Samantha Atkins wrote:
> Perhaps it makes me non-mainstream here, but I do not believe
> that technology alone will allow us to transcend our current
> conditons and its many dangers. I don't believe that a
> technology-only (or mostly so) end-run is a viable or workable
> alternative. I think a lot of personal/social transformation is
> also required.
This reminds me of the classic rejoinder to the temperance advocate.
The temperance advocate, upon being offered a glass of brandy,
sniffed and said "I don't believe in strong drink."
to which her host replied: " I assure you, madam, it exists."
Samantha, you may choose to believe that technology alone
will not result in whatever. I have to ask: what do you think will
prevent the advance of technology from making radical changes
in the human condition in the next 20 years? Even very conservative
projections of existing trends lead to fundamental changes.
The usual argument is "It's never happened before, therefore it
won't happen." That argument requires far more faith than I have.
If you think that a lot of personal/social transformation is
also required to drive the transformation in a "good" direction,
then you had better figure out a way to make those transformations
occur before we are all overtaken by events. You have at most
20 years, and you may be too late even now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:13 MDT