Overly optimistic
E.O. Wilson picks up on our urge to group (21 April, p 34), which is leaving us with innumerable paradoxical, overlapping loyalties. Kinships and religions, the ones that he recognises, are only two: think local, think country, think race, think culture, think football team, think enemies and rivals.
But Wilson is surely engaging in a narrow form of optimism when he says a better understanding of biology is the key to resolving conflict. His solution, though useful, will not be enough to save humanity, let alone our world.
Born to die
Further to Geoffrey Shephard’s letter suggesting stem-cell research could enable lifespans of centuries through the manufacture of replacement body parts (21 April, p 37). I cannot think of a better recipe for the intellectual and cultural stagnation of our species.
Death, as Steve 91av observed, “is very likely the single best invention of life. It clears out the old to make way for the new”. Besides, how would such long lives be financed, or would we all have to work to age 300?
A more valid objective would be to make the last quarter of people’s lives healthier and more comfortable. A shining earlier example of such a philosophy is John Charnley’s replacement hip, which has restored mobility to millions in later life.
Snuff said
In CultureLab’s look at Immortality (7 April, p 47), both reviewer S. Jay Olshansky and author Stephen Cave appear to consider that the unit of survival is the individual. The battle against death is then the fight for individual survival, whether through health measures, life after death, immortality of the soul, or legacy.
What if the unit of survival is the community, or the species? We have already seen the resurrection of the concept of group selection, after all.
Many of us are happy to grow, spread our genetic and cognitive seed, then drop off the branch. We might not even need to leave a recognisable legacy, so long as we make a difference during our time.
Hard problem
As a physicist, I’m intrigued by Christof Koch’s article on consciousness (14 April, p 24).
His description of an approach to a generic theory of consciousness that involves linking physical neuronal firing patterns in the brain to an abstract, multidimensional space is strongly reminiscent of the phase space model of statistical physics. Physicists have honed the phase space model into a powerful mathematical probe of complex systems, out of which emerges the profoundly important link between information and entropy.
In the past, researchers from other disciplines brave enough to paddle in biological waters have labelled the development of a successful theory of consciousness as “the hard problem”. Physicists may perhaps be encouraged that a solution is now being sought on territory familiar to them, and they may find the link between consciousness, information and entropy particularly appealing.
Moon economics
I couldn’t help feeling that mining minerals on Earth’s mini-moons would not be viable (21 April, p 48). If a 2-kilometre-wide asteroid is worth $25 trillion ($25×1012), surely a mini-moon one-thousandth of the diameter of such an asteroid (and therefore one-billionth of the volume) would only be worth $25,000 ($25×1012×10-9).
There does not appear to be any way in which the value of the minerals found on such a small moon could possibly justify the expense of getting there and bringing it back. Or am I missing something important?
Power talk
Michael Bond’s article on wealth and the research of Dacher Keltner and Michael Kraus throw up some interesting hypotheses regarding the impact of class, status and money on the way we interact with each other (21 April, p 52).
Teasing apart those three concepts is often hard and there are a host of assumptions made about the terms. This is one reason why the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has embarked on research to look at the question “How much does money matter?” This will look at the evidence for causal impacts of income on other outcomes and help to develop robust theories about why money makes a difference, or not, to health, education and happiness.
An important point from the article is that traits of “lacking interest in others” and “lacking empathy” among groups of higher socio-economic status are not inherent – wealthier participants were perfectly capable of reading emotions when they interacted with people they believed to be higher up the chain. The findings therefore reflect the power relationships between people, based on subtle cues reflected in behaviour, or perhaps the not-so-subtle contrivances of a psychological experiment.
Crucially, the distribution of money – as a reflection of this power and status – could be one of the policy levers available to governments who are interested in the happiness of their citizens.
From Staffan Ulfstrand
Nowhere does your article speculate on whether money-rich people become empathy-poor or empathy-poor people become money-rich. To my knowledge no millionaire has ever said: “Enough is enough. I do not want the extra bonus you are offering me”. Rarely has anybody ever said (or done): “I wish to pay a bit more tax than I am obliged to, because I really do not need all the money I am receiving”.
Is avarice an adaptive personality trait evolved by natural selection, or a cultural fad?
Uppsala, Sweden
Glut from fracking
The real danger from fracking is not the small earthquakes it can cause or even the disposal of the chemicals used in the process (28 January, p 8). It is that we may discover a glut of gas that will drive down the price of all fossil fuels. Natural gas will not replace coal, but will simply increase our use of what will have become a cheap energy source.
We will be left with much further to fall when the gas runs out. That is because the cheap energy will have prevented the introduction of renewable-energy infrastructure, so we won’t even have that to fall back on.
In the meantime, we will be testing the theory of climate change with abandon.
Mammals, after all
The article on immunity correctly states that “breastfeeding reduces infection rates, particularly in the developing world” (7 April, p 34).
Absence of breastfeeding is especially disastrous in developing countries and anywhere in the world where there is a war, crisis or other disaster. But, contrary to popular opinion that breastfeeding is a mere bonus in developed countries, data from UNICEF suggests that increased breastfeeding rates could “save or delay around 720 post-neonatal deaths in the US each year” ().
In addition, about $13 billion could be saved in the US per year if rates of breastfeeding exclusively for the first six months of life increased to 90 per cent of newborns ()
UNICEF also refers to a 1995 study which estimated that the UK’s National Health Service spends £35 million per year treating gastroenteritis in formula-fed infants, who are more likely to get this .
Breastfeeding is the biological norm for our species. We are mammals after all.
No choice?
Helen Knight claims that our smartphones are subtly removing our ability to choose, or even to make a decision (14 April, p 36). I’m not sure that the notion of free will has been settled, but the idea that clever marketing algorithms can deprive us of our ability to choose seems specious.
No doubt there are many individuals who would just as soon abandon their lives to Apple’s virtual assistant Siri and “her” kind, but for those of us who continue to use “smart” phones while at the same time not abandoning our thought processes, the world will remain full of choice.
Political divide
I would not wish to contradict the conclusions of John Hibbing and Chris Mooney on the biological basis for differences in political belief (7 April, p 28). Yet when Mooney speaks of US liberals and conservatives as personality types, his terminology confuses.
He goes on to talk about political left versus political right – terms which might be confused with liberal and conservative in some countries – but equally could have talked about socialist versus capitalist, cooperative versus competitive, egalitarian versus privileged or imperial. Presumably within any of these regimes, there would be conservatives who support the status quo and liberals who seek to change it, and the liberals and conservatives in each group might be profoundly different.
Off is off
Feedback talked about devices consuming power when supposedly turned off and suggested a requirement that “off really means off” (31 March). But this is already the case.
There are two international standard symbols for a power switch. The one for a true on/off switch has an unbroken circle with a vertical stroke within it. This is the . A device with a standby state has a broken circle, with the vertical stroke through the break – the IEC 5009 standby symbol.
Ironically, many power-saving initiatives incorrectly use the standby symbol as their logo.
Pays to play
In Feedback, Terry Devlin is puzzled that an Irish lottery “compiles a STATS section to improve your chances of winning” (21 April). It’s obvious! Fools who study such a section in the hope of winning are likely to spend more. This will indeed increase their chance of winning.