Harari vs “Scientists” & Fact Checkers

When scientists focus on the finger pointing at the moon rather than the moon itself, it's a missed opportunity!
 

I have read the first and the third books of the Sapiens saga by Youval Harari - 'Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind' and '21 Lessons for the 21st century' - while at the moment, I am engrossed in the second one: 'Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow’.

Based on my understanding of what I've read so far, here are my key takeaways from Harari's writing:

• Our species has achieved significant advancements and may continue to do so at an even faster pace.

• We have excelled in certain areas but often at the cost of other species and sometimes even our own, though not always consciously.

• In light of issues like inequality, climate change, and disruptive technological advances, we face significant risks. Therefore, we should adopt a more humble approach, acknowledge uncertainty, and engage in discussions about the future and society we wish to construct.

While I might hold different opinions on some of Harari's narratives, I believe that these points are incredibly valid, and we should take them seriously when formulating policies and making decisions, including when we vote.

You can imagine my reaction when I read articles like this one, which I carefully read to the end. To discover that, as the title suggested, the primary argument - substantiated by scientific peer review - is that Harari is merely a scientific populist.

So should we disregard challenges such as climate change or the potential societal disruptions caused by AI and new technology? Because if we ignore these points and read such articles after hearing Mr. Harari speak, whose tone may not be conducive to building sympathy and sometimes comes across as presumptuous, we might be inclined to believe that these are false alarms and continue with our lives without much concern for environmental policies, data protection policies, and policies related to the societal impacts of new technologies.

I expect more, much more, from scientists when they comment on someone pointing at the moon than merely criticizing the hand.