We have lost the ways of being human in the Age of Technology. Yes, computer technology & the Internet have their benefits, even as they are major influences on why we often act like digital machines.
Perry, it’s really good to see your latest writing and I welcome you back. I remember Dr Buscaglia and feel that every generation needs heartfelt human beings who share the call to love. Thank you for sharing.
> We need to be taught that the technology is only a tool. The same as a any other tool, the chief difference is that a hammer or screwdriver does not distract or create distance between us.
I agree with the general premise of your essay, Perry, but I don't think this particular statement is true in any sense. Technology is so damaging to human relations precisely because it *isn't* just a tool. To say it is just a tool (in general) implies that we can choose whether to use it in some dispassioned, logical and rational way – we can't. Once technology becomes sufficiently complex, it starts to function as a force, that is manipulative in an emergent sense that bends our wills and rational thought due to our maladaptive instincts, and thus restricts our freedom independent of our choice. Thus, technology, far from being "just a tool", is much more of a semi-independent entity that we have only limited control over.
It is absolutely crucial that we learn that technology is not a tool, because it is exactly this realization that will elevate the seriousness of the technological problem to our collective consciousness.
You raise a valid point; technology is not the same as a hammer or screwdriver..It is immersive and can (and does) overwhelm us. This is one reason why meeting humans face-to-face (without tech) is so essential. As is being in the realm of Nature.
Absolutely right. And we must be especially careful because big tech know this and want to eradicate as much face-to-face contact as possible because it drives adoption of their nefarious algorithmic schemes.
Born memorably in a war-zone at 310-312 ppm in the so called 10 year plateau before 1950s CO2 take-off.
Yes, I agree "it" sounds extreme, and yes it is extreme. It comes perhaps from training for a kind of militarised mind. Horses, dear creatures, were trained that way to misplace their trust.
I was a scientist of sorts, did a lot of flying for work, was brought up short, confidence in technologies deflated. Thanks.
Yes, well said, Philip. Did not know this about horses, but am not surprised. Breaking the animal’s spirit is necessary for control or, as they say, their management. Love does not, or ought not, operate in this way.
This makes me curious. Is there reliable data about how people viewed their happiness and connection to others pre-technology? I’m not convinced that people were happier and more connected back then, that there was more love. I have a hard time believing that suppressed minorities, including women, would want to go back in time. I wonder if technology has provided a conduit to connect the disenfranchised and illuminate the challenges people still have regarding love and connection. My greatest hope lies in Dr Buscaglia’s comment that “love is learned.” We can learn. We can teach. Thanks for the conversation.
My pleasure, Cindy. My view is that before the Net and social media, humans met face-to-face, because this was the norm and more so than today. There was the telephone at home, but it was nothing like the phones of today.
Whether humans were happier is not known, but humans, I suggest, were less lonely. And certainly less distracted. I am.old enough to have observed the change.
The key message is that love does not come naturally to us humans. We have to learn love.
I agree, but i would say that I have 'met' people online who then became friends in real life, sometimes it can be a useful way to make an initial contact, but it isn't in itself ever a replacement for a real life friendship
Perry, it’s really good to see your latest writing and I welcome you back. I remember Dr Buscaglia and feel that every generation needs heartfelt human beings who share the call to love. Thank you for sharing.
Thank you, Heidi; it’s good to be back here writing and sharing.🐦🦜🕊
> We need to be taught that the technology is only a tool. The same as a any other tool, the chief difference is that a hammer or screwdriver does not distract or create distance between us.
I agree with the general premise of your essay, Perry, but I don't think this particular statement is true in any sense. Technology is so damaging to human relations precisely because it *isn't* just a tool. To say it is just a tool (in general) implies that we can choose whether to use it in some dispassioned, logical and rational way – we can't. Once technology becomes sufficiently complex, it starts to function as a force, that is manipulative in an emergent sense that bends our wills and rational thought due to our maladaptive instincts, and thus restricts our freedom independent of our choice. Thus, technology, far from being "just a tool", is much more of a semi-independent entity that we have only limited control over.
It is absolutely crucial that we learn that technology is not a tool, because it is exactly this realization that will elevate the seriousness of the technological problem to our collective consciousness.
Hi Jason,
You raise a valid point; technology is not the same as a hammer or screwdriver..It is immersive and can (and does) overwhelm us. This is one reason why meeting humans face-to-face (without tech) is so essential. As is being in the realm of Nature.
Absolutely right. And we must be especially careful because big tech know this and want to eradicate as much face-to-face contact as possible because it drives adoption of their nefarious algorithmic schemes.
Born memorably in a war-zone at 310-312 ppm in the so called 10 year plateau before 1950s CO2 take-off.
Yes, I agree "it" sounds extreme, and yes it is extreme. It comes perhaps from training for a kind of militarised mind. Horses, dear creatures, were trained that way to misplace their trust.
I was a scientist of sorts, did a lot of flying for work, was brought up short, confidence in technologies deflated. Thanks.
Yes, well said, Philip. Did not know this about horses, but am not surprised. Breaking the animal’s spirit is necessary for control or, as they say, their management. Love does not, or ought not, operate in this way.
This makes me curious. Is there reliable data about how people viewed their happiness and connection to others pre-technology? I’m not convinced that people were happier and more connected back then, that there was more love. I have a hard time believing that suppressed minorities, including women, would want to go back in time. I wonder if technology has provided a conduit to connect the disenfranchised and illuminate the challenges people still have regarding love and connection. My greatest hope lies in Dr Buscaglia’s comment that “love is learned.” We can learn. We can teach. Thanks for the conversation.
My pleasure, Cindy. My view is that before the Net and social media, humans met face-to-face, because this was the norm and more so than today. There was the telephone at home, but it was nothing like the phones of today.
Whether humans were happier is not known, but humans, I suggest, were less lonely. And certainly less distracted. I am.old enough to have observed the change.
The key message is that love does not come naturally to us humans. We have to learn love.
I agree, but i would say that I have 'met' people online who then became friends in real life, sometimes it can be a useful way to make an initial contact, but it isn't in itself ever a replacement for a real life friendship
I agree; it can be a way to introduce oneself. But it is essential to be aware of social media's limitations, lest it disappoint.
Absolutely