#james hester

[geopolicraticus]

Interstellar distances seem to cry out for robotics and artificial intelligence. But as Nick Nielsen explains in the essay below, there is a compelling argument that our long-term goal should be hu...

Thanks again to Paul Gilster who has posted this new essay of mine, “The Scientific Imperative of Human Spaceflight,” on his Centauri Dreams blog.

Since I sent this to Centauri Dreams I wrote a couple of posts about experimental archaeology in the future, Experimental Archaeology of the Future and Portraying the Future: “Historical Pre-Enactment” (the latter a comment upon James Hester‘s post Portraying the Future: 'Historical Pre-Enactment'), and I have thus realized that the experimental archaeology that places the archaeologist in an authentic context (whether an authentic context of the past or future) is another perfect example of the sciences that use technology to place a human observer (as a whole person) in a position where it is possible to make novel observations -- something that this essay discusses in some detail.

Also, a few weeks ago in “Adventure Science Enters the Space Age,” along with Jacob Shively I argued for the importance of “adventure science” in contradistinction to “big science.” Adventure science, too, is another example of science undertaken by human beings on a human scale.

The overview effect, experimental archaeology, and adventure science all represent science undertaken by the whole person, in which the embodied mind encounters the world through the mediation of the human body, and this mediation can be a significant constituent of the experience.

As long as civilization allows the possibility of new experiences, and our technologies can place human beings in new contexts in which human experience can reveal hitherto unrecognized aspects of the world, there will be a specifically human role in the development of scientific civilization. While I did not write this as a response to Bill Joy’s famous dystopian essay, “Why the future doesn’t need us.” it nevertheless could be taken as an argument that the future does, in fact need us, and that human beings are indispensable to history on the largest cosmological scales. 

[geopolicraticus]

(I must admit, first off, that I am cheating ever so slightly. What follows is an idea, not a report from a completed project. However, it is an idea that a number of people are behind and, once the opportunity and resources present themselves, I plan on manifesting as soon as possible.) 'Be the change you wish to see in the world.' - Gandhi

After posting Experimental Archaeology of the Future I heard from several individuals -- James Hester and Vinay Gupta, inter alia -- who have already been pursuing this line of thought. The above-linked article by James Hester gives a sketch of the idea. I was interested to note that Mr. Hester has been involved in historical re-enactment (and I should mention that “historical pre-enactment” is a great term to cover the symmetrical extrapolation of this into the future), which I previously wrote about in Falling in Love with Medieval Armed Combat.

Both experimental archaeology of the past and experimental archaeology of the future are perfect examples of how human beings are sometimes impacted to a greater degree by learning experiences that involve the whole person. We’re all familiar, of course, with intemperate condemnations of mere “book learning,” but, being myself an enthusiast of books and book learning, I in no way wish to disparage this approach to knowledge. However, this is not the only approach to knowledge, and in some cases it is not the most effective approach to knowledge.

I have an upcoming blog post in which I discuss this extensively in a theoretical context, and I will provide a link here when the post is up; when I was writing this soon-to-appear post, experimental archaeology had not occurred to me as an example of my thesis, so I would like to connect to two ex post facto.

With these examples of potential experimental archaeology of the future, which I suggested yesterday would need funding on the level of “big science” to be a reality, and my post from a few days before that, Origins of Life Research as Space Science, in which I suggested scaling up origins of life research by building an artificial habitat in Earth orbit where life could be studied on a large scale for a long duration, it should be obvious that it would be a relatively easy matter to fund scientific civilization at a much higher level than in now the case. How much a civilization driven by science actually spends on scientific research is probably a determining factor in the existential viability of that civilization and its ongoing status as a scientific civilization. 

[evokit-notes]

Rather than seeing them as our primitives forebears, it may be more helpful to look at previous civilisations as different ways of addressing the common challenges of life. Some were more high-tech than others but ultimately what they came up with worked for them: otherwise, the ideas, or even the people wouldn't have lasted for long.

James Hester | Dark Mountain - Issue 3 | p36

[evokit-notes]

The Afghan tribes are some of the most devastating guerilla fighters on the planet. They are hard as nails. fiercely defensive of their territory, and carry as hell to anyone who happens to get on their bad side. They do not take kindly to outsiders, and have developed an effective warrior culture to deal with them. The foreign militaries operating in Afghanistan during the past decade of occupation have witnessed this firsthand. The reactions of the tribes make sense when you know that they have sustained repeated invasion attempts, and emerged victorious, for at least the past 2500 years. They've done this before, and against powerhouses such as Alexander the Great, the British Empire (three times), and the Soviets. That is why Afghanistan is often referred to as 'The Graveyard of Empires.'

James Hester | Dark Mountain - Issue 3 | p34

[evokit-notes]

Men's shirts and jackets button left over right because swords were worn on the left hip. When it was drawn, you didn't want your hilt snagged by a flap of cloth, since you might have a rather urgent reason for drawing it.

James Hester | Dark Mountain - Issue 3 | p33