Episode 8 – George Gilder on the Cryptocosm and Life After Google

Close Minded Podcast

1×

0:00

-1:04:19

Episode 8 – George Gilder on the Cryptocosm and Life After Google

Close Minded Podcast

Mar 08, 2019

Today's guest is George Gilder, a prolific author, economist, investor, and techno-futurist.

In the 1970s Gilder wrote a controversial book about gender roles in society, originally titled Sexual Suicide, but later revised and reissued under the title Men and Marriage.

In the 1980s, as an articulator and defender of Supply-Side Economics, he became known as President Ronald Reagan's most frequently quoted living author.

In the early 90s Gilder foresaw the broadband internet revolution and also predicted the development of the smart phone. There is some evidence that he even influenced Steve Jobs. Gilder hosts the annual Telecosm Conference with Steve Forbes, which draws tech leaders, inventors, entrepreneurs and investors from around the world. He also co-founded the Discovery Institute, which is the leading think tank of the Intelligent Design movement.

For over 30 years Gilder has contributed to various publications, including The Economist, Forbes, the Wall Street Journal, Wired, and National Review.

The philosophical framework that unifies much of Gilder's thinking on science and technology is known as Information Theory, which he unpacks and applies in his 2013 book, Knowledge & Power: The Information Theory of Capitalism and How it is Revolutionizing Our World.

His most recent book is 2018's Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy, and is our primary focus in this episode. Gilder is a fascinating character, and I really enjoyed this one.

Before I reached out to George about doing an interview, I posted a written book review of Life After Google as a blog post here. He told me he had read it and enjoyed it, so that was pretty cool.

Links related to our conversation:

My extended book review of Life After Google
Telecosm Forum Facebook page
The Israel Test Facebook page
Gildertech.com
The Discovery Institute, co-founded by Gilder
Gilder's article "The Materialist Superstition" at The Imaginative Conservative
C.S. Lewis' essay "Transposition," which Gilder calls an essay of Information Theory
Information Theory entry on Wikipedia
Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku

Books by Gilder (all Amazon URLs are affiliate links):

++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks to LEVV and David Ramirez for the intro/outro music.

Discussion about this podcast

Close Minded Podcast

“Close Minded? Isn't that sort of narrow and negative?”

At first glance, that's certainly a reasonable reaction. (But it got your attention, didn't it?) However, the name of the show is not just a marketing tactic, but rooted in a deep truth.

G.K. Chesterton once wrote the following:

“Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.”

A hallmark of maturity is the ability to hold up an idea you don't necessarily agree with and scrutinize it, to evaluate it dispassionately without having to own it for yourself.

Another sign of maturity is one's willingness to engage a wide variety of ideas and topics without being frightened away just because someone shouts “problematic!”–whether it be a Twitter mob, a self-hating Social Justice Warrior on Facebook, or even your own tribe.

So around here we aren't afraid to discuss lots of ideas, regardless of our actual positions:

Political anarchism? Check.

Human sexuality? Check.

Trump as an existential dictatorial threat to Western Civilization? Check.

Darwinism and Intelligent Design? Check.

The intersection of technology and philosophy? Check.

But there's more! We also aren't interested in claims that certain genres of literature are “uncool.” Who cares?

We are readers. Avid readers of wide-ranging works. Readers who cultivate what Tolkien called “the leaf mold” of the mind, the topsoil of our moral imagination and creativity.

We aren't embarrassed to enjoy “kid lit” and YA fiction, or afraid to read sociological & political works that challenge our assumptions. We enjoy classic novels, hard-boiled crime thrillers, controversial works of theology & culture, economics, productivity & personal development. We are not bound by social or political convention.

We “read for pleasure in an age of distraction” (Alan Jacobs). We consume and engage books for stimulation, conviction & enrichment. We want to stretch our minds, grow in empathy, & experience the joys & challenges of reading good books.

We read with an open mind in order to close it on something.

--------------------------------

“But wait! Shouldn't it be CloseD Minded (with a d)?”

Welcome, fellow grammar nerd, to my tortured existence. I do happen to believe that “Closed Minded” is preferable to “Close Minded”–and thus, I die a little bit inside each time I say or write it. HOWEVER, I went with “Close Minded” for two reasons. First, technically both are considered acceptable–see here and here. Second, when I compared the Google search results for both spellings, “Close” had exponentially more hits, so I followed the basic rules of internet marketing and went with what people are actually searching for.

Case close, er, closed.

Subscribe here: www.closemindedpodcast.com/subscribe

“Close Minded? Isn't that sort of narrow and negative?” At first glance, that's certainly a reasonable reaction. (But it got your attention, didn't it?) However, the name of the show is not just a marketing tactic, but rooted in a deep truth. G.K. Chesterton once wrote the following: “Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” A hallmark of maturity is the ability to hold up an idea you don't necessarily agree with and scrutinize it, to evaluate it dispassionately without having to own it for yourself. Another sign of maturity is one's willingness to engage a wide variety of ideas and topics without being frightened away just because someone shouts “problematic!”–whether it be a Twitter mob, a self-hating Social Justice Warrior on Facebook, or even your own tribe. So around here we aren't afraid to discuss lots of ideas, regardless of our actual positions: Political anarchism? Check. Human sexuality? Check. Trump as an existential dictatorial threat to Western Civilization? Check. Darwinism and Intelligent Design? Check. The intersection of technology and philosophy? Check. But there's more! We also aren't interested in claims that certain genres of literature are “uncool.” Who cares? We are readers. Avid readers of wide-ranging works. Readers who cultivate what Tolkien called “the leaf mold” of the mind, the topsoil of our moral imagination and creativity. We aren't embarrassed to enjoy “kid lit” and YA fiction, or afraid to read sociological & political works that challenge our assumptions. We enjoy classic novels, hard-boiled crime thrillers, controversial works of theology & culture, economics, productivity & personal development. We are not bound by social or political convention. We “read for pleasure in an age of distraction” (Alan Jacobs). We consume and engage books for stimulation, conviction & enrichment. We want to stretch our minds, grow in empathy, & experience the joys & challenges of reading good books. We read with an open mind in order to close it on something. -------------------------------- “But wait! Shouldn't it be CloseD Minded (with a d)?” Welcome, fellow grammar nerd, to my tortured existence. I do happen to believe that “Closed Minded” is preferable to “Close Minded”–and thus, I die a little bit inside each time I say or write it. HOWEVER, I went with “Close Minded” for two reasons. First, technically both are considered acceptable–see here and here. Second, when I compared the Google search results for both spellings, “Close” had exponentially more hits, so I followed the basic rules of internet marketing and went with what people are actually searching for. Case close, er, closed. Subscribe here: www.closemindedpodcast.com/subscribe

Listen on