Nnadiebube Journal of Philosophy

Interests in the future of humanity and attempts to predict its outcome are as old as humanity itself. Many religions, especially the three Abrahamic religions: Christianity, Islam and Judaism have their teachings of where human destinies are headed and most of their devotees are made up of people who want to share in these future destinies. Some scholars, including renowned philosophers such as Kant, Hegel and Marx have also speculated on the future of mankind. However, in recent years, following the astonishing breakthroughs in science and technology, this interest in the future of mankind has skyrocketed and attracted special attentions and interventions from scholars. Thus, questions are being raised about what the future holds for man in the age of biotechnology and artificial intelligence. There are also the issues of global warming, nuclear and biological weapons and the threats these pose to the continuity of life on earth. Scholars have also discussed how governance and religion can be a force for good or evil in the age of science and technology. While scholars who pursue predictability believe that human future can be predicted, there also, another group of scholars, who believed that any attempt to predict human future is futile and therefore bound to fail. Their argument usually is that there is not enough information to stand on and predict human future. Using the documentary method of data collection and conceptual method of data analysis, this study interrogates the feasibility and relevance of predictability in relation to the future of humankind. The study argues that while attempts to accurately predict human future is not feasible because the data needed for such accuracy is not and will not likely be available in the foreseeable future, probabilistic predictions which enable humanity to plan for contingencies is feasible. What this means is that prediction is a matter of degree determined by the amount of information available to the predictor. The study thus, concludes that in stead of doing away with predictability, efforts should be channeled towards understanding the contingent nature of predictions and the need to adapt and readapt society to these contingencies because prediction is not just a part and parcel of the human condition but that it is necessary for navigating the unpredictable conditions that humanity finds itself, especially in the age of science and technology.

Open Full Text (PDF)