The Bias Distorts The Analysis

The technological progress bias fundamentally distorts how we analyze and evaluate the SSIS concept in several critical ways.

First, it leads to framing the SSIS primarily as a comparative tool or research subject rather than a valid alternative way of life. Both AI responses characterized SSIS as a "reservoir of genetic and cultural diversity" for studying "the effects of technological advancement on human psychology" or providing "insights into human nature and social dynamics in a controlled environment." This perspective diminishes the intrinsic worth of the SSIS and its inhabitants' experiences, reducing them to research subjects for the benefit of the technologically advancing mainstream.

Second, it imposes inappropriate success metrics on the SSIS, evaluating it according to external, technologically-driven standards rather than internal measures of well-being, cultural richness, or ecological harmony. By presuming that "technological advancement" represents progress, we risk overlooking alternative forms of advancement that an SSIS might achieve—deeper connection with natural cycles, more harmonious social structures, or sustainable ecological relationships.

Third, this bias causes us to overlook potential benefits of isolation. While both AI responses emphasized concerns about isolation, they neglected potential advantages: the development of unique problem-solving approaches unconstrained by technological assumptions, the cultivation of deep connections with nature and traditional knowledge, and the preservation of diverse worldviews and philosophies that might offer critical perspective on the mainstream technological paradigm.

Fourth, the bias skews ethical considerations toward concerns about "limiting" the SSIS inhabitants' access to technology while underestimating the ethical implications of continuous technological advancement on human psychology, social structures, and ecological systems. This creates an imbalanced ethical framework that privileges technological access over other human values.

Perhaps most significantly, judgments about long-term viability become distorted by assumptions about technological necessity rather than considering alternative measures of sustainability and success based on human flourishing, environmental stewardship, and cultural continuity. Recognizing these biases allows for a more balanced evaluation of alternative social structures and encourages consideration of a broader range of perspectives and potential outcomes, leading to a richer understanding of humanity's possible futures.

Reframing the Question

To properly evaluate whether an SSIS would protect some portion of humanity from continued dehumanization, we must first recognize and set aside our technological progress bias. This allows us to consider the question from a more balanced perspective that acknowledges multiple forms of human development and fulfillment.

An SSIS could provide a space where humans maintain a direct, unmediated relationship with the natural world. This connection, often romanticized but nonetheless profound, may be crucial for human psychological and spiritual well-being. The daily experience of tending crops, observing seasonal changes, and living within natural rhythms represents a form of human experience increasingly rare in technologically mediated societies. This direct engagement with nature might preserve essential aspects of human experience that technological advancement tends to attenuate or eliminate.

By maintaining a "human-scaled primitive-technology" environment, the SSIS would preserve knowledge, skills, and ways of being that might otherwise be lost. The ability to create shelter with one's hands, to understand the complexities of soil and plant relationships, to navigate by the stars - these capacities have intrinsic value regardless of their relevance to technological societies. Their preservation represents not stagnation but a different form of cultural wealth.

An SSIS focused on agriculture and coexistence with the natural environment could redefine our understanding of "dehumanization." It might reveal that certain aspects of technological progress, often assumed to be advancements, may actually be forms of dehumanization—the loss of direct sensory engagement with the natural world, the attenuation of face-to-face community relationships, the disappearance of skills that connect us to our evolutionary heritage. By providing a contrast to technologically-driven societies, an SSIS would help us recognize forms of dehumanization that our technological progress bias renders invisible.

A Refuge From Dehumanization

Establishing Self-Sustaining Isolated Societies (SSIS) would indeed serve to protect portions of humanity from dehumanization by creating intentional communities that preserve essential human experiences increasingly threatened by technological transformation.

The SSIS model offers a crucial counterpoint to conventional progress narratives by demonstrating alternative development paths prioritizing community bonds, environmental harmony, and human-scale technologies. This preservation of diverse human experience provides civilizational insurance against unforeseen consequences of rapid technological change.

Beyond mere cultural preservation, SSIS communities would offer something increasingly precious: meaningful work directly connected to survival and community welfare. As AGI/ASI systems potentially render much human labor obsolete, these intentional communities would provide every member clear purpose and value—a stark contrast to potential scenarios where technological abundance paradoxically creates existential poverty.

Perhaps most significantly, SSIS would preserve multi-generational family structures and community interdependence that have shaped human psychology for millennia. These deep social bonds and clearly defined roles fulfill emotional and psychological needs that technological societies increasingly struggle to address.

An SSIS would not merely preserve the past but maintain essential human experiences unfettered by technological dependency. Initial implementation of an SSIS may prompt broader societies to reflect on its values, assumptions about progress, and the trade-offs involved in technological advancement. This mirror held up to mainstream technological society could catalyze crucial conversations about what truly constitutes human flourishing and encourage broader adoption of the SSIS principles in variously population scaled societies. Its value transcends nostalgia—it represents humanity's hedge against a potentially diminished future where technical capacity expands while meaningful human experience contracts.