Discussion Questions for “Why the Future Doesn't Need Us”

1. Does Joy agree or disagree with Kurzweil's basic claims? Explain.

● Clearly Joy disagrees because he knows that what Ray claims is a possibility. Bill Joy anticipates
danger and that he feels uneased and troubled.
2. What are Joy's best reasons for being pessimistic?
● In the first part of Joy’s article, he introduces the fears he and others have for the potential danger
of the new twenty-first century technologies known as GNR- genetics, nanotechnology, and
robotics.
● Joy sees this as potentially disastrous because it not only enables humans to become controllers of
creation and evolution, but if inadvertently released, could self-replicate uncontrollably.
● Joy also notes that through the manipulation of genes, humans could reengineer themselves with
different species. This he sees would threaten the concepts of equality in society, and even the
foundation upon which democracy is built.
● He fears that by enabling computers and robots to think and make decisions for themselves, they
would eventually be able to self-replicate. If this were to happen, Joy fears the human race would
become extinct or slaves to the superior machines.
3. What are his strongest reasons for expressing optimism?
● Mainly, we, humans have great capacity for caring.
4. Why, in Joy’s opinion, is humility necessary in developing technology?
● Humility instructs us to think harder about how to reframe problems so that their ethical
dimensions are brought to light, which new facts to seek and when to resist asking science for
clarification.
Humility is in fact, one of the most powerful and important attributes of growth, both in and out
of the ring. Being humble helps to build trust and facilitates learning, which are key aspects of
leadership and personal development.
5. What is Joy’s dilemma, with respect to knowledge? How does he view it, compared with
Oppenheimer?
● As Bill Joy has argued, new technologies pose a profound challenge to society. Joy debate looks
to the future with penetrating vision while Oppenheimer didn't.
6. In the passage beginning “If we could agree, as a species, what we wanted …”, do you get the feeling
Joy is expressing a longing? What is it for?
7. On what ethical principles would you say Joy bases his critique of technology?
● Joy bases his critique of technology as non-maleficence where safety comes first.
8. Joy believes that “we must find alternative outlets for our creative forces, beyond the
culture of perpetual economic growth …” What should we say to future generations who
will face prospects of less prosperity than their parents if we curtail the technological
development that drives economic growth?
● Such arguments hold only if actions today do not harm future generations; however, this cannot
be known with certainty. It is possible that future generations can be made worse off by inheriting
fewer resources from the current generation than they need to match our standard of living
(Anand and Sen 2000).
9. “Each of us has our precious things,” Joy says, “and as we care for them we locate the
essence of our humanity. In the end, it is because of our great capacity for caring that I
remain optimistic we will confront the dangerous issues now before us.” Do you share
his optimism? Explain.
● Yes, because caring is the most important thing.Why do we do the things we do? At the most
basic and definite level, it can be resolved in two words: we care. Whether it is direct or indirect,
emotional investment is what compels us to make certain choices and take certain actions.
10.Are you more in agreement with Kurzweil or with Joy? Why?
● They both have good argument. What they're claiming are true but I am more sided to Joy
because I also believe that we might be able to steer technology in the right direction.