms. Did he really need 400 pages to reach that conclusion? Show Less
LibraryThing member alexyskwan
It seems the author forgot his original premise about how our species will become like gods and ended up focusing on how humans will be reduced to algorithms in the future instead. I also disagree with his definition of what constitutes a religion.
The prose reads fine, though I don't find it as
The prose reads fine, though I don't find it as
Show More
convincing as Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. Show Less
LibraryThing member santhony
Since its earliest existence, the human race has devoted virtually all of its resources and attention to address three vital issues; famine, disease and war. It is the author’s premise that entering the 21st century, these previously overriding concerns have been largely conquered, leaving the
Well, according to the author, “what now” is a quest for immortality, and the concept may not be as far-fetched as many people think, leading to a new form of human, hence the title of the book, Homo Deus.
I purchased this book, because I thought it might contain a lot of predictions on the future of the human race, based upon recent advances in biotechnology and medical sciences. Instead, it largely consisted of long screeds on the development of humanistic philosophies, with only very broad, non-specific statements on what the future may hold. In other words, a lot of philosophical discussion of the past and current state of the human race, and very little on the future.
Finally, this is the densest book I have ever read. No, not necessarily the subject matter, though if you are not into philosophy, the subject matter may (will) bore you to tears. I’m talking about physical density. I don’t know what kind of paper stock the publisher used, but this book weighed about 10 pounds. If Dickens had used similar stock, David Copperfield would have required a forklift to move.
Show More
question, “What now”?Well, according to the author, “what now” is a quest for immortality, and the concept may not be as far-fetched as many people think, leading to a new form of human, hence the title of the book, Homo Deus.
I purchased this book, because I thought it might contain a lot of predictions on the future of the human race, based upon recent advances in biotechnology and medical sciences. Instead, it largely consisted of long screeds on the development of humanistic philosophies, with only very broad, non-specific statements on what the future may hold. In other words, a lot of philosophical discussion of the past and current state of the human race, and very little on the future.
Finally, this is the densest book I have ever read. No, not necessarily the subject matter, though if you are not into philosophy, the subject matter may (will) bore you to tears. I’m talking about physical density. I don’t know what kind of paper stock the publisher used, but this book weighed about 10 pounds. If Dickens had used similar stock, David Copperfield would have required a forklift to move.
Show Less
LibraryThing member atheist_goat
I gave up on this about 40% of the way through when Harari stated that present-day inhabitants of Afghanistan and Syria have no more ability to comprehend science and engineering than an ancient Egyptian peasant would have. It is shocking and unacceptable that that degree of racism made it through
I shouldn't have been surprised, though, given that in the introduction Harari makes it clear that his definition of "humanity" is limited to wealthy, white Christians from the Western world. Using that definition, he also states confidently that the only remaining threats to humanity in the 21st century are obesity and Ritalin abuse. This is... certainly a take! Not to mention that his numerical claims for obesity-caused deaths and prescription stimulant abuse are debunked and unsubstantiated, respectively (a citation for something presented as fact which has to begin with "evidence is insufficient" should also not have made it past the editing process).
But even if you agree that these are problems for some societies, believing that humanity as a whole faces no other challenges is wild. It also makes for a very dull book because Harari has to talk about utterly random things (whether animals have souls, for example) at great length to avoid acknowledging pandemics, climate change, genocide, etc. What a waste of time.
Show More
the editing process. I shouldn't have been surprised, though, given that in the introduction Harari makes it clear that his definition of "humanity" is limited to wealthy, white Christians from the Western world. Using that definition, he also states confidently that the only remaining threats to humanity in the 21st century are obesity and Ritalin abuse. This is... certainly a take! Not to mention that his numerical claims for obesity-caused deaths and prescription stimulant abuse are debunked and unsubstantiated, respectively (a citation for something presented as fact which has to begin with "evidence is insufficient" should also not have made it past the editing process).
But even if you agree that these are problems for some societies, believing that humanity as a whole faces no other challenges is wild. It also makes for a very dull book because Harari has to talk about utterly random things (whether animals have souls, for example) at great length to avoid acknowledging pandemics, climate change, genocide, etc. What a waste of time.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Lady_Lazarus
Catchy, easy and partly also entertaining to read. Partly just irritating. Many times I had a feeling Harari was just filling in the space with words, rephrasing the same thing multiple times. The message did not deserve a whole book to be told, but at least there is a message. It is not very
Show More
original and the material provided to support the theory is mostly superficial. Therefore I felt this book did not have much to offer. Show Less
LibraryThing member infjsarah
This was as well written and easy to read as "Sapiens". And equally thought provoking. Of course most predictions of the future are seen as laughable when you reach the future but I think I'm kind of glad that I'm not going to live to see some of these possibilities. I don't want to be "superhuman"
Show More
though I'd be very happy for someone to solve the need for reading glasses past 45. Oh and to invent the dentbots of "Long way to small angry planet". Show Less
LibraryThing member Ken-Me-Old-Mate
This is the follow up to Sapiens and it is as excellent as Sapiens. A follow up and expansion. If you liked Sapiens then you mist read this, if you didn't like Sapiens then you aren't going to find much here either.
LibraryThing member antao
When I was little, I believed (sort of) that Santa Claus existed. It was a working hypothesis that worked, and I didn't look behind it until it became untenable. Now I effectively assume my continuing identity as a person - because that works, sort of, too. In me, and most people I know, the baton
Take famine. We are told that "famine is rare". But across what data-set is that claim true? Across the data-set of what we actually know, about what is actually happening, at the present time? But that is a profoundly-inadequate data-set. We ought to consider also what we don't know about what is happening right now (Do we know whether or not, even right now, a serious famine is underway in under-reported/remote in parts of Africa?). More important, we ought to consider what might have happened, in recent history (has humanity quite possibly been merely lucky not to have experienced a mega-famine, in recent times (we may have come close, for instance, in 2007-9, during which period most of the world's countries resorted to banning food exports)? If so, then we can take very little consolation from the fact that it didn't happen). Most importantly of all, we ought to consider what might be about to happen (Can we really be confident that we’re not in the position of the turkey who claims loudly to any other turkeys that will listen to have ever-increasing evidence that famine is a thing of the past, the closer it gets to Christmas? Perhaps in a decade's time, historians will look back on casual remarks along the lines of some people I know as some kind of cruel or bizarre joke. (Assuming that there are historians to look back, at all).
The so-called 'evidence' of our power isn't really statistically-significant evidence, once we take into account the vast seas of our ignorance. In order to be (justifiably) confident that "famine is rare", we would need to be justifiably confident that our systems are not fragile. That we have enough resilience to weather the storms of misfortune, which might for instance be about to hit us by way of unprecedented climate-disasters, now that our weather appears to be tipping into an unprecedented state. We would need a data-set that covered the three categories of unknowns that I outlined in the previous paragraph.
Of course, the vastly-greater 'data-set' of which I speak here is in principle unavailable to us, stuck as we are in highly-limited epistemic horizons, unable to experience history's counter-factuals, let alone those of the future. The thoroughly counter-factual nature of the 'data-set' that would be needed in order to undergird Harari's claims ensures that we will never become the kinds of masters of the universe that it is so tempting to imagine ourselves being or becoming.
So what can we do? For starters, we can stop patting ourselves on the back that we are living in a safe and secure world, when we simply don't know that. Harari tells us that we have "conquered nature" (my reading); on the contrary, in the very act of struggling to outgrow (our) nature we are unleashing terrifying new post-natural forces that are quite likely to unravel the complex systems and long-supply lines we have created. We are radically fragilising ourselves and our one and only home. What can we do? We can stop doing this. But only if we adopt a radically different vision from the widespread complacent 'progressivism' of Harari and a million other well-fed intellectuals. The real, Janus-faced evidence of our power is in the extent to which we have created a world that is hurtling ever further out of our control. The only way to turn this around is to stop pretending that we have evidence that we are in control, and start taking a properly precautionary attitude. That means starting to radically 'build down' the level of our impacts upon the world around us. Rather than self-defeatingly fantasising ourselves a 'God-species', we need to start acting as if we are what we are: one species, with a responsibility not to destroy our descendants and ourselves -- and not to take most of the other species with us.
What I sense behind the Data driven mindset is the age old human need to eradicate uncertainty. Just to stop having to live in an uncertain world. So no surprises, nothing off the wall, everything predicted, containable, knowable in all its parts. Yet the problem to be dealt with is not really social life and data, the problem is existential and profound, it's intrinsically unmanageable, something functioning entirely within what in the end is an open-ended universe of possibilities (predict that Jimmy) also known to us all as human self-consciousness. I sympathise with the drive (I have one too, a consciousness solid until searched for then turning to air) but no sympathy for the infantile drive of the methodology. There is now way out of our predicament, if there is a way through it may be to live deeply enjoyably, with deep uncertainty.
Bottom-line: I enjoy the way that Harari considers big issues, but so far a number of the ideas seem to reiterate Karl Popper's notion of "world 3", and other themes have been covered in previous SF by Olaf Stapledon (“First and Last Men”), and Isaac Asimov, passim. A bigger problem is that by writing this book Harari has highlighted a problem with the "big history" approach, promoted by people such as Bill Gates. His previous book, “Sapiens”, was a good example of the genre and sought to see human history both in how it fits into the history of the cosmos, biological life, mammal physiology, and the long period in which modern humans existed but wrote nothing. From that Olympic perspective "big history" seeks to move away from both the modern academic resistance to "grand narratives" and from the antiquarianism and micro-history into which some modern academics have retreated. The problem for Harari is that once you have written one "big history" book, there is not really a need to write another, or at least not until new information (from science, diligent archivists, or even intelligent algorithms) changes the big picture. Hence this book is a mix of shitty philosophy, Alvin Toffler-style futurism, and a whole jumble of the author's personal fads and prejudices. Whatever it is, it is not "history".
And that presents a problem. If even author the greatest recent publishing success in "big history" cannot produce a second book on the subject, the whole area does not look that promising for other authors. Provocative book? Not in the least. If you want “provocative” you should instead read “The Trouble with Physics” by Lee Smolin.
SF = Speculative Fiction.
Show More
of consciousness, of awareness of one's I-ness, is repeatedly exchanged at unimaginable speeds between the two hemispheres. That baton seems to get dropped by people suffering certain forms of dementia - with increasing frequency as their condition worsens, being eventually only picked up and handed to and fro for brief, sometimes apparently fortuitous periods, if at all. How cruel (alongside other pains and indignities) to lose the working hypothesis that everyone else lives by. But perhaps, isolated in the permanently unfamiliar and frightening. Now they may be closer to the reality of the human condition than the rest of us. As with Santa, the mere fact that a working hypothesis produces a desirable and convenient result does not make it correct.Take famine. We are told that "famine is rare". But across what data-set is that claim true? Across the data-set of what we actually know, about what is actually happening, at the present time? But that is a profoundly-inadequate data-set. We ought to consider also what we don't know about what is happening right now (Do we know whether or not, even right now, a serious famine is underway in under-reported/remote in parts of Africa?). More important, we ought to consider what might have happened, in recent history (has humanity quite possibly been merely lucky not to have experienced a mega-famine, in recent times (we may have come close, for instance, in 2007-9, during which period most of the world's countries resorted to banning food exports)? If so, then we can take very little consolation from the fact that it didn't happen). Most importantly of all, we ought to consider what might be about to happen (Can we really be confident that we’re not in the position of the turkey who claims loudly to any other turkeys that will listen to have ever-increasing evidence that famine is a thing of the past, the closer it gets to Christmas? Perhaps in a decade's time, historians will look back on casual remarks along the lines of some people I know as some kind of cruel or bizarre joke. (Assuming that there are historians to look back, at all).
The so-called 'evidence' of our power isn't really statistically-significant evidence, once we take into account the vast seas of our ignorance. In order to be (justifiably) confident that "famine is rare", we would need to be justifiably confident that our systems are not fragile. That we have enough resilience to weather the storms of misfortune, which might for instance be about to hit us by way of unprecedented climate-disasters, now that our weather appears to be tipping into an unprecedented state. We would need a data-set that covered the three categories of unknowns that I outlined in the previous paragraph.
Of course, the vastly-greater 'data-set' of which I speak here is in principle unavailable to us, stuck as we are in highly-limited epistemic horizons, unable to experience history's counter-factuals, let alone those of the future. The thoroughly counter-factual nature of the 'data-set' that would be needed in order to undergird Harari's claims ensures that we will never become the kinds of masters of the universe that it is so tempting to imagine ourselves being or becoming.
So what can we do? For starters, we can stop patting ourselves on the back that we are living in a safe and secure world, when we simply don't know that. Harari tells us that we have "conquered nature" (my reading); on the contrary, in the very act of struggling to outgrow (our) nature we are unleashing terrifying new post-natural forces that are quite likely to unravel the complex systems and long-supply lines we have created. We are radically fragilising ourselves and our one and only home. What can we do? We can stop doing this. But only if we adopt a radically different vision from the widespread complacent 'progressivism' of Harari and a million other well-fed intellectuals. The real, Janus-faced evidence of our power is in the extent to which we have created a world that is hurtling ever further out of our control. The only way to turn this around is to stop pretending that we have evidence that we are in control, and start taking a properly precautionary attitude. That means starting to radically 'build down' the level of our impacts upon the world around us. Rather than self-defeatingly fantasising ourselves a 'God-species', we need to start acting as if we are what we are: one species, with a responsibility not to destroy our descendants and ourselves -- and not to take most of the other species with us.
What I sense behind the Data driven mindset is the age old human need to eradicate uncertainty. Just to stop having to live in an uncertain world. So no surprises, nothing off the wall, everything predicted, containable, knowable in all its parts. Yet the problem to be dealt with is not really social life and data, the problem is existential and profound, it's intrinsically unmanageable, something functioning entirely within what in the end is an open-ended universe of possibilities (predict that Jimmy) also known to us all as human self-consciousness. I sympathise with the drive (I have one too, a consciousness solid until searched for then turning to air) but no sympathy for the infantile drive of the methodology. There is now way out of our predicament, if there is a way through it may be to live deeply enjoyably, with deep uncertainty.
Bottom-line: I enjoy the way that Harari considers big issues, but so far a number of the ideas seem to reiterate Karl Popper's notion of "world 3", and other themes have been covered in previous SF by Olaf Stapledon (“First and Last Men”), and Isaac Asimov, passim. A bigger problem is that by writing this book Harari has highlighted a problem with the "big history" approach, promoted by people such as Bill Gates. His previous book, “Sapiens”, was a good example of the genre and sought to see human history both in how it fits into the history of the cosmos, biological life, mammal physiology, and the long period in which modern humans existed but wrote nothing. From that Olympic perspective "big history" seeks to move away from both the modern academic resistance to "grand narratives" and from the antiquarianism and micro-history into which some modern academics have retreated. The problem for Harari is that once you have written one "big history" book, there is not really a need to write another, or at least not until new information (from science, diligent archivists, or even intelligent algorithms) changes the big picture. Hence this book is a mix of shitty philosophy, Alvin Toffler-style futurism, and a whole jumble of the author's personal fads and prejudices. Whatever it is, it is not "history".
And that presents a problem. If even author the greatest recent publishing success in "big history" cannot produce a second book on the subject, the whole area does not look that promising for other authors. Provocative book? Not in the least. If you want “provocative” you should instead read “The Trouble with Physics” by Lee Smolin.
SF = Speculative Fiction.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Guide2
Not as good as the first book, but still a lot to think about while reading it.
LibraryThing member ccatalfo
Fascinating read of current and future trends in humanity and humanism.
LibraryThing member Maquina_Lectora
Yoval Noah Harari suggests that as science is converging on an all-encompassing dogma, which says that organisms are algorithms and life is data processing, human nature will be transformed because intelligence will be uncoupled from consciousness. The advances in sciences, more specific to
Show More
neurosciences, nanotechnology and computer science, will change fundamentally the society, politics and our daily lives. Show Less
LibraryThing member breic
Some retreading of "Sapiens". The new material was highly speculative and generally ill-informed. Harari seems to have toured Silicon Valley after writing Sapiens, and his thoughts on technology are inaccurate and often factually wrong; one gets the impression that he credulously reads emojied
I very much enjoyed Sapiens, so the sloppy thinking here was quite disappointing. One star for being provocative.
Show More
Twitter posts based on clickbait Wired articles based on university press releases based on scientific papers, and never actually looks to the source itself. The book is full of ridiculous syllogisms, as in: Information is important, Humans process information, Therefore humans will outsource their decisions to Google and thanks to the Internet of Things conquer the solar system, the galaxy, and the entire universe! I very much enjoyed Sapiens, so the sloppy thinking here was quite disappointing. One star for being provocative.
Show Less
LibraryThing member nivramkoorb
This book is the follow up to Sapiens which I thought was one of the best non-fiction books that I have ever read. In this book Harari spends much of the book rehashing concepts that he introduced in Sapiens. For me this helped build on these complex theories. Having had a chance to look at things
Show More
through Harari's prism, I do see the concept of myths that dominate our society. He continues to build on these concepts while getting into the influence of "humanism" over the last 300 years. You begin to understand the impact of religion in restricting society from advancing against famine, plague, and war. Once the value of the human is introduced and the concept of expanding knowledge becoms the reality, we begin to see the incredible advancements that the world has made in the last 300 years. With this foundation in place, Harari begins to paint a future that is based on science and the belief that we are nothing more than algorithms of our neurons that determine behavior. He splits hairs on the concept of free will with what we feel is free choice is nothing more than an algorithm. One can debate this concept, but ultimately he postures that increased AI developments along with data gathering through google, facebook etc, and biological data gathering through devices like the Apple watch can lead to enough data being available to eliminate the need to for humans to make choices. Given this book was written in 2016, he gives examples on how data from facebook can be used to influence election strategy. Very prescient! You may not agree with his predictions but this is a thought provoking book that will make you think about the big concepts that you base your life on such as organized religion, government, and science. Along with Sapiens these are 2 books that are must reads. Show Less
LibraryThing member kristilabrie
I lost my review of this awhile back, so adding another. I think I was nicer right after I finished reading this book, but it didn't age well over time, on me. There were some interesting suggestions brought up (albeit nothing very original), and I enjoyed considering what the future of humanity
Show More
and technology might look like. Now, what I remember from reading the book, is that it was long-winded, presumptive, and rather generous as far as logic goes...meh. Show Less
LibraryThing member RajivC
This, at many levels, is a disturbing book. It is indeed disturbing if the gentle reader pauses to contemplate the future. The thoughts he leaves us with are not new. They have been predicted by science fiction writers, and if you apply the Big Brother concept of 1984 to today's world, you will get
Indeed, in today's world of big data, electronic eavesdropping, AI, genetic research etc, indeed the possibility of a race of 'superhuman', with the mass of humanity being stooges of the same, is not that remote a possibility.
The question then becomes, what happens to nations?
The book is indeed well written, and is quite accessible in its style. You could argue some points. I personally believe that, despite our data and the modern rush towards algorithms, we are not algorithms. We are emotional beings who will burn the planet (and ourselves) to extinction. Having said that, he raises many pertinent issues, and it would be a mistake to dismiss them as mere speculation.
An excellent book, and one that we should all read, and ponder over.
Show More
an idea of how disturbing this can be. Indeed, in today's world of big data, electronic eavesdropping, AI, genetic research etc, indeed the possibility of a race of 'superhuman', with the mass of humanity being stooges of the same, is not that remote a possibility.
The question then becomes, what happens to nations?
The book is indeed well written, and is quite accessible in its style. You could argue some points. I personally believe that, despite our data and the modern rush towards algorithms, we are not algorithms. We are emotional beings who will burn the planet (and ourselves) to extinction. Having said that, he raises many pertinent issues, and it would be a mistake to dismiss them as mere speculation.
An excellent book, and one that we should all read, and ponder over.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Jane-Phillips
A fantastic and very readable follow up to "Sapiens", in which the author explores where humanity goes from where we are at the moment. How will technicological advances effect our work enviroments, are we going to make ourselves redundant are some questions I came out of reading the book asking.
LibraryThing member johnverdon
Few Thinkers today - have such a broad and deep grasp of where the future can go.
Harari is a MUST READ - even if you don't agree with him - he will deepen your understanding of the forces at work today that are shaping the future we are creating. His grasp of the future is based on a deep
Harari is a MUST READ - even if you don't agree with him - he will deepen your understanding of the forces at work today that are shaping the future we are creating. His grasp of the future is based on a deep
Show More
understanding of the past and the emergence of humans. Show Less
LibraryThing member DanielSTJ
This was a spellbinding, captivating book. The problems of tomorrow, interrelated with the outcomes of the day, permeate this book and facilitate comprehension of what it is to be in a world full of humans who no longer understand their place. Harari's work is commendable, multilayered, and written
5 stars-- and well deserved.
Show More
eloquently. The questions that he poses, his answers, and the possible scenarios are desirable, yet left open-ended at the same time. This is one of the best recent non-fiction books I have read in some time. I recommend it for everyone.5 stars-- and well deserved.
Show Less
LibraryThing member datrappert
This book, a follow up to Sapiens, is just about as much a page-turner as Harari, better than anyone I can remember recently, is able to make the most complex ideas and subjects clear in his writing. The story here, however, is even more depressing than that of Sapiens. Essentially, now that
Show More
Sapiens, that is Man, controls everything, what will he do with it? Harari stresses that these are only "possible" futures, but there is little doubt that the super-rich and super-powerful will take advantage of medical advances to extend their own lifespans and further increase their dominance over the rest of us. In Harari's worst scenario, most human beings simply don't have any reason for existence in the brave new world that is coming closer every day. And when that happens, will the rich even care to feed us? Or will they think of us the same way we think of cows and pigs, merely lower animals to be exploited? Yes, it's bleak, and my summary doesn't begin to do it justice, but you need to read it. Yes, Harari can be a bit annoying at times. He is so sure of so many things, and he makes broad sweeping statements indicating that religion really doesn't count for much these days. Obviously he doesn't live in the United States. Show Less
LibraryThing member aadyer
A good, if somewhat long prophecy and pitch for the future of humanity and how society and humanism is going to change in this process. Whilst interesting, thought provoking and certainly well argued, with layered thoughts and conclusions, this was prophecy with a heart of ice. Do we seek these
Show More
changes that are happening to us? Are we happy with them? Is it what we want long term? Thought provoking and intriguing Show Less
LibraryThing member the.ken.petersen
Until the last two chapters, I was with this book. Harari has written a book which many reviewers have taken as a dystopian prediction of the future but, which is in reality, a discussion document looking at potential futures, working on current trends.
If you are as old as me, you will remember
The author does raise many interesting concepts: the end of the liberal era is something which I could see coming to pass but, I did find his dismissive attitude to religion irritating. Naturally, Mr Harari is entitled to his view as to whether a, or indeed any, religion is based on more than superstition, but to write a supposedly factual book and simply state that religion is now dead, is a little far fetched. Mr Harari goes further than this, he offers us the replacement 'religion' for the new era; he calls this 'Dataism'.
Dataism is described as a new, fact based religion. It seems that human beings, if they survive, will become a sort of universal virus, collecting information just for the pleasure of knowledge. I say, 'if they survive, because the suggestion is that artificial intelligence will be far more effective at this task and that we will either become enhanced human/computer mergers or, we will replace ourselves with a homo sapiens creation. This seems unlikely to me.
The wealthy, the influential, the high rollers will not negotiate themselves into a position of less power and the underclasses are sadly showing a lack of concern for the issues of significance; they are neatly side tracked into a world of 'needing the latest technology', and playing with these new toys. Capitalism will not go gently into that good night.
Interestingly, a brief study of t'interweb, shows that the whole concept of 'Dataism' is far from a rapidly expanding new religion, it is a crank idea with little following.
An interesting book, but don't expect it to change your life.
If you are as old as me, you will remember
Show More
those 'Tomorrow's World' type programmes on the television: if their 1970's ideas as to life in the 21st century had been accurate, we would all be using flying cars, have limitless free energy and be living the life of luxury whilst robots undertake all the work. I don't need to tell you, that this is not quite the way things worked out! Similarly, this book is most unlikely to be a pre-history.The author does raise many interesting concepts: the end of the liberal era is something which I could see coming to pass but, I did find his dismissive attitude to religion irritating. Naturally, Mr Harari is entitled to his view as to whether a, or indeed any, religion is based on more than superstition, but to write a supposedly factual book and simply state that religion is now dead, is a little far fetched. Mr Harari goes further than this, he offers us the replacement 'religion' for the new era; he calls this 'Dataism'.
Dataism is described as a new, fact based religion. It seems that human beings, if they survive, will become a sort of universal virus, collecting information just for the pleasure of knowledge. I say, 'if they survive, because the suggestion is that artificial intelligence will be far more effective at this task and that we will either become enhanced human/computer mergers or, we will replace ourselves with a homo sapiens creation. This seems unlikely to me.
The wealthy, the influential, the high rollers will not negotiate themselves into a position of less power and the underclasses are sadly showing a lack of concern for the issues of significance; they are neatly side tracked into a world of 'needing the latest technology', and playing with these new toys. Capitalism will not go gently into that good night.
Interestingly, a brief study of t'interweb, shows that the whole concept of 'Dataism' is far from a rapidly expanding new religion, it is a crank idea with little following.
An interesting book, but don't expect it to change your life.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Elizabeth80
Absolutely fascinating!!
LibraryThing member brakketh
Interesting and engaging look at social forces that have shaped currently politics and philosophy with hypotheses for what the future may hold. Forecast is concerning and thought-provoking.
LibraryThing member GlennBell
I have read several other books by Yuval and liked the others better. This book has a lot of good ideas and I agree with much of it but his definition of religion in this book is flawed in my opinion. He also introduces the concept of datatism at the end that seems strange. Overall I recommend this
Show More
book but not as strongly as his other books. Show Less
Awards
Independent Booksellers' Book Prize (Shortlist — Adult — 2017)
Wellcome Trust Book Prize (Longlist — 2017)
Jan Michalski Prize for Literature (Finalist — 2018)
Wissensbuch des Jahres (2017)
Chicago Public Library Best of the Best: Adults (Selection — 2017)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
2015 (in Hebrew)
2016 (in English)
2017 (in French)
2017 (Nederlands)
Physical description
464 p.; 9 inches
ISBN
0062464345 / 9780062464347