This is only one perspective on these complex issues, and my knowledge is ever-evolving. There are many other aspects and viewpoints that we could explore in future conversations. This is an ongoing and evolving discussion that will require us to revisit and re-evaluate as we learn more.

The aim of this note is to throw light onto the next socio-political system with the introduction of technologies like HMI which are leading us towards an abundant society.

Capitalism & the state of scarcity

Throughout human history, the problem of resource scarcity has been a constant challenge. Food, water, land, and other resources have always been in limited supply, and people have fought wars and developed entire economic systems in an attempt to manage and distribute them. Economics itself emerged as a discipline to address these challenges of resource allocation.

Initially, the management of resources was centralized in the hands of a select few, such as monarchs and nobility. However, this approach suffered from a lack of information and a conflict of interest, as the rulers were not necessarily motivated to make the most efficient or fair decisions.

Capitalism, which evolved out of feudalism is the precise transition aimed at solving the issue mentioned in the above paragraph. It gave more power to the people, who could now vote with their dollars to determine how resources were used. Under capitalism, private companies seek to maximize their profits by providing consumers with the most valuable goods and services. This competition in the free market, the theory goes, leads to increased innovation and economic growth. Though, it improvised the allocation of resources, the distribution of power and wealth has not changed that much.

Overall capitalism led us to increased productivity, freedom, and wealth generation.

Scarcity of resources? → Scarcity refers not only to material resources like the ones mentioned, but also to non-material resources such as time, labour, and intelligence. These resources are scarce because they are limited in supply, and there are only so many hours in a day, so much work that can be done, and so many creative ideas that can be conceived.

What is changing?

But, if you note, the core of capitalism is the efficient allocation of scarce resources.

Over the past century, we've seen tremendous progress in making previously scarce physical resources abundant. For example, we've found ways to create clean water from seemingly scarce sources, we can produce abundant amounts of food through agriculture and other methods, and we've made great strides in renewable energy taking the cost of energy to near zero levels. These technological advances have helped to make many physical resources abundant, which has transformed the way we think about scarcity and abundance.

While material resources are increasingly abundant thanks to technological progress, non-material resources like time and labor are also becoming abundant in a different way. Automation and machine intelligence are helping to reduce the need for mindless, repetitive labor, freeing up time and human effort for more meaningful pursuits. This shift is changing our understanding of scarcity and abundance, and its implications are still being explored.

Technological progress, which is driven by our growing knowledge and understanding of the world, is enabling both the abundance of material resources and the abundance of non-material resources.

Look at the Abundance Society | HMI Lens

As technology makes many forms of labor abundant, humans will be liberated from low-level, repetitive tasks, giving them more time to engage in more creative and cognitively demanding pursuits. In the future, the majority of the workforce may be engaged in work that is more fulfilling and stimulating, since machines and automation will take on the more mundane and repetitive tasks. This shift will have profound implications for the nature of work and the way we think about what it means to be productive.

This leads us to three key questions: 1) What would we be doing then, and who is deciding the tasks? 2) Would people want to do it?, and 3) Are people capable of doing it? All these questions are subjective and can only be broadly answered over time.

1) What would we be doing? And to achieve what?

These are very complex questions, and there are many possible answers, but one possible way to approach them is to say that the purpose of humans is to understand and improve our environment in order to ensure our survival and improve the quality of our lives. This involves developing technology and knowledge to solve problems like aging and inequality, and to help us avoid threats to our survival from intra and extra terrestrial events like pandemic, earthquakes, changing electro-magnetic field, asteroids, etc.

In the far future, as we continue to expand our knowledge and technology, we may eventually be able to harness the vast energy resources of our galaxy, making us a "Type 3 civilization" according to the Kardashev scale. This would be a radically different stage of human development, with unprecedented capabilities and power. And, I believe, this can only be done if we increase the cognition we put into understanding our surroundings.

The hypothetical 'post-scarcity' world that we've been discussing offers an exciting vision of humanity's future. In this world, humans are freed from the constraints of survival and have the opportunity to pursue knowledge for its own sake. The big question, however, is whether there are physical or cognitive limits to human understanding. Can we truly achieve infinite knowledge, or is there some hard limit to what we can know and understand?

2) Would people want to do it?

If humans truly want to achieve a 'post-scarcity' society, then we need to consider how social institutions and structures can be re-designed to promote true freedom of choice. This could involve rethinking the way we approach economics, politics, education, and other systems. The goal would be to create a society where individuals are truly empowered to pursue their own interests and contribute to the advancement of knowledge, without the constraints of survival and material needs.

If we could indeed create a world without material scarcity, would this actually be desirable for humans? While it may seem like a utopia, it's possible that a world without material concerns could have unintended consequences for human psychology and motivation.

I just want to point out that what humans do right now is not out of sheer free will but due to overall circumstances. Similarly, we cannot deny working on this idea of post scarcity world solely due to the opinion that people might not want it.

3) Are people capable of doing it?

Whether humans are capable of a post-scarcity world is an open question. There are many reasons why it hasn't happened yet, including economic, social, and educational constraints. It's possible that if we remove these constraints, humans could potentially create a world without scarcity. However, we can't know for sure until we try.

We will be adding more points, and insights on this topic in the coming days.

‍