In my experience, consumers do indeed operate the way that you described, David, with the most important gap being between the innovators and the early adopters. The people labeled “innovators” are not effective at driving a new innovation into the populace; they tend to hoard new ideas because it makes them feel special and different from everyone else. If you want to see this attitude in action, check out the dismissive way that some technophiles online speak about the rest of the populace.

In contrast, the early adopters are high-status people who get credibility from others by being the first to adopt and evangelize effective new innovations. Think of the guy on your block who is the first to install a built-in stainless steel barbecue grill. (David, I am not sure what the equivalent would be in the UK — perhaps a new form of greenhouse?

A bigger problem with applying the adoption curve to influencing on social issues is that the adoption curve is based only on beneficial innovations — things that the average person will see as useful and rewarding once they try them. The early adopter says “this is cool, give it a try,” the later adopters follow, and everyone ends up happier.

Understanding the Singularity doesn’t give a person any immediate tangible benefits. There’s no innovation here to adopt, just a mental paradigm to work with. So I’m not convinced that the adoption curve is even applicable in this case.

However, with greenhouse gas emissions and perhaps in other areas, the crisis may be already upon us but it isn’t hurting people enough to act on the scale required. Thus the solutions we have to develop become increasingly dramatic. We’re relying on humans being able to rise to the challenges when they do become evident.

Does the book have any insights into how to approach the negative future uncertain problems?

The book doesn’t mention global warming or looming energy problems, but I think this is what its authors might say on the topics:

1.) Use “vicarious experience” to change thoughts and actions

The kind of vivid stories told by Al Gore, Elizabeth Kolbert and others, have the power to rouse people’s interest, because they often describe the experiences of individuals (humans and animals) who are already being impacted by changing climate.

2.) Identify a handful of high-leverage behaviors that lead to rapid and profound change

It’s necessary to identify a small number of behavioural changes which people can research for themselves, and understand how they will lead to the effects that are desired. This requires input from domain experts – eg dietary experts in the case of which behaviours to change to lose weight, disease control experts in the case of how to eradicate the guinea worm disease, and climate change experts in the case of avoiding climate change catastrophe.

However, whilst we have plenty of (1.), we don’t have (2.): there’s nothing like sufficient consensus among experts as to “a handful of high-leverage behaviors that lead to rapid and profound change” as regards the impact of humans on the planet’s climate.

And the book makes plain that having (1.) without (2.) can often be counterproductive.

Footnote It’s possible to ask questions, such as yours, on the website accompanying the book.

I think it can be effective to help provide solutions to problems that most people aren’t yet feeling. Those negative-future-uncertain things eventually start to affect the majority. At that point we’d like something useful to be ready, so that the outcome is not more stupidity.

For that to happen, it isn’t necessary to influence the majority – just enough of the innovators and early adopters to maintain a critical mass to support research and development until the crisis point.

However, with greenhouse gas emissions and perhaps in other areas, the crisis may be already upon us but it isn’t hurting people enough to act on the scale required. Thus the solutions we have to develop become increasingly dramatic. We’re relying on humans being able to rise to the challenges when they do become evident.

Does the book have any insights into how to approach the negative future uncertain problems?