4 replies to this topic

[advancedatheist]

Saul Kent on page 10 of Future Sex (published in 1974) writes:

I have . . chosen to explore sex in the context of a future world in which many of the basic restrictions on individual freedom have been overcome. In this world everyone is immortal (not subject to the inevitable decline of old age) and resources are virtually limitless. . . In my opinion, immortality and unlimited wealth are well within our reach and if we fail to achieve them it will be due only to lack of will and vision.

Saul explicitly quotes from Bob Ettinger's Man Into Superman in several places. His view of "the future" also sounds like F.M. Esfandiary's in spots, but Saul doesn't credit him. From the vantage point of the real 21st Century, a lot of that era's breathless transhumanist speculation sounds ironic now.

Saul surprised me by also forecasting something that sounds a lot like the singularity, quoting Marvin Minsky. Funny how the singularity always looks about 30 years away no matter how much time passes:

[Shannon Vyff]

Thanks! Fun to read--but where is the sex in that page?

[qemist]

Give credit where it is due. Saul doesn't deserve any for this. The citation is Marvin Minsky, “Artificial Intelligience,” (1966). Scientific American 215(3): 247-260. Minsky's predictions as to when super-human AI would be reality were wildly early. In 1970 he predicted it would happen in "three to eight years" (maybe he meant 328).

[Mind]

I think I am not so pessimistic about the future (and predictions) perhaps because I did not get burned by the first couple waves of predictions (Like Minsky's and F.M. Esfandiary) and the space/sci-fi broken promises (ala STar Trek).

I'll do my duty and remind everyone that there has been progress. In reality we are getting closer to Star Trek communicators and tricorders, and what-not with cell phones, hand-held diagnostics devices, and microfluidic chips. Even cloaking is being engineered!! That has to count for something Mark, right?

I haven't read the book, but since "Future Sex" is the book in question, let me chime in on the changes I have seen in my life. I am leaving aside the moral arguments about whether more open or closed sexual practices are good for individuals and society, this is just about the changes. I grew up in a religious tradition and "sex" was repressed and frowned upon. It was a sin. You were not supposed to have sex until you were married and no masturbating either. Women were also banned from sex until marriage. The only way for testosterone fueled young males to satisfy the their over-active libido was to risk public ostracization and buy a "dirty" magazine. Since my youth I have seen a dramatic sexual revolution. There is no question about it. For those young men out there, technology has helped to relieve that over-active libido. With a smart phone, pornography (of any degree, type, or fetish) can be viewed at any time of day anywhere in the world (again, I am leaving moral arguments aside). Not only that, all kinds of "interesting" devices and drugs have been developed in order to help singles, couples, triples, whatever to enhance their sexual experience. Not only that, gay, bi, trans, poly, whatever relationships are becoming more common. I don't know how much of this is progress or just change, but the future is now, and sex in 2009 is a lot different than back in the 1960s and 70s (anyway for the majority who did not partake in the previous "sexual revolution")

[advancedatheist]

How about this as an example of "future sex":

Is Feminist Socialism Beta Aversion?

the welfare state allows some women to avoid long term relationships with men they find insufficiently attractive while still being able to make babies.