Technology Dooms Us

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
1

Since every invention is so abused by a government, I suspect that we are doomed to serfdom. To paraphrase Orwell, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.

If the men of the mind all went on strike, as in Atlas Shrugged, it MAY save the world. I suspect though it won’t be a conscious strike; the powerful will kill off any spark of intellect in the population, then the elite will wither and die from lack of need to oppress anyone. No more creativity, art, music, literature, and we will wink out from the planet.

2

But isn’t Capitalism what you worship?

3

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Since every invention is so abused by a government, I suspect that we are doomed to serfdom. To paraphrase Orwell, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.

If the men of the mind all went on strike, as in Atlas Shrugged, it MAY save the world. I suspect though it won’t be a conscious strike; the powerful will kill off any spark of intellect in the population, then the elite will wither and die from lack of need to oppress anyone. No more creativity, art, music, literature, and we will wink out from the planet.
[/quote]

You must not fear technology. Technology is what is going to keep the human race alive thousands of years from now. Technology is often abused by the gov’t, but that isn’t the tech’s fault, it is our own for not asserting ourselves. Technology has also ushered in new eras of freedom. The internet has brought about such intellectual freedom that hasn’t been matched since the Gutenberg Press. The rifle has given the individual unmatched power to fight for liberty. The argument for technology is the same one I make for guns. People always want to blame the guns and not the criminal. Don’t blame the tech, blame the government.

mike

4

IMO, technology is a classic “double-edged sword.”

5

Technology is what naturally results when individuals work together to solve problems. Technology is a means to an end and not the end itself. The end goal is always to satisfy some perceived uneasiness.

HH, I am amazed at your conclusion. Do we blame the gun or the shooter?

6

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Do we blame the gun or the shooter?[/quote]

How about the original inventor?

People nowadays cannot be solely responsible for their actions.

7

Technology is the paintbrush. It is up to the artist to create the painting.

As technology advances, it actually becomes harder for governments to control their population. A good example is China. They want to advance in the world, and they found out that communism just won’t work. So they are attempting to embrace some capitalist rules, while still keeping an iron fist over their people.

But this is not working. Their people are seeing the world, and saying, �??I want that.�??

It is almost like capitalism is a virus that spreads throughout, but unlike a virus, seems to free people.

Russia can never become the socialist state it was. The people would never allow it. Even as Putin attempts to recreate the USSR.

I actually believe that the world Karl Marx envisioned is more likely to become a reality, through technology and capitalism then through socialism. Just looking at all the good charities, you see those of means helping those of need. And interestingly without government involvement. (Which always fucks things up.)

Technology has freed the masses from the farm. Now people choose to farm, instead of having to farm, and many actually make a good living at it. (Most of the ones who lose money at it need more business training, or need to realize they do not belong in that business.)

Right now if I want to know something I can usually find it in minutes. (After filtering out the bs that is.)

I remember that the industrial revolution was supposed to eliminate the need for jobs, and instead it had the opposite effect. Then as computers came about, it was supposed to eliminate jobs. Again it created jobs.

If the government can get out of the way, and correct the education system, I can see the number of wealthy in this country exploding. Same thing across the world.

The real drawback is allowing the loons, and idiots access to the technology. I only recently found out that there is a way to modify a nuclear bomb so that one could destroy all human life on earth. (Oh boy.) But who would want to do that? Not anybody with the ability to right now.

Knowing and doing are two different things. That is the key to this discussion.

8

[quote]unbending wrote:
People nowadays cannot be solely responsible for their actions.[/quote]

Why?

9

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Technology is what naturally results when individuals work together to solve problems. Technology is a means to an end and not the end itself. The end goal is always to satisfy some perceived uneasiness.

HH, I am amazed at your conclusion. Do we blame the gun or the shooter?[/quote]

“The damnned and the guiltiest among you are those who HAD the capacity to know, yet chose to use their minds to be used to create weapons of coersion and destruction. Theirs is the guilt beyond forgiveness.”
— Atlas Shrugged (from memory)

Now you know how I became a teacher. I was going to work at White Sands, New Mexico (missile testing/development). I could not bring myself to do it.

I am ‘on strike’.

10

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
unbending wrote:
People nowadays cannot be solely responsible for their actions.

Why?[/quote]

Good question. Because their sue crazy?

11

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
unbending wrote:
People nowadays cannot be solely responsible for their actions.

Why?

Good question. Because their sue crazy?[/quote]

No. Its because of the MAN breathing down our backs. MAN.

But seriously. I have no idea why.

Its not because they’re sue crazy. They sue because they feel victimized. Suing is the result of people thinking they are not responsible for their actions.

Maybe its the culture. People lose identity because they sacrifice more of themselves for the almighty dollar. Either to get rich or support their family.

As a result, maybe they think they are victims?

That’s the best educated guess I have.

12

Anyone interested in the topic of technology should read the work of the late Neil Postman, including Technopoly, and watch some of his lectures posted on YouTube. While I don’t agree with every point he presents, he presents an excellent counter argument to the culture of technophilia that is rampant throughout the world.

Furthermore, the premise of his earlier work, Amusing Ourselves to Death, makes a strong case that the fears of Orwellian totalitarianism in the industrialized world are far less likely than Aldous Huxley’s vision in Brave New World.

Despite the fact that the book is 20 years old, it has an amazing amount of foresight. We live in a society where people are far too distracted by toys,trinkets and entertainment, the Soma of our day; this is clearly evident in the nature of public discourse in America.

13

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Since every invention is so abused by a government, I suspect that we are doomed to serfdom. To paraphrase Orwell, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.

If the men of the mind all went on strike, as in Atlas Shrugged, it MAY save the world. I suspect though it won’t be a conscious strike; the powerful will kill off any spark of intellect in the population, then the elite will wither and die from lack of need to oppress anyone. No more creativity, art, music, literature, and we will wink out from the planet.
[/quote]

The problem with using the rationale that egoism(or Rand’s objectivism) will lead to the betterment of everyone is that it defeats the purpose of the philosophy. If I follow Rand’s views, why the fuck should I care if what I do,that is in my best interests, also benefits others?

Using objectivism as a means to a happy end for society undermines its original intent: namely, to act on only that which will serve my own self-interests. It also paints a shade utilitarianism over what is supposedly a self-serving ethical belief.

14

[quote]abcd1234 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Since every invention is so abused by a government, I suspect that we are doomed to serfdom. To paraphrase Orwell, imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.

If the men of the mind all went on strike, as in Atlas Shrugged, it MAY save the world. I suspect though it won’t be a conscious strike; the powerful will kill off any spark of intellect in the population, then the elite will wither and die from lack of need to oppress anyone. No more creativity, art, music, literature, and we will wink out from the planet.

The problem with using the rationale that egoism(or Rand’s objectivism) will lead to the betterment of everyone is that it defeats the purpose of the philosophy. If I follow Rand’s views, why the fuck should I care if what I do,that is in my best interests, also benefits others?

Using objectivism as a means to a happy end for society undermines its original intent: namely, to act on only that which will serve my own self-interests. It also paints a shade utilitarianism over what is supposedly a self-serving ethical belief.

[/quote]

**edit
I realize now your initial post addresses a different aspect of objectivism, but given your clear belief in Rand’s views, my comment still stands as relevant.