Which is that we have fucking number we have the brains of the page the institutions of the medieval and the technology of the gods and he wasnt being terribly complementary i mean technology is accelerating extremely fast in certain areas computing and genetics primarily we still essentially have the same brains that we crawled out of caves with and there is a problem emerging that we either have to merge with the machines or reject or restrain some of this technology but the previous Industrial Revolutions also happened very quickly in a matter of day kids and to some extent they were far more dramatic in terms of changing peoples lifestyles and their values i agree technology is advancing very quickly but so is our ive taishan to it arent we overdramatizing the fact of the digitalisation the internet and other phenomena brought on by the 4th Industrial Revolution well well we dont really know i mean its a bit like things like demographics where youve got rapidly aging societies when the entire. Sure whats going to happen because its never happened before and yes people point to the industrial level revolution saying it will happen before particularly in the context of losing jobs and other jobs being created but it does seem slightly different this time i mean its more than just ways of making things ways of living its a bit broader than that potentially this time and i think we need to be quite careful about things and the thing im very disappointed at the moment this possibly gets more into the so philosophical ethical area is theres very little discussion about what all of this technology is ultimately for it seems to be an end in itself a lot of the time now ive seen you write recently that the future has essentially been stolen by a tiny slice of society essentially man in that twentys thirtys and fortys pushing certain forms of communication and certain channels of communication on toss are they really so much different from the big food the big tobacco Pharma Companies who are trying that bass to get consumers who looked in order to sell their products would you have a point i mean i think a lot of products have been designed by sort of western white middle class people in the past the difference this time is that it was easy not to buy their products there was a limit to how impactful that products where whereas this time Digital Products in particular are being designed by terribly tiny slice slice of society and if it is white middle class young men in a certain part of california and they are designing things that they truly believe in and i think that works for them quite a lot of them quite frankly. Spectrum and they have issues relating to other human beings now that Technology Works for them it doesnt necessarily work for other people and weve had a lot of discussion about products being designed by men that terribly well for women but its also young men designing products terribly well for older people and even the discussion about ethics at the moment is a calm. Because the american view of ethical behavior is quite different to a chinese view of ethical behavior the american view is centered on the primacy of the individual the chinese view as i understand theres more about group home and i dont know how you put those 2 things together i disagree with the notion that d you know previously it was easy to say no to certain products take the big Food Industry you cant say no to food and as a result of it you know all over 80 percent of the American Population are metabolically sick so to some extent we had the same issues with any major industry in the same africa questions were pondered im coming back to the question i asked previously is the tech sector really so much different from all the other industries because those industries were also run by a very special group of people some some ive seen some cite is that suggest that the percentage of psychopath is much higher among Business Executives so i think its always been that way doesnt it im not quite sure i dont i mean that there is definitely some truth in what you say again i just question the sheer dominance the ubiquity of some of these tools and technologies that are now emerging i mean there is some difference i mean you know there are certain regional differences now the chinese about their own version of American Products and services but i think my point is the shia ubiquity of it and. We are having less and less choice in a sense i think you know yes you got to eat food but you always have to choose a choice in what you age but its becoming increasingly difficult to disengage with certain technologies a moment well im not sure he you have a choice when it comes to food especially in western societies because there are about 12 Big Companies that are running food protection production there around the world but coming back to technology i know that you personally are very cognizant that about how Much Technology you personally left in into your own life whats your regiment or one thing i thought. I do like his retrospective reading i mean i find it very difficult when there is so much going on and its so volatile its confusing ambiguous that im trying to restrain the amount of information that reaches my head one of the tools i personally use that works quite well for me is this idea of retrospective reading so i i dont look at newspapers during the week i find them full of pointless speculation and the mindset is it creates is quite anxious so i like buying a couple of quality newspapers that weekend i particularly like the Financial Times in the New York Times they must be built on paper. Being the weekend editions people have got more time to reflect on things and more analytical but i dont read them there and then i read them a week 2 weeks a month later and then you know certain things have happened so its its very quick to scan through the paper my mindset is calm and critically im able to see connections that i dont necessarily see if im frantically trying to through todays newspaper and as far as i know you know youre also try to keep away from all the social media youre not on twitter youre not on instagram no i just fragments my mind and its constant confusion i dont pick up email on the go if im not in the office i will not look at email my phone doesnt pick up email i have periods where i turn my phone off i like to think i like to reflect on things if its just constant i think your your thinking is very reactive very superficial i think weve been very like its you actually being able to get hold of you both i hurried people to describe these kind of lifestyle as informational fasting and i personally find this matter for a very abacus abstaining from anything is the bass way i know of reigning in the impulses that most of the industries are trying to you exploit dont you find it a bit contradictory though that youre youre consulting for corporations that ultimately want to exploit the milk our paleo least. Emotions and our paleolithic brains and your own various sadek informationally ascetic lifestyle well i there are Certain Companies i will not work for there are other companies i may work for it it depends but certain certain ones are completely off. Its not just about abstaining though i think its about balance its not saying i will not do something its saying i will use it in a certain way to go back to your food example its a really bad idea to constantly stuff your face with with food well its i think its a very bad idea to constantly stuff your mind with things on social media its about restraining things and its about finding the balance its about you know when is a good time to use it when its a bad time its also to do with tools and education is is very relevant here and its not its not sort of binary you cant say a screen is bad paper is good or vice versa they are both paper and screens are both very clever technologies that are suitable for certain things theyre very good at certain things theyre very bad at certain things so you have to think well what am i trying to do and what is the best tool to help me do that now by the way you know wilson whom you mentioned earlier was also very much concerned about humanity drowning in information and he believed that the world in the future would be run by synthesisers people who can discern the right information the Important Information quickly who can process it critically and make wise decisions but when i look around modern day politics by the way its in the u. K. In the United States or even in russia it doesnt seem to be the case do you think wilson was wrong on that do you think these synthesizes really stand a chance in governance or in politics these days well that used to be the role of the media right the media was there to edit and they were trusted sources the trouble is that the hierarchy of trust the collapse somewhat not only do we have too much information moment we have we have too much opinion and not enough filtering the trust has has largely collapsed and thats deeply problematic so i dont necessarily agree with i mean one. To think about in the context of 29000 from the Office Future shock which is 50 years old next year and most people remember a future shock saying the perception of too much change over to short a period of time would create a form of mental instability which i would argue is true now in many regions but he was one of the very early people to talk about information overload and i think we suffer from that right now as well and we still have this mindset of the more information we can get our hands on the better decisions will make which used to be true 100 or 200 years ago i no longer think that is true now and i think less is more and on many levels when it comes to the media now speaking about mental instability and politics i know that at some point you jokingly consider i dont know trump as a global game changer 3 years into his presidency hasnt he proved to be one not only in terms of his approach to governance but also with regards to the geopolitical changes that are happening well under his watch he represents you can take trump away but youll get a sort of similar version of him its a bit like brett sit there indicative of things the default. I mean i guess i dont know on one level i completely despair about trump its like living through an episode of south park he certainly disruptive i mean if you like disruption youre going to have to love donald trump things upside down you know some of his opinions i think a fine i mean the draining the swamp thing isnt entirely bad idea other times hes completely nuts i mean im im more relaxed with him now than i was a year or 2 ago but i still frankly despair well mr watson i have one more question about donald trump but i will ask it after a short break dont go away well be back in just a few moments. To my the hardest to a dash was to care but it. Dhanush optimism of. Optimism of the be. Better laden are we keep. The same country because he must come tell if israel can make us tell if they survive because suddenly one day my mother but then it had to be neighbors who. Sent. Him on the hook include the whole thing as opposed to the funny thing with the quote this is the guy said come since. You didnt. Fall just so he dumped the last young man whos young they have. By so much smoke the soup. Is still so not to sing on. Such and such. Welcome back to worlds apart big u. K. Based futurist im all for Richard Watson mr. Watson just before the break restarted talking about donald trump and when you discuss humor you tend to do it in a somewhat snarky manner you make a lot of jokes about his intelligence and i understand how some people on the personal level may find hes pronouncements and his manner is poor and but im not sure that intelligence wise hes so much inferior to for example barack obama who was well educated man well liked man but hes policy on lets say leiby a was. Beyond stupid with far reaching implications. When you talk about classifying trumps election or reelection as one of the major global risks is that if youre a political bias or is it indeed analysis oh its i think everythings my personal bias i think we all have lenses that we see the world through i dont want to get too hung up on trying to trump i mean i think i referred to him as a global going change which could im not putting any sort of positive or negative spin on that you also discussed there as a potential risk well you know well it depends on how you view risk where you stand i suppose. Im not sure how to respond to that question i dont want to get too deep into that is on the next book on american politics but he certainly has disrupted the system but hes not alone in doing that or other people disrupting systems now a few years ago you came up with a map of mega trends and Technology Running all the way out to you 2050 and i hope you dont mind me saying that i think that map navigates the future from a decidedly western analytical perspective which. Im sure you would agree with me by by no means universal do you believe that the western lifestyle the western thought the western way of doing things will continue being dominant for years to come well i mean 1st of all again we see it has a statistical assault on it and its very difficult to avoid that it was also written as a time when id been involved in various workshops looking at certain things and they had influence that i mean in general terms the west in the western mindset is in decline the us is in relative decline china reason is rising europe some people say it is rising other people see it is declining its. Likely that the sort of western mindset and western culture will decline relative to eastern culture thats thats probably whats going to happen although its you cant say for certain i mean china has a lot of issues china may change direction you know africa is interesting but can change direction so if the end of the day we can only talk about whats probable and whats possible i think anyone that says that something will or wont happen. Hes pushing it a bit well mr watson i actually agree with the i think the westernized they should know to while the with individual is an asset starting in Central Point is already slowing down in fact i see a reversal of it with eastern philosophies and a higher strasse all collective and shared rather than individual good gaining ground 1st and foremost in the west itself do you think its a passing fad or is it indeed a major trant of rebalancing our i think we are potentially on a major rebalancing away from being powered individual isnt which is where we are right now which is creating a lot of problems back towards the individual and again we talk about china you know the harmony of the group the collective good also a shift away from this sort of material culture and we talk about happiness quite a lot in in the west and we tend to relate it to material acquisition you know some of the happiest people in the world have had very few possessions and i think we might see the emergence of some kind of new spiritual paradigm i think theres some interesting things going on generation where people are questioning the need to actually own things maybe they just need to certain things and they are being forced to live with less because they have less money means a big generational divide opening up and in terms of wealth but thats not necessarily a bad thing i think having less is a very very good thing indeed the other thing is you know the world was made in its current form very much off to world war 2 by the u. S. And North Western europe and most of the global institutions have been made in the name now if if the u. S. North western europe are in or europe or in relative decline and the east and a shrimp particular are arising we may get a remaking of these institutions based on their values rather than u. S. Or western values i slightly disagree with you here because i think the western world view over many centuries not just since the 2nd world. War but many centuries but before that has been geared towards progress and more and more development i would be the 1st to say that people in the west more of sort of human doers then human beings and that produce a lot of innovation but at that also came with a lot of environmental degradation including Climate Change beach you mention as one of the mega trends given how acute this. Challenge right now do you think thats trifle progress could ever be balanced against the costs well its moving in that direction were beginning to sort of account for things in a more general sense what is the societal impact of a of a Company Beyond just Carbon Emissions or whatever will waste or something in a much more holistic sense i mean one thing i think we might see going quite a long way out is that as i develop some particularly general intelligence develops they start taking our jobs and become a threat to human beings that might shine a very very strong spotlight almost human beings are actually for you know what do we actually good at what are the few things if anything that humans can do that and i call it do and that will create this kind of ethical philosophical discussion about you know why were here what with for what we good at and so on and that is a long. Discussion we are on the cusp i think also of having discussions about where we want to go in the future i mean the problem with futurologists is. Its all about trying to predict whats going to happen from the full cost whats going to happen which is quite a sort of negative thing really is that the feature is out there and weve got to sort of work out how were going to react or respond to it i think a much wiser thing that we should be doing is having collective discussions about where we want to go in the future and then trying to create that future and you know we can we do shape the future i mean what you and i decide to do today tomorrow and the day off the fundamentally show. Its what the future looks like it is not some sort of force that you can see or call kong cant deal with it absolutely is and i think some ethical dimensions are absolutely critical to that and whats very clear to me is a sort of western model if you want to call it that is not sustainable with knowing 10000000000 people can discuss ethics indefinitely but i think consumers missed still the main driver of both western and to a large extent the Global Economy and you know whatever conservationist efforts people may take they certainly do you know a lot of sad the damage the cost of our daily lives and i suspect that many of the companies that are reading up your books wouldnt like that to change would they of course not theyre going to have to though even the future belongs to ask how can we make them. Change their minds well i think 1st we have to i mean we have potentially have to challenge this idea of growth you know how else can we creating come create jobs without necessarily this endless growth model we certainly need to take a much longer term view of how Companies Operate a more holistic view of what profit is and what what costs are. I dont think theyre going to have any any choice ultimately. Im personally very fascinated by this whole issue of progress because many of the major breakthroughs we as humans have also had major dark sides for example the green revolution fed millions of people but it also resulted in a huge loss of biodiversity irreversible loss i mentioned the the issue of basic metabolic disease medicine has produced the cure for Infectious Diseases but as i said over 80 percent of americans are metabolically sick do you think the current definition of progress is really comprehensive more you can show how to define progress that. Thats a very long discussion what we actually mean by progress and i think in the west we have generally referred most people would think in terms of the cumulation of possessions its quite a materialist consumerist definition although there are other definitions you know the things like longevity extreme poverty you know number of women in work in education there are all these sort of broad definitions of progress but that fundamentally i think consumerist materialistic in the west now i mean the interesting thing to me is its never been about its a time to be alive than 2019 i think and if you if you just speak i just dont think youve been paying proper attention to whats been going on i mean im talking from a western context if. I dont most measures that may matter its never been a better time to be alive yet somehow somethings missing and i think its that maybe theres been no progress spiritually maybe theres been no progress ethically i mean fairness is an interesting thing to dig into so i think we are going to read if were going to have a discussion about what we mean by progress and probably redefine it in some sense that you mentioned the devotee and i think its also a good example of how something could be both a blessing and curse because you dont just want people to leave longer you want them to leave productively you want them to be healthy and happy for as long as they leave is not the case today do you think if the problem for the future to solve or is there something perhaps in the past that may offer us some solutions well i mean this case is nicely into philosophies and because it would talk about what is a good life i mean if we go back to the sort of the Silicon Valley thing a bit here there is a sort of a very small group of people same people more or less intent on curing what they call the death problem this is human in the huntsman taking to the extreme so were talking about doubling lifespans or even stopping people from dying altogether which i think is possibly the worlds most dangerous idea at the moment you know in the west we have in the u. K. I have a problem with the n. H. S. Caused by people theres more people there living longer theres migration as well but fundamentally its created by longevity yet theres almost no discussion about the quality of life and we have to keep people alive at all cost its all about duration and surely its about quality at some level and that is a discussion were going to have to have in the future as well you know what do we mean by a good life and so on and so forth and your beastie point is absolutely correct that it that is an enormous problem that were largely ignoring them even aging where were not really dealing with that in very in a very effective manner the world is physically designed for relatively young people and theres not that many of them anymore you know the world essentially is going to be full of all the people who was a great statistic in new scientist a while ago by fred pierce who said that of all of the people who have ever lived to the age of 65 throughout Human History half of them are still alive now that raises a bunch of questions and concerns weve never had to talk about before now i think that chimes well with the point that you often make that people fundamentally dont change we have finite needs both physiological and psychological and thats not likely. To alter in the years to come i wonder if you think that instead of sort of wondering about the future and trying to decipher it people how much better off on learning how to leave that alive to the best of that ability speeches by reach i mean productively mindfully happily and healthily reach hopefully will produce the kind of future that you want to see in well this i think theres something in that i mean you can try and change the world or you can just change your own life and thats kind of the best you can do on the some kind of level amazin interesting problem really because i mean if you think of Extinction Rebellion and Climate Change and so on if everyone fundamentally changed their behavior in the u. K. At the end of the day it would make absolutely no difference if china doesnt change their behavior but thats not an excuse to not do something i think you have to do something and start somewhere and going back to an earlier point i think when we talk about progress progress is usually defined in physical material to i think were going to enter a period where were talking about mental progress now whether that spirituality or Mental Wellbeing i dont know but were going to be more interested in what you know hades than before well mr watson we have to leave it there thank you very much for sharing your thoughts about that today thank you very much for having me our viewers can keep this conversation going in our social media pages thats for me and the team. Same place same time on worlds apart. Time after time to repeat the same mantra sustainability very important. Transition to sustainable transport sustainability. The more equitable and sustainable. They claim their production is completely hamas. Companies want us to feel good about buying their products while the damage is being done far away and this is a this. Is a tense situation in venezuela is still all over the news the problem in venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been a holy temple and inside venezuela things are different were going to announce sanctions against petroleum to venezuela associate. Famously have a supplement good. Football that it is. The key to the moment. The whose story isnt new nixon called in Henry Kissinger to tell him it would not be tolerated in latin america. Terms of economic and social system could take hold and therefore the policy would be to make. The chilean economy scream so wants an economy of venezuela screed. A week of violent clashes in bolivia supporters of president evo. His return from exile in mexico. This weekend marks one year since the birth of iconic populist movement in france you look at how the yellow vests marking it. All some of the stories that shape. Up a controversial White Helmets rescue group. Dead in istanbul since then his work in p. D. F. Biography. Of time seemingly to remove anything