Will civilization collapse? | WIRED’s Kevin Kelly
WIRED founder Kevin Kelly explains why progress often looks like dystopia to the untrained eye.
Subscribe to Big Think on KZhead ► / @bigthink
Imagine that tomorrow, the world magically got 1% better. Nobody would notice. But if the world got 1% better every year, the "compounding" effect would be very noticeable - in the same way that compounding grows a bank account.
When technology solves a problem, it creates new problems. The solution is not less technology but better technology.
Kevin Kelly of WIRED magazine calls this incremental progress toward a better world "protopia." Protopia is a direction, not a destiny.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This video is part of The Progress Issue, a Big Think and Freethink special collaboration.
In this inaugural special issue we set out to explore progress - how it happens, how we nurture it and how we stifle it, and what changes are required in how we approach our most serious problems to ensure greater and more equitable progress for all.
It’s time for a return to optimism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Kevin Kelly
Kevin Kelly is Senior Maverick at WIRED magazine. He co-founded WIRED in 1993, and served as its Executive Editor for its first seven years. His newest book is The Inevitable, a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestseller. He is founder of the popular Cool Tools website, which has been reviewing tools daily for 20 years. From 1984-1990 Kelly was publisher and editor of the Whole Earth Review, a subscriber-supported journal of unorthodox conceptual news. He co-founded the ongoing Hackers’ Conference, and was involved with the launch of the WELL, a pioneering online service started in 1985. Other books by Kelly include 1) Out of Control, the 1994 classic book on decentralized emergent systems, 2) The Silver Cord, a graphic novel about robots and angels, 3) What Technology Wants, a robust theory of technology, and 4) Vanishing Asia, his 50-year project to photograph the disappearing cultures of Asia. He is currently co-chair of The Long Now Foundation, which is building a clock in a mountain that will tick for 10,000 years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Big Think | Smarter Faster™
► Big Think
The leading source of expert-driven, educational content. With thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, Big Think helps you get smarter, faster by exploring the big ideas and core skills that define knowledge in the 21st century.
► Big Think+
Make your business smarter, faster: bigthink.com/plus/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want more Big Think?
► Daily editorial features: bigthink.com/popular/
► Get the best of Big Think right to your inbox: bigthink.com/st/newsletter
► Facebook: bigth.ink/facebook
► Instagram: bigth.ink/Instagram
► Twitter: bigth.ink/twitter
This is part of our inaugural special issue on Progress: how it happens, how we nurture it and how we stifle it, and what changes are required in how we approach our most serious problems to ensure greater progress for all. Videos: "Will Civilization Collapse?" with Kevin Kelly: kzhead.info/sun/oa5phtGMZ3ZumK8/bejne.html "Can America make a comeback?" with Tyler Cowen : kzhead.info/sun/ZrCCaLNpkXyuZok/bejne.html "3 tools for predicting 2122" with Peter Schwartz: kzhead.info/sun/eKWJiLFtZ6mvko0/bejne.html Playlist: kzhead.info/channel/PL5uULy4b0kV4HAE84o_StVH66U1awDy9L.html Articles: "An End to Doomerism" by Hannah Ritchie: bigthink.com/progress/pessimism-is-a-barrier-to-progress/ "The Great, Progression, 2025-2050" by Peter Leyden: bigthink.com/progress/the-great-progression-peter-leyden/ "We Need a New Philosophy of Progress" by Jason Crawford bigthink.com/progress/a-new-philosophy-of-progress-jason-crawford/ "Expert Roundtable: What does progress look like?" bigthink.com/progress/progress-agenda/ And more available at bigthink.com/special-issues/the-progress-issue/
I respect an optimistic perspective, and appreciate it, but I have serious doubts that those who innovate and shape the world have the best interests of anyone but themselves at heart. Corporate greed is running amok. The only thing that matters to these powers is profit, not progress.
Star Trek is a good example of protopian world
You're not wrong! That's why it falls on us, the consumers, to direct them towards roads that mean actual progress for civilization. We can enforce a "technological selection" by being conscientious about our choices. I'm being too optimistic, aren't I?
I am unlikely to change your mind so won't even try. I'll just suggest you check out various playlists I have for content from other channels. Now onto the main point I wanted to make. The Dystopias of the Political Compass. Far Left Perverted Socialism aka Stalinism: Enslaved to work for the government by a tyrannical dictator, with no option of being your own boss, ever. Crony Communism, that has historically been racist, anti-semitic, misogynistic, homophobic. Also, caused mass poverty, famines, and Cannibalism. In his case, the infamous Holodomor. Authoritarian Turbo-Capitalism: Fascist perversions of the original Corporatism like Mussolini. Anarcho-Communism: A truly lovely dream. Sincerely. I share this dream, but dream it for the long-distant future, because I realise technology will be necessary to make it possible. Totally Sustainable Fully Automated Infinite Energy Luxury Global Space Communism with Humanity united as one. A more realistic ambition is similar to this Marxist dream, an international federalism where we'll be allowed our own countries, cultures, religions, beliefs, and thoughts. Too lovely a dream for now. Any country that tries full-on Anarcho-Communism WILL be crushed by invaders within ten minutes due to wetbag hippies. Anarcho-Capitalism: Dominated by Billionaires with no regulation, democracy destroyed to get out of paying taxes. Neo-Feudalist, Charter City, Hybrid Regime. Not even charity to help the less fortunate. Notice how Far Left, Far Right, and Anarcho-Capitalism all arrive at the same terrifying destination of Stalinism? And so this is why I'm in the hilarious position of British, Left-Liberal, Social Democrat, hated by Marxists and Trumptards who think they're totally opposite to each other. "Russian Communism is the illegitimate child of Karl Marx and Catherine the Great" - Sir Clement Attlee, legendary, lovely Social Democrat. Labour Party PM of Post-WW2 Britain. He made this quip because: Karl Marx was a casually racist anti-semite in his letter to Engels 30th July 1862, a womanising misogynist who had a secret son with his maid behind his Noble wife's back, and chuckled with Engels in 1869 about a rival homosexual German Socialist getting arrested for homosexual activity. Eerily similar to Donald Trump! Then we have lovely Lenin using chemical weapons against peasant farmers in the Tambov Rebellion. Lovely Lenin. Man of The People. Also rumoured to have owned several luxury cars, and all the Russian peasants got out of his tenure was starvation and being taught to read. Read Tankie propaganda that is. Stalin. Oh my days. He was even worse than the NSDAP high command, all by himself, and if the paranoid german dictator hadn't betrayed him, America would be the last land of freedom that remains, but likely would've increased its own Fascism it already had in those days. Kruschev was a bit of a problem but he was a far better leader of the USSR than ANYONE they had before him, including Lenin.
we will be like africa to europeans, they will colonize mars, forget they come from earth and enslave us
I love delusional optimism. I'm a delusional optimist myself in a lot of ways. The reality of our situation on planet earth is that, well, how could we be optimistic that our massive existential problems will be solved when they are without real solutions, and are not even acknowledged as real problems. It's a pickle.
I agree with some of the others in the comments that this view is flawed. I also think the title is clickbaity. We cannot blindly hope to innovate ourselves out of problems or trust that the people developing technology have our best interests in mind. We cannot continue to overconsume the earth's resources and hope that before we reach the level of climate catastrophe we will create a new technology that saves us. I think he has a few interesting points like about it being a process and not a destination but overall for him to claim technology will save us and that dystopias never last are absurd.
We HAVE to hope that we can innovate ourselves out of our current problems, because if we don’t, we’re fucked. Want to deal with “overconsume the Earth’s resources”? That will require innovation, because we can’t go back to just not having modernity - nor should we want to. Even if you think the solution is to just walk away from everything that modern energy provides and ride a horse on your hand-tilled farm and work yourself to the bone just to eat, like our ancestors did… well, hardly anyone will go along with you on that. So we HAVE to innovate. Because clearly, we can’t just keep burning fossil fuels. Even ignoring the environmental catastrophe, sooner or later we will simply run out of them. If we are to be saved at all, innovation is what will save us. The alternatives are permanent social collapse, or extinction.
Very true
Snaps to that
He doesn’t claim technology will save us - his point is that a problem presents an opportunity to create more knowledge which may be able to save us. I am sure he would be eager to learn how you propose to deal with any specific problem which you are concerned about. Is your answer to simply stick your fingers in your ears and go “lah lah lah”?
Exactly. Progress didn't work for the dinosaurs favor.
hm . the Amish have an actual community to connect with phones . for all too many of us in the rest of the world , smartphones just create the illusion of community , in my book .
Very good observation, could center a quality research paper proving that point.
I connect with ideas through my phone. Pseudo community belittles that I'm happy with the relationship.
@@Anuchan Personally I've found that the problem with internet technology isn't the effect it had on me, its the effect it had on those around me. It's one thing to avoid the pitfalls yourself, it's something else to effectively transfer that ability to those you love.
You’re idealizing to a large extent. The difference between the two is obligation vs. choice. The Amish or many other closed communities make being “cast out” a horrifying fate. You stay in the community regardless of abuse, unhappiness, or disagreement because if you don’t, everyone from your neighbors to your family will become estranged. Internet communities are freely associated with. They are definitely less sticky, but they are frequently more supportive because of self-selection and in the end all they have is whether or not people choose to be a part or not. Good example for the author’s point, but not a prescription - just an explanation of how it works
@@tjwoosta I've found it to be a problem of using the phone for social acceptance, rather than as a tool for communication. What's the solution? Better education?
His definition of protopia is incredibly vague. To me, he's a watered down version of the technical utopianists of the 60s and 70s. Technology has brought incredible gains in our standards of living and our ability to communicate with each other. But it's also brought ecological destruction, enabled the state to pry into our lives and corporations to sell us more unnecessary products at immense cost to the environment. And, it's brought humanity to the point where it can destroy all life on the planet in a nuclear exchange. That's enough to make me pessimistic about the future
Was lookin for that guy who seems fun at parties, God led me here
Vaguery hides a multitude of conceptual sins.
Think about chatGPT. Why the fuck are we automating artistic, creative jobs? That's the work people want to do, mean while pointless office jobs make up about half of all jobs and manual labor is more productive and physically demanding than ever. Technology is not the answer. All of our major decisions are made by the free market which responds to the 1% more so than anyone else. 1 dollar. 1 vote. $20 billion, 20 billion votes.
Solar punk is a great protopian vision. Technology in balance with nature.
Successful people don't become that way overnight. What most people see at a glance- wealth, a great career, purpose-is the result of hard work and hustle over time. I pray that anyone who reads this will be successful in life..
Assets that can make one successful in life
You are right 👍
But I don't know why people remain poor due to ignorance
I in-vested $18500 and she made profit of $82000 for me just in 7 days of trading
her success story is everywhere,
I'm just glad he explained how tech becomes a thing when you see something similar on some old TV show/movie. Instead of thinking "they predicted the future!" No... they simply wanted what they saw and figured it out!
Technology cannot become a thing without energy. This is ignored by futurists.
Art inspires progress
"Progress" is subjective. "Better" is subjective. Civilization's have regularly collapsed over history's time span.
'Progress' has still occurred. 'Better' has still happened. Civilization has not collapsed, only specific ones.
I just finished his book. When I first started reading it I put it down after page 100 or so because it really wasn't telling me anytbing I didnt already know. But several months and several books later I picked it back up and finished the rest. I ended up loving it.
Well lets see if someone can figure out that you can't have infinite growth with finite resources. Never has a species consumed so many resources at such an alarming rate. How do you make a sustainable world?
We were disconnected from nature when our common management of it was lost. As a result, we no longer understand its limitations and no longer notice when we go beyond those limitations. That's why people in the West continue to have the delusion that technology will save us.
@@dama9150 well said.
It's an interesting philosophy that definitely should be elaborated on. It's absolutely true that many people fear new technology but there are certainly many others who who see it as a benefit. Science is nothing more than a tool so it's morality should be interpreted through our actions and intentions. Unfortunately as science gets more advanced it also becomes less democratic. Advanced science requires large institutions and infrastructure all working towards a singular goal. Very few organizations have the capability to conduct science at this scale, as such advanced science often conforms to the goals of these organizations. Currently the main motives driving science right now are profit and military power, not exactly noble goals. This explains why we build more nuclear bombs than nuclear reactors and why we keep using fossil fuels despite having many viable alternatives. We need to find a way to balance our scientific goals to be more altruistic, otherwise we will continue on this dystopian path.
I take your point(s), of course. Ironically the internet proved its worth, in one of its more positive ways, sharing immense amounts of data amongst those seeking to create a vaccine for COVID … only for the scientists to be given a hard time for having created one either too slowly, or too quickly! Science DOES rather seem to get a ‘bad rep’, which is a shame as I believe that those who conduct their work ‘at the coal face’ as it were (an odd quote, I realize) have good intentions … (although, I suppose Oppenheimer probably felt the same at the time, too)!
In 1947, a couple of aliens flew to Earth in a silver saucer-shaped craft. After closely observing mankind, they shit themselves laughing and crashed into the desert in Roswell, New Mexico. The US Army found the shit covered craft, conducted an investigation, deduced what happened and out of embarressment told the public it was a weather balloon. ,
Maybe true
Not to take anything away from what you have said, but I have to state, whatever we do it has to be Sustainable. Anything not Sustainable has to end and we exist on Unsustainability.
This is how I think of utopian thinking but I constantly run into people interpreting utopia as by definition impossible. I'll use protopia from now on.
Utopia by definition doesn't exist. Utopia means "nowhere" in Greek.
@@bosmul_ exactly, it's meant to be unattainable and unrealistic.
Understanding how to connect with others is a prerequisite in unlocking our phones ability to amplify our ability to connect with others.
Love this! Well read as I am, this is the first time I'm hearing the word "protopia." Everyone right now is interested in dystopian futures which feeds a societal mindset. We've gone down a path expecting the worst from the financial and political elites. On the other hand, Star Trek for instance is a protopian future genre showing how humanity can work together to improve society. That is such a strong notion that it has stuck with me for decades and I'm perpetually dismayed at how far away we are to achieve anything like it.
Kevin Kelly : "Technology will make a better world". Hunter-gatherers : Look what he needs to mimic a fraction of our power.
There is no law that says a dystopian system cannot form and remain indefinitely. Just ask North Korea. And there is no reason this can't be world wide.
They've only been around for like 70 yrs or whatever
To me, it just seems like something that’s inferred. You can argue how long it will take for NK to eventually fall or assimilate into something entirely different until you’re blue in the face, but the country as it currently stands *will not* remain indefinitely.
Well, if you were someone born 70 years ago in North Korea, you have spent all your life in a dystopia. As good as forever.
I don't have too much trouble imagining anon dystopian future. It's just that I also don't have trouble imagining a dystopian one either. It creates a conflict in me that's very difficult to resolve. I hope for one and dread the other.
I think it's clear to see that in life we all have options... In my view of human history dystopian thoughts and fantasies are based on a collective of apocalyptic human fears and held together with a bunch of negative 'what if's' ... You can change the script ... That does not have to be the way the story goes ... You do have the option to be more optimistic WE all have better options ... We can also make some better choices and be a bit more brave in the face of fear ... We are all capable of rejecting the fearful mindset and the negative narrative ... All of us can opt for a way of life that can organically and gradually grow into a better way of living that's much more positive ... being sustainable does Not have to be perfect... My favorite poem was written in 1927 by Max Erman... The poem is 'Desiderata' and it's a very grounded perspective on an imperfect life filled with hope and optimism.
All abroad the” world is ending this generation” trumpet that nobody has ever heard of before.
Where do those retro pictures come from? Please
Damn, what a nice topic
One small problem: we're running out of economically-accessible oil and natural gas. Technology (indeed all modern civilization) runs on these and there are no feasible replacements that can be scaled up until long after we've run out.
We have to be both, we have to somehow be hopeful, but dig so deep into the negatives of our present, and ourselves, that we don't have blind spots, otherwise those blindspots drive. For example, we have missed the huge blindspot that all our wonderful developments and expansion have literally cost us the world. This is what we have to begin dealing with, and the hour is late. I think we need something like solarpunk, or mindpunk... basically something where not only is technology secondary to being natural and balanced, but also where we have changed and advanced our minds, and aren't just superimposing our current folies and limits onto a future world.
Well said Richard!
Technology is not the problem, and therefore, neither can it be the solution, not even by changing its image or proposing a "desirable" future based on alternative uses. That people feel distrust of science, technology, artificial intelligence, etc., is due to social movements, it is a problem of society; not of the political, technological or economic centers. What is shaking, what is threatening to crumble, is the basis on which these centers are built.
My fear of dystopia isn’t rooted in the progression of technology. Rather, it’s rooted in the long term destruction of the planet due to climate change, and in the short term decline of western democracy.
Thanks for bringing these up. These are important and difficult questions to consider. We invited some people to weigh in on them for our Progress Issue. Hannah Ritchie, senior researcher at the University of Oxford, raises the interesting point that climate scientists are actually "often less pessimistic than the general public, which is a new and odd disconnect. Few accept that humanity is doomed. They have children, and believe that they have a future worth living for. They continue to push for action and solutions every day. Few accept that humanity is doomed.” bigthink.com/progress/pessimism-is-a-barrier-to-progress/ Is it possible to recognize that we need to do more - much more - and also believe that we have the capability to solve the problems? If both optimism and pessimism can excuse inaction, how do we adopt an attitude that inspires us to actually solve them? Worries about democracy are a bit more subjective than the hard numbers around climate change, and we can only wish we had a crystal ball here! Still, some historical perspective to keep in mind is that this is hardly the first time in history, or modern history, the world has veered between democracy and autocracy. This can very well cause war and horror--but the long arc has been towards higher living standards and less death and war. What can we learn and how can we keep pushing the curve in that direction? Jason Crawford, founder of the "Roots of Progress" project, explores that at bigthink.com/progress/a-new-philosophy-of-progress-jason-crawford/ .
Is that what we're reduced to, now? Excited that climate scientists haven't given up all hope? The OP talks about a climate dystopia, and acknowledging the heavily substantiated fact that this is where we'll be unless unprecedented and revolutionary global change occurs immediately, despite no current intentions to do so, kind of justifies their concern. Also, I find it hard to believe that "climate scientists are typically more optimistic". Every climate scientist I've ever talked to expresses how it becomes more emotionally difficult every year to do their work as more and more lines are crossed without any serious action. International organizations like the IPCC, using the work of thousands of climate scientists from across the globe, continue to pump out more and more dire reports with increased certainty. Then, on the other hand, the average person barely knows the tip of the iceberg about climate change. They know it'll get a bit warmer, oceans will rise a little, and polar bears are going to be really sad. Something smells fishy here. Or could it be a fruity smell. Perhaps cherry picking?
@@Anonymoose66G Is that before or after the coast floods?
@@bigthink ...effects on society brought-on by climate change (mass migration, food shortage, economic turmoil, etc), directly feed/empower a nationalistic/authoritarian/etc political landscape (fear, protectionism, etc). Now look at the overwhelming tendencies of people vulnerable to support those politics... what do they think of climate change? So, we're staring down the barrel of a very long feedback loop. One which doesn't favor empathy & collective progression. This is in-motion now, as we know tipping points have already begun & will trigger others.
What an interesting perspective!
We can argue all our lives what’s the best approach to identify and solve societal problems. I think one thing nearly all of us can agree upon is that status quo is not the choice. After basic amenities, we can talk about opportunities and ways to find meaning in life. Not everyone has the capability nor the interest to become a CEO of a multinational corporation or leading edge scientist, but the opportunity to become is a problem. When the baseline of living is risen everyone wins, but it brings up more problems to solve.
Good points. The trend in the past, globally, has been one of expanding opportunity--but it's not necessarily assured that that will continue and it will take work to continue to expand them. And we also often see that higher standards of living don't always go hand in hand with increased happiness (or we would be in a euphoric state compared to ancient serfs!) but that as they rise we get just as bothered by a new set of problems, if often objectively smaller ones. Peter Leyden, author of the famous "Long Boom" article in Wired in the 90s, wrote an update for us that touches on this: bigthink.com/progress/the-great-progression-peter-leyden/ .
Mahatma Gandhi was hostile to Industrial civilisation. He was also inspired by Thoreau's Walden. But he himself was using printing press, watches, cars, etc. For him perhaps, the technology which makes the society better, e.g. by bringing employment, spreading education, etc are good. He used Railways, but also criticised railways, just as how we use mobile phones, but criticise them too. Technology should be judiciously used, not recklessly adopted everywhere.
is nice to heard that we should move towards "more options", but we still living in a scenery where the scarcity competition is against the world...
But then there is the Fermi Paradox and the idea of the great filter coming to my mind.
Technology used properly can help but if not used properly will harm progress. Progress has to be measured with sustainable effects to the overall ecosystem
I agree that small is beautiful. I also believe that Katmandu is the most holy city as they have preserved divinity.
Interesting perspective 🤔
That soldering drop at 06:28 probably burnt all those chips and made me sad.
A world that has no problems... envisioned as someone dropping their iPhone. Wow. 👎
Talker: "Dystopias don't last long." North Korea: "Hold my beer."
"Dystopias don't last long." Ancient Rome: Hold my beer..
That's exactly how I always think of things, for the first time someone summarizes what I think very well.
Define "civilization." Then define "collapse." Based on your presonal interpretations of those concepts, an answer should be relatively easy to arrive at.
I think Taoists have a good perspective, seeing things in cycles, peaks and troughs.
Damn. That's some 1990's thinking right there.
it has already collapsed... and it has been unable to lift from the ground again...
Always interesting. Thank you. Peace 💕🇺🇲
Utopia no doubt will exist in the future. In VR.
I bet even the metaverse will be a dystopia
Maybe they will find a way to biohack users to force us to enjoy our lives in digital captivity
No
@@ongobongo8333 No U
This "metaverse" thing will never be a thing. VR does have uses but in terms of escapement it will always be niche. The reality is people can be just as emerged in a world sitting on the couch with a controller or sitting in front of a computer, all with out the crap that comes with VR. Even then, the most immersive worlds are not the utopias.
He can't see the problem is systemic. He's completely lost in magical dreams.
Wow. I really appreciated hearing his perspective.
This is very correct and good,
Just imagine the next dark age, mix of high tech and mud, in a world with production chains broken and small local goverment. The growd of any civilization can't be perpetual, there must be some periods of decline.
The destruction of the earth's natural environment is dystopia.
Today I would be happy in a world that didn't change. The change I see happening frighten me. We are at a brink of world war III and a nuclear war. We are at a brink (or over it) of unstoppable climate change.
Cultures collapse whereas the human civilization will endure. It is only a matter of "how much survives". At some point a civilization reaches a "tipping point" as far as if it can last or not. Ancient civilizations died out usually owing to a collapse of what were central governing structures. The world today despite being separate nations is still very interconnected. Ergo human knowledge will persis at some level and what "collapses" can be replaced in time. Education is fairly ubiquitous today in most developed nations such that the board can not totally be wiped as it was in times past where populations were for the most part functionally illiterate - and thus dependent upon those central authorities.
We have already passed the tipping point climate wise.
I don't see too many people considering whether we should develop a Technology based on its impact on society. Like the Amish do. Most of the time they just use the new technology and don't think about it otherwise they'll be Left behind in the competitive framework which our society is based on, it is not a Cooperative framework like the Amish society. Not only that whether or not a technology will be developed depends on whether it makes money for a few a minority called capitalists and more and more money more and more political power ends up in their hands so it's all dependent on whether or not it benefits them not whether it benefits us
While we can make small progress every year, our current problem is that a real solution is receding faster than our progress, so we get farther and farther behind.
The title is very clickbait
Why?
Respect
Techno-feudalism is the better way to describe the current state of societies
We unfortunately have idiots in very key places making very important decisions on our behalf.
Earth is a loaner, a rental and the occupants still behave as such. The trouble is that it is genuinely just a refuge where in the one-in-a-billion²-chance-Utopia in a goldilocks zone intelligence and imagination could thrive. One day a teenager asteroid will arrive still trying to figure out the brakes or we will become fuel for a red dwarf. Are our intelligence and creativity going to be enough or are we going to pray like mad that the asteroid takes out our enemies first, one second before us?
Was introduced to Kevin Kelly through listening to the podcasts of the Long Now Foundation. I can highly recommend checking them out if you're into long-term thinking, technology and social trends.
how do you feel now?
Resources are becoming scarce.
The future I want is where freedom, peace, art, imagination, exploration and creation are valued more than propaganda, greed, power over others and monetary gain.
I have to disagree with him because millions can and do live under a dystopian rule. Millions can tolerate living in deplorable conditions for multiple generations. Our species direction is heading for dystopia.
North Korea, Communist China, Soviet Union, etc, these lasted a long time and many are still around. He's looking at the places he's been with rose colored glasses, these places before and after industrialization had many problems.
That's exactly right. I don't know what he thinks he's saying when he says "Dystopias don't last long. Warlords install some form of order, not an order we'd prefer, but it's a form of order." An order we don't want, instituted by a greedy warlord who seized control... That's literally the definition of a dystopia.
Respectfully, disagree. The evidence of life being better (longer, healthier, more entertaining, freer, more comfortable)for the average human now, as compared to any past historical era is incontrovertible. That doesn’t mean there aren’t major problems to address, but I think the point is imaging solution.
@@docjaramillo I think only half the human population enjoys the better lifestyles and better healthcare. The solutions are being thrown out and disregarded by the people in power. Also, for those solutions to even have a chance to work, it would require major sacrifices from the half that enjoys the " better" lifestyles.
Yes, a significant percentage of the population of Earth today - 9% - live in what the World Bank defines as “extreme poverty” (less than $1.90/day). That’s horrible. But 200 years ago, 90% of the population of Earth lived in extreme poverty, many in actual chattel slavery. And just twenty years ago it was 29%. We’ve eliminated two thirds of the world’s extreme poverty in just the past two decades. So no, I do not agree with your assessment. And I recommend you read “Factfulness”, by Dr Hans Rosling, to learn how many hard, verifiable facts about the world we all fail to understand. It blew my mind when I read it, and completely changed how I think about poverty and global health.
Protopia is also about (Re)Education, not only on an Individual perspective, but on a Collective perspective (Communities or whatever groups of people they are). However, Protopia is a chaotic process that can be easily truncated, not by Mediocrity; but by Evil. We are a Society blind to the fact that relatively few Wolves nonetheless are more or less free to develop in the middle of the crowd of Lambs; as long as the Lambs (some being wishful Protopians) cannot identify the own Wolves among themselves, they'll be fooled (and often eaten) chronically; Protopia is a beautiful neologism and concept, but it is not new in History -as so many attemps to 'fix' Human Society have been made. In this sense, no Protopia will be sufficiently effective in our Society, while we do not assess properly the Lamb-Wolf problematic. Oh, yes: And the Wolves will indeed make (bad) use of "Protopia" so to lure for exemple Protopians into oblivion. Of course, this is allegorical; but it's because of ignoring this problematic, that we do not have Protopia now -despite all efforts.
It was an eye opening short video
You need what to steer??
If Only you believe in the first place that creation took place, would you believe that there’s an end, and that is sooner than later
Thanks
Very much appreciated! Email me at toby@freethink.com and we'll send you a small thank you gift!
Mahatma Gandhi was hostile to Industrial civilisation. He was also inspired by Thoreau's Walden. But he himself was using printing press, watches, cars, etc. For him perhaps, the technology which makes the society better, e.g. by bringing employment, spreading education, etc are good. He used Railways, but also criticised railways, just as how we use mobile phones, but criticise them too. Technology should be judiciously used, not recklessly adopted everywhere.
Yeah, believed in village autonamy, how can every village produce their own meds, train physicians? The Chinese would love it if India had gone this way.
@@bhatkat Village autonomy didn't mean the villages wouldn't have collaboration between them. Also it is that he didn't like modern medicines. He said it makes people dependent on medicines, and he isn't totally wrong here. Also other things such as testing on animals, etc which he considered as violence. Also it was just his ideal model, something like a political theory. He himself lived mostly near cities. His village autonomy concept is important. In fact China is better at it than India. The Indian local governments have very less powers. They are almost like departments of State governments. Chinese local governments have much more powers, with more money, manpower, functions,etc
Nobody plans Dystopias. Dystopia Begin as Utopic visions but independently of technology those visions turn into nightmares by the dark side of human nature. Dystopia it's not about technology but dishonest societies.
I am an optimist but I wasn't one for the future, until I saw this Video !
Famous last words: _I think I can see light at the end of the tunnel._ _Oh.... it's the train coming!_ 😱
Then you need to get out of that tunnel... Everyone has options
@@sharonjarvis-young710 You are deep in a tunnel and the train is coming. Explain "options" 🤔
If taken literally it's rather simple ... If you're in a tunnel that's wide enough and the train is moving so fast that you're in danger of being killed ... you can still get off the track, you can lean against the wall of the tunnel until the train passes.
As Elon said we have to feel great about the path we have picked or the path might have picked us.
2:39 timestamp, they admit what they are gonna do to us. So why are we giving them arms and legs. So like gods they would be born and like gods they will be ruling. 3:10 well I see different things I can tell you I see a world without problems.
Nothing lasts forever .
Came for the Amish tech, stayed for the chin curtain.
Read some science fiction. Daemon & Freedom by Daniel Suarez Most people cannot tell when the technology is crappy. They buy on the basis of brand name and price.
This is what a philosopher is
Deadlines prevent you from trying to make it perfect, so you have to make it different, and different is so much better - Kevin Kelly
That's why perfectionism is usually treated with "trying out stuff" as in, training to see, maintain and use options more flexible.
But surely this is already a dystopian society. Technological Progress? That's not a measure of value and certainly not of quality of life. It is not a question of technology, but one of will. Civilization may not collapse, but it will end. Sooner, or later. The only question is: Did you choose to love, or something else?
there is no finish line.
Basic problem: There is serious shortage of energy in future. 90% of world energy comes from fossil fuels which is running out. Where is the solution? What happens when civilization is short on energy and resources? That part should be obvious to everyone.
By non dystopian, I don't mean a utopia. I would find a utopia very boring. Some conflict and difficulties are desirable. But when situations like what lead to WW2, I become very concerned will we make it.
Competition is possible without conflict. If you have had a chance to observe and/or be a part of a very positive group or organization with a healthy culture and so on and been able to compare that with a deeply dysfunctional one it provides an excellent example of how utopia can be non toxic without being sterile and boring. I'm thinking about how winning and losing play out as another aspect of the same idea. It's possible to be a gracious winner without arrogance and to lose admirably or, alternatively one can be Repulsive in victory and a big baby whining about hackers and cheaters in defeat. I'm not sure if I expressed myself well but that's my opinion on the topic.
“We finally really did it… You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!” -Charlton Heston, Planet of the Apes
We’ll never make it to the future with the way things are now… this system will crumble, unless change comes VERY fast… unfortunately the way our politics and economy is set up, the change we desperately need to make will never be accomplished before we crumble.
charming man and great insights! However the title of the video is very misleading, what threatens civilisation is mostly global warming not technologies, and on that we are not even remotely close to see that shit as an opportunity to improve. It will collapse.
i like the sound of that... but there's broken glasse in the KY... humans are too egoist for that...
Modernist physiology, technology is solution. Hows that working out ?
Hasn't it already?
This is magical thinking lol
Perfection is not possible, however steady change/growth/progress is. I like to think: "if one/i can improve 1% per day, a complete revolution can occur in 1 year". 360°♡
Kevin Kelly Please consider this impractical thought experiment for a thermal diversification process:that is self powered. COLD ROOM ())--:::WALL:::-->> HOT ROOM >~1000 NM< Key ()) = Paddlewheel. -- = Axle. (Continuous from end to end) ::: = Axle tunnel going through a wall. >> = Lumped friction element Visualize two roome full of air separated by a very thin wall that allows the rooms to hold their heat with minor loss independently. The wall is thin to delicately support billions of separate nanometer scale short axles running straight through loosely enough to rotate freely but not leak very much heat so the rooms can hold separate temperatures. On the left side, a very small paddlewheel is mounted at the left end of each axle. On the right side, lumped friction elements are mounted stationary in place on the wall, one for each axle, for the right end of each axle to run through. The lumped friction elements connvert the mechanical rotation of their axle into heat. Brownian motion turns the paddlewheels at random speeds randomly clockwise or rcounterclockwise. This random rotation is turned into heat by the lumped friction elements. The lumped friction elements do not impart Brownian motion to their axle. The committed functional roles of the paddiewheels, axles, and lumped friction elements in differnt places should systemically produce a divergence in the thermal energy in the two rooms. Heat is moved by process without being forced by added energy. I was granted US patent 3890161 DIODE ARRAY for a refrigerator that coproduces thermal energy reduction and equal electrical energy yield vla aggregating the rectified brownian motion of mobile electrons in a plurality of diodes. This is superseded by "ThermicArray" which needs to be prototyped under free and full disclosure for the overall betterment of civilization. Aloha, Charles M Brown lll Kilauea, Kauai, HI 96754 Aloha Charles M Brown lll Kilauea, Kauai HI 96754
I agree.
You might not know this but humans hate choosing.
good point
Only a fool would think that it can't happen to us
Every prediction is wrong ?? What are you doing then ??
Answer: Yes
Klaus Schwab say thank you!!!
Anyone interested in these philosophies should read Karl Popper