Will advancement stop?

Here you can talk about anything (that isn't related to the other forums).

Moderator: Crew

Post Reply
User avatar
Zandrav Ibistenn
Patron
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:32
Location: Irrelevant

Will advancement stop?

Post by Zandrav Ibistenn »

Technological advance is the gradual refinement of tools and the steady accumulation of knowledge. Through the interplay of these processes, humankind ascends the ladder of technological sophistication, each step exploiting a facet of nature to expand the capabilities for control over the surrounding world.
But how tall is the ladder? Infinitely tall? Hardly, the fact that we've come far and still have much to see shouldn't let us believe that the road ahead can never end. At some point no new building blocks can be found and and the possible combinations between them will eventually be exhausted.

Depending on where we'll be stranded technologically this could mean a number of things. Consider the asymmetry between offence and defence - following the progression from swords to cruise missiles - the attacking party gains a disproportional advantages for each new weapon design. Suppose the arms race eventually leads to a situation where the capabilities to cause destruction has become readily accessible and then chaos ensues. (You could argue that this is already happening: go from bombs to biological weapons).

This was just an example - the question this inspires is this: Is more (advanced) always desirable? Is there anything to do about it? Is it possible that our species' ability to fashion
tools turns out to be a curse and get us stuck in a nightmarish situation?
Man's fault lies in his propensity towards willingly doing what feels good and his procrastinating reluctance to doing what is immediately uncomfortable but good.

Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
- Immanuel Kant

Custodian of the Symposium.

[b]Error Tracking[/b]: Let's begin at the amygdala...
User avatar
Maz
Admin emeritus
Posts: 1938
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 21:11
Location: In the deepest ShadowS
Contact:

Post by Maz »

Yes. It is possible that our technology will be our destruction. In many manners it already is. People become physically weaker and softer when tools ease our work. I can't see why wouldn't same apply in intelligence. When phones remember numbers, calculators handle maths, knowledge and information are easily accesible via internet, various tasks can be organized / planned by computer software...

I know this was not what you originally meant with this thread, but this is part of the game.

Now I would do a rough separation.. I know most won't accept this :p I would separate gaining new information about things, and building new technology.

Gaining new information is always good. Research should never be stopped, and it actually will never stop. I believe there is infinite amount of things to know.

Creating new technology should be limited. It should be under carefull supervision. And that will not happen. Never.

New technology is perhaps the best way to make money. And when we obtain new knowledge, new technology will become available. So knowledge is a tool, and money is a motivation... Money is so enormous motivation that new technology will always be created, no matter if it's allowed or not.

And.. As I said, I believe there is infinite amount of new things to research. It leads us to infinite amount of new technology (in theory). But creating new technology requires resources. We need materia to produce technology, and perhaps we one day reach the limit where new tech would require more resources than we can afford. Maybe some day... But that day won't happen while I live, stop for technological advancement is not yet visible.
User avatar
Eric
Patron
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:08

Post by Eric »

I believe that the boundaries of knowledge are limitless, that there is no end to what is possible.

However, the problem is not the technology itself but rather that we lack the intellectual, moral or ethical maturity to harness it responsibly.

The weak spot in anything is the human factor. It's also true that no matter what original use a creation may have had it can always be bent to another use by those less scrupulous or with different goals.
User avatar
Chroelle
Admin emeritus
Posts: 9870
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:19
Location: Location, location...
Contact:

Post by Chroelle »

True. How often have you not heard the phrase: "This can be dangerous in the wrong hands..." I mean people wouldn't create things that was dangerous to all hands would they. They must have seen a purpose of it that was beneficial to somebody or something...
Currently testing Life version 2.9 (With added second child)
(Beta testing in progress)

www.paed-it.dk - My blog in Danish

Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.
--Mark Twain
User avatar
Zandrav Ibistenn
Patron
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:32
Location: Irrelevant

Post by Zandrav Ibistenn »

The notion that the possibilities are limitless is very common, and for good reason I might add, but this is really just based on historical experience; since we haven't reached the end yet it becomes hard to imagine, but the possibility that further advancement may someday be prohibited must not be excluded.

I was interested in the consequences of technological advance stopping at certain levels of sophistication and how people would feel/react upon that, because some people have already said stop. The Amish sect in North America rejects most modern technology. The Unabomber, mathematical genius Theodore Kaczynski carried out his terrorist attacks in the belief that technology is inherently oppressive and that man would be better off without it.

I'm not sure time-saving applications like calculators impair people's intellectual development, since even though the brain is not stimulated with working out the arithmetics there's still the main part of finding the solution to a problem. Also, intellectual growth is stimulated by new challenges, not reiteration of old problems. And since more time, thanks to computers, could be freed to investigate the former, it might actually be a positive thing.
Maz wrote:I know this was not what you originally meant with this thread, but this is part of the game.
Actually this was sort of what I was hoping for for this thread. (Wish it would happen more often).
Man's fault lies in his propensity towards willingly doing what feels good and his procrastinating reluctance to doing what is immediately uncomfortable but good.

Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.
- Immanuel Kant

Custodian of the Symposium.

[b]Error Tracking[/b]: Let's begin at the amygdala...
Post Reply