Talking Politics Guide to ... Existential Risk
TALKING POLITICS
Catherine Carr
4.7 • 2.5K Ratings
🗓️ 10 January 2019
⏱️ 30 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Summary
David talks to Martin Rees about how we should evaluate the greatest threats facing the human species in the twenty-first century. Does the biggest danger come from bio-terror or bio-error, climate change, nuclear war or AI? And what prospects does space travel provide for a post-human future?
Talking Points:
Existential risk is risk that cascades globally and is a severe setback to civilization. We are now so interconnected and so empowered as a species that humans could be responsible for this kind of destruction.
- There are natural existential risks too, such as asteroids. But what is concerning about the present moment is that humans have the ability to affect the entire biosphere.
- This is a story about technology, but it’s also about global population growth and the depletion of resources.
There are four categories of existential risk: climate change, bioterror/bioerror, nuclear weapons, and AI/new technology.
- Climate Change has a long tail, meaning that the risk of total catastrophe is non-negligible.
- Bioterror/bio-error is becoming more of a risk as technology advances. It’s hard to predict the consequences of the misuse of biotech. Our social order is more vulnerable than it used to be. Overwhelmed hospitals could lead to a societal breakdown.
- Machine learning has not yet reached the level of existential risk. Real stupidity, not artificial intelligence, will remain our chief concern in the coming decades. Still, AI could make certain kinds of cyber-attacks much worse.
- The nuclear risk has changed since the Cold War. Today there is a greater risk that some nukes go off in a particular region, although global catastrophe is less likely.
These threats are human-made. Solving them is also our responsibility.
- We can’t all move to Mars. Earth problems have to be dealt with here.
- There are downsides to tech, but we will also need it. Martin describes himself as a technical optimist, but a political pessimist.
Mentioned in this episode:
- Martin Weitzman on long tail risks and climate change
- The Stern Review on climate change, 10 years on
- A review of Jared Diamond’s Collapse.
Further Learning:
- Martin’s new book, On the Future: Prospects for Humanity
- The Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at Cambridge
- The Talking Politics Guide to Nuclear Weapons
- Who wants to colonize Mars?
And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking
Transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
| 0:00.0 | Hello, my name is David Runseman and this is Talking Politics. Today is the last of our |
| 0:08.5 | Talking Politics guides before we get back into actual politics. It's with Martin Rees, |
| 0:14.0 | astronomer Royal, one of the world's leading scientists, and he's going to be explaining |
| 0:17.7 | to us what is existential risk. |
| 0:28.2 | Talking Politics is brought to you in partnership with the London Review of Books. This Christmas |
| 0:33.9 | gifts subscriptions to the LRB for yourself or somebody else. Start from just 1999. Find |
| 0:41.2 | our best offers and a reading list to accompany today's episode at lrb.co.uk forward-flash-talking. |
| 0:53.7 | Maybe we should start with some definitions. How do you distinguish existential risk from |
| 0:59.4 | other kinds of risk? I think it's a rather blurred phrase, but what I mean by existential |
| 1:04.0 | is a risk which cascades globally and is a severe setback to civilization. One of the important |
| 1:11.3 | features of the present century is that for the first time we are so interconnected and |
| 1:16.7 | so empowered as a species that we can envisage that these would be caused by human actions |
| 1:22.3 | either collectively or even by a small group. Because human beings have always faced very |
| 1:26.8 | serious potential hazards, is the distinction characteristic of existential risk that it |
| 1:32.8 | could be the end of everything or is it just the human capacity to cause destruction is on a scale |
| 1:37.8 | we've never seen before? Well I think it's a latter and the phrase is perhaps a slightly unfortunate |
| 1:41.7 | one, of course if an asteroid hit and like the one that killed the dinosaurs that would be a |
| 1:46.8 | similar existential risk but the main point is that although we are stood at risk from events |
| 1:52.6 | like that, natural events, they are not getting any more likely. The probability of an asteroid |
| 1:57.9 | hitting is no bigger now than it was in the time of the dinosaurs whereas what is much more |
| 2:03.3 | concerning is the class of risks which are a consequence of human actions because for the |
| 2:10.0 | first time in the world's 45 million centuries of existence one species namely ours is so dominant |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Catherine Carr, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of Catherine Carr and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.

