我最近写了关于每个合格的未来主义者都应该知道的约20个术语的文章，但现在是时候关注其对立面了——这里有 10 个没有意义的伪未来主义术语和概念。

i recently wrote about 20 terms every self-respecting futurist should know, but now it's time to turn our attention to the opposite. here are 10 pseudofuturist catchphrases and concepts that need to be eliminated from your vocabulary.


顶图：elysium 的截图。
1.“超越”

1. "transcendence"


一些未来学家以一种与宗教根源相差无几的方式使用这个词。希望我们的科技能够帮助我们体验超越正常形式或物理界限的存在。我们最终很有可能学会如何在计算机中成功模拟大脑，但我们是否能够转移意识本身，这是一个开放性的问题。换句话说，未来可能不属于我们，而是属于我们的副本。因此，任何生物都不可能真正经历超越的过程（也就是说超越只是幻觉）。更重要的是，在一个 "超越的 "数字化世界的生活虽然充满了难以置信的潜力，但不会像在公园里散步那样简单；完全超越不可能是一个可行目标。模拟思维容易被黑客攻击、被删除、被未经授权的复制，还有如何维持最低生活水平的问题。事实上，一个所谓的“上传思想”可能会脱离其肉体形式，但不会脱离经济现实和物理限制，包括运行模拟思维的超级计算机的安全性和可靠性，以及采购足够的处理能力和存储空间的成本问题。

some futurists toss this word around in a way that's not too far removed from its religious roots. the hope is that our technologies can help us experience our existence beyond normal or physical bounds. now, it very well may be true that we'll eventually learn how to emulate brains in a computer, but it's an open question as to whether or not we'll be able to transfer consciousness itself. in other words, the future may not for us — it'll be for our copies. so it's doubtful any biological being will ever literally experience the process of transcension (just the illusion of it).
what's more, life in a "transcendent" digitized realm, while full of incredible potential, will be no walk in the park; full release, or transcendence, is not likely an achievable goal. emulated minds, or ems, will be prone to hacking, deletion, unauthorized copying, and subsistence wages. indeed, a so-called uploaded mind may be free from its corporeal form, but it won't be free from economic and physical realities, including the safety and reliability of the supercomputer running the ems, and the costs involved in procuring sufficient processing power and storage space.

2.奇点

2. "the singularity"

vernor vinge引入了这个宇宙学术语，用来描述我们预测思维中的盲点，或者更确切地说，我们无法预测在比人类更高的人工智能出现后会发生什么。但在那之后，技术奇点已经退化为一个没有任何真正意义的术语。
除了其准宗教内涵之外，“奇点”一词已经变成对未来学家的真正罗夏测试。奇点已被用来描述加速的变化或技术进步几乎瞬间发生的未来时刻。奇点也被用来描述人类过渡到后人类的状态，思维上传，以及一个乌托邦时代的到来。由于这个词的宽泛含义，以及在未来等待我们的险境越来越明晰（例如智能爆炸），我们要放弃奇点的概念转而用更多实质的、明确的假设。

vernor vinge co-opted this term from cosmology as a way to describe a blind spot in our predictive thinking, or more specifically our inability to predict what will happen after the advent of greater-than-human machine intelligence. but since that time, the technological singularity has degenerated to a term void of any true meaning.
in addition to its quasi-religious connotations, it has become a veritable rorschach test for futurists. the singularity has been used to describe accelerating change or a future time when progress in technology occurs almost instantly. it has also be used to describe humanity's transition into a posthuman condition, mind uploads, and the advent of a utopian era. because of all the baggage this term has accumulated, and because the peril that awaits us coming clearer into focus (e.g. the intelligence explosion), it's a term that needs to be put to bed, replaced by more substantive and unambiguous hypotheses.

3.《科技拯救未来》

3."technology will save the future"


我完全赞同我们应该利用科技为我们自己和后代打造理想的未来。 但重要的是，我们要承认未来肯定会面临的挑战，以及我们的努力可能带来的意外后果。
科技是一把双刃剑，不断让我们面对新问题。 我们的发明通常会导致需要解决的矛盾。 枪支产生了对枪支管制和防弹背心的需求。 软件产生了对杀毒软件和防火墙的需求。 工业化导致了工会、气候变化和对地球工程的需求，飞机已被选为恐怖主义武器，等等。 这种态势会一直持续下去。

i wholeheartedly agree that we should use technology to build the kind of future we want for ourselves and our descendants. absolutely. but it's important for us to acknowledge the challenges we're sure to face in trying to do so and the unintended consequences of our efforts.
technology is a double-edged sword that's constantly putting us on the defensive. our inventions often produce outcomes that need to be provisioned for. guns have produced the need for gun control and bulletproof vests. software has produced the need for antivirus programs and firewalls. industrialization has resulted in labour unxs, climate change, and the demand for geoengineering efforts. airplanes have been co-opted as terrorist weapons. and on and on and on.


我们的科技发展可能会导致未来我们的星球遭到破坏和资源耗尽，我们的隐私消失，我们的公民自由受到严重限制，我们的政治、社会和经济结构发生剧烈变化。 因此，尽管我们仍应努力创造未来，但必须记住，我们将不得不适应亲手创造的未来。

the evolution of our technologies could result in a future in which our planet is wrecked and depleted, our privacy gone, our civil liberties severely curtailed, and our political, social and economic structures severely altered. so while we should still strive to create the future, we must remember that we're going to have to adapt to this future.

4.“必然”

4. "will"

我们经常在谈论未来会发生的事情时说得好像它们必然发生，或者好像我们是自己命运的主人。 问题是，不同的人对未来有不同的看法，这取决于他们的需求、价值观和特权地位； 利益竞争总是会引起紧张局势。 更重要的是，我们无疑会在此过程中遇到一些棘手的科技和经济障碍，更不用说一些黑天鹅（意外事件）和骡子（超出我们目前对世界运作方式的理解的意外事件）事件。
另一个观点来自 idea couture 的远见战略家jayar lafontaine， 他告诉我：
“必然”这个词被未来学家滥用了。 这个词看似很微不足道，所以人们可以把这个词加入演讲中以创造一种几乎总是不合适的权威感。 通常情况下，它表明未来学家对某个主题的个人偏见，而不是对确定性的任何认真评估。 对我来说重点是这个词会终止关于未来的有效交流。

we often speak about things that will happen in the future as if there's a certain inevitability to it, or as if we're masters of our own destinies. trouble is, different people have different visions of the future depending on their needs, values, and place of privilege; there will always be a tension arising from competing interests. what's more, we will undoubtedly hit some intractable technological and economic barriers along the way, not to mention some black swans (unexpected events) and mules (unexpected events beyond our current understanding of how the world works).
another perspective comes from jayar lafontaine, a foresight strategist with idea couture. he told me,
the word "will" is wildly overused by futurists. it's small and innocuous, so it can be slipped into speech to create a sense of authority which is almost always inappropriate. more often than not, it indicates a futurist's personal biases on a subject rather than any serious assessment of certainty. and it can shut down fruitful conversations about the future, which for me is the whole point.

5.永生

5. "immortality"

激进的延寿和超人类主义社区中的一些人喜欢谈论实现“永生”。 事实上，未来的人类很有可能最终实现停止老化——一种显著的可能是通过几类科技的结合应用来实现，包括生物科技、控制论、神经科学、分子纳米科技等。 但这个前景有点太乐观了。
首先，意外或不可避免的死亡（比如被有轨电车撞死、被谋杀或无意中驾驶航天器遇上超新星）将永远是人类或后人类的生命中不可避免的一部分。 确实，我们活得越久，被外力杀死的可能性就越大。 其次，宇宙是有限的——这意味着我们的存在也是有限的。 这可能意味着生命的最终命运由宇宙的热寂、大挤压或大撕裂决定。 与 弗兰克·j·蒂普勒的想法相反，这里没有漏洞——甚至没有复活生命的欧米茄点。

some folks in the radical life extension and transhumanist communities like to talk about achieving "immortality." indeed, there's a very good chance that future humans will eventually enter into a state of so-called negligible senescence (the cessation of aging) — a remarkable development that will likely come about through the convergence of several tech sectors, including biotechnology, cybernetics, neuroscience, molecular nanotechnology, and others. but it's a prospect that has been taken just a bit too far.
first, accidental or unavoidable deaths (like getting hit by a streetcar, being murdered, or inadvertently flying a spacecraft into a supernova) will always be a part of the human — or posthuman — condition. indeed, the longer we live, the greater chance we have of getting killed in one way or another. second, the universe is a finite thing — which means our existence is finite, too. that could mean an ultimate fate decided by the heat death of the universe, the big crunch, or the big rip. and contrary to the thinking of frank tipler, there's no loop hole — not even a life-resurrecting omega point.

6.“颠覆性”

6. "disruptive"

如今，几乎所有从硅谷出来的小玩意儿都被过誉为具有颠覆性。 我不认为这个词的内涵与这些公司宣传的意思一样。
老实说，要使一项科技真正具有颠覆性，它必须动摇社会的基础。 回顾历史，可以肯定地说，电报、火车、汽车和互联网确实具有颠覆性。 展望未来，分子组装的发展、大规模自动化的社会和经济后果以及人工智能和通用人工智能的广泛应用可能具有颠覆性。

virtually every gadget that comes out of silicon valley these days is heralded as being disruptive. i don't think this word means what these companies think it means.
honestly, for a technology to be truly disruptive it has to shake the foundations of society. looking back through history, it's safe to say that the telegraph, trains, automobiles, and the internet were truly disruptive. looking ahead, it'll be various developments in molecular assembly, the social and economic consequences of mass automation, and the proliferation of ai and agi.


7.未来冲击

7. "future shock"

这是一个很快就会过时的术语。

this is a term that's getting old fast.

当然，未来冲击可能在70 年代初alvin toffler第一次提出这个理念时就已经发生过（尽管我对此表示怀疑），但是真的有人遭受“未来冲击”吗？ 托夫勒将其描述为“在太短时间内发生太多变化”导致的“巨大压力和迷茫”，但我不记得在最新的dsm-v（精神疾病诊断与统计手册第五版）中见过这种病。
毫无疑问，我们社会中的许多人都反对变革——比如抵制同性婚姻或全民医疗保健——但将他们描述为处于受冲击状态是不准确和不合理的， 也许是反动的。

sure, such a thing may have existed in the early 1970s when alvin toffler first came up with the idea (though i doubt it), but does anyone truly suffer from "future shock"? toffler described it as "shattering stress and disorientation" caused by "too much change in too short a period of time," but i don't recall seeing it in the latest edition of the dsm-v.
no doubt, many folks in our society rail against change — like resistance to gay marriage or universal healthcare — but it would be inaccurate and unfair to refer to them as being in a state of shock. reactionary, maybe.


8.《摩尔定律》

8. "moore's law"

不，摩尔定律不是定律。 充其量只是一个一致的经验规律——而且是一个相当明显的规律。 是的，处理器的处理速度越来越快了。 但为什么要称之为定律而迷信呢？ 还有其他类似的可观察到的规律，包括软件、电信、材料小型化甚至生物科技的稳步进步。 事实上，数学“定律”可以预测许多经济部门的产业增长和生产力。 更重要的是，摩尔定律不是进步的指标（摩尔定律经常被用来衡量进步），尤其是社会和经济进步。

nope, not a law. at best it's a consistent empirical regularity — and a fairly obvious one at that. yes, processing speed is getting faster and faster. but why fetishize it by calling it a law? there are other similar observable regularities, including steady advancements in software, telecommunications, materials miniaturization, and even biotechnology. an in fact, mathematical "laws" can predict industrial growth and productivity in many sectors. what's more, moore's law is a poor barometer of progress (something it's often used for), particularly social and economic progress.

9.机器人启示录

9. "the robot apocalypse"

让我们暂时假设一个人工超级智能最终出现并决定摧毁所有人类（插句题外话，考虑到它更有可能是偶然或因为它无动于衷）。 由于人们经常把人工智能与机器人这两种技术混为一谈，因此许多人表示随之而来的很可能是侵略性机器人——即所谓的机器人启示录。
当然，疯狂的超级人工智能当然可以毁灭人类，但常规武力并不是最有效的手段。 一种更可能的情况是某种纳米噬菌体破坏大气层或地球表面。 或者，人工智能也可以用致命病毒感染全体人类。 或者毒化所有的水和食物供应。 还有其它不可预见的方式——没关系。 关键是，如果ai想，它根本不需要那些蠢办法来毁灭人类。

let's assume for a moment that an artificial superintelligence eventually emerges and it decides to destroy all humans (a huge stretch given that it's more likely to do this by accident or because it's indifferent). because ai is often conflated with robotics, many people say the ensuing onslaught is likely to arrive in the form of marauding machines — the so-called robopocalypse.
okay, sure, that's certainly one way a maniacal asi could do it, but it's hardly the most efficient. a more likely scenario would involve the destruction of the atmosphere or terrestrial surface with some kind of nanophage. or, it could infect the entire population with a deadly virus. alternately, it could poison all water and the food supply. or something unforeseen — it doesn't matter. the point is that it doesn't need to go to such clunky lengths to destroy us should it choose to do so.

10.生物学人类的末日
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


10. "the end of humanity"


（图片来自bikeriderlondon/shutterstock）这个概念真的让我反感。 生物学人类末日的说法既是反人类的，也是对未来的不准确描述。 有些人认为，下一个人类进化时代的到来必然意味着人类的灭亡。 这不太可能。 不仅在遥远的未来可能会存在未经改造的生物学意义上的人类，而且他们将永远保留保持原始状态的权利。 所谓的超人类和后人类很可能存在（无论他们是基因改造的产物、控制论的还是数字化的），但他们将永远和大量普通的老智人共存。

this one really bugs me. it's both misanthropic and an inaccurate depiction of the future. some people have gotten it into their heads that the advent of the next era of human evolution necessarily implies the end of humanity. this is unlikely. not only will biological, unmodified humans exist in the far future, they will always reserve the right to stay that way. so-called transhumans and posthumans are likely to exist (whether they be genetically modified, cybernetic, or digital), but they'll always inhabit a world occupied by regular plain old homo sapiens.

乔治于 2014 年5月15日发布