# data[].attributes.body
'The fundamental problem of humanity is that we have paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and accelerating, godlike technology' p xiv

This is putting the cart before the horse - we can change the tech; we can't change ourselves.

We are trying to make humans fit a technology rather than making technology fit humans.

# data[].attributes.body
'In an age where AI and humanity are merging, one thing seems clear: dystopia is inevitable if we don't... buy my book on threshold leadership(!)'

# data[].attributes.body
This is a very impressive sounding word salad that meant nothing to me.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree more with this quote. I am not sure that we are capable of 'changing our ways fundamentally' short of conversion. There is nothing new under the sun.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm inclined to agree with the concept "What can we...?" is not a great first question. I'd be more comfortable with "Should we...?" as a starting point. I'm surprised by the idea of starting with "How can we promote flourishing...?" It seems attractive but reactive. Perhaps that's all we've got when technological advances are running ahead of us!

# data[].attributes.body
A little concerned this is simply exchanging one system for another.

# data[].attributes.body
"... the continuous exercise of power... . ... the great man theory of leadership, which posits that history can be largely explained by the impact of heroes. This theory supports an alpha, or wolf pack, leadership approach ... . Such leader disconnect their thinking from their full humanity, prioritising short-term personal success and wealth over flourishing or averting suffering." pg xvii

I think I have seen this type of leadership in the conservative evangelical church, which is concerning. The alpha leader that equips people to be highly productive in their discipleship of others, which uses lots of biblical language but has felt off the mark.