« Failings of Capitalism | Main | Avalanche 1 »
February 04, 2003
Simplicity
People often talk about the importance of simplicity in ones life. Sometimes its in a nostalgic sense, remembering how much simpler things were. Most people agree that a simpler life is a better life. We often point to all our modern conveniences and to how much easier life is today with them. I often wonder how many of these advances really simplify our iife, or complicate it. Take an extreme, the car. The car certainly makes it simpler to go long distances. Its much easier to visit distant relatives, and see more places. Its easier to take a vacation. But on the flip side, now that everyone has a car, few people work close to where they live. So a lot of time is spent getting to work and back. So in a utilitarian sense, has the car really simplified our life. Thats not even getting in to car maintenance, payments, refueling etc... There are other modern things which make life simpler with little apparent consequence. Take the microwave. I have a tough time with this one. I hate to cook, I love the microwave. You just heat it up. We're past viewing micro-waving as unhealthy in and of itself. Of course, we eat a lot less healthy now that we CAN just microwave. So we have more time for loved ones because we can spend less time cooking, but we eat and feed our loved ones much less healthy. Its a tough one. Email is another tough one for me. Email has done so much to connect people. Instant messaging as well. I am closer to many people because of them. Its obviously helped society in many ways. But on the flip side, it has dramatically sped up the business cycle, perhaps more than anything else. Documents take seconds to send instead of days and because of that, you are expected to respond in a shorter time. Now, a manager can fire off 15 emails in 15 minutes with tons of work without ever meeting with people, in many ways, reducing communication by removing the benefit of face to face contact and dialogue. I have been thinking on the topic of modernity a lot, without a clear answer. I often think about Tolkien and his view of it. Tolkien vehemently denied there was any message in The Lord of the Rings (TLOR), but if there was, it would be a message of anti-industrialism. Looking at Tolkien's history and the themes in TLOR, it is obvious he believed strongly that creeping industrialism did more harm than good. But you can easily plot many futures which have it going both ways. Automation for example has long been touted as the best and worst thing for humanity. On one hand it elimninates jobs, on the other hand robots can work in much more dangerous environments than humans. Robots can work in the kind of horrible working conditions that humans are forced to work in today. That seems good right? It does to me, but would it just further polarize the classes once most menial labor can be automated? I don't know.Posted by wonko at February 4, 2003 07:49 PM
Comments
Automation and the progress of technology has always had the ability to improve the quality of life, I believe. However, as a result of politics and the social constructs of our society, these improvements rarely, if ever, materialize. Instead, we get all the bad with none (or very little) of the good that ought to have replaced and overtaken it.
Posted by: kasei at February 5, 2003 01:22 PM
Please how can we blame modern conveniences for the problems that have developed in our society. The car hasn't made us work further away, it has given us the ability to choose. You can't be serious when you imply that these improvements in technology, may not have improved the quality of our lives. We can't blame things on the way we choose to behave, we have to except responsibily for our own actions, we can not blame things, for the poor choices we make.
MaTT
Posted by: at February 7, 2003 03:39 PM
--
Posted by: matt at February 7, 2003 03:41 PM
Its not that simple. Its true, 'things' can't be blamed, they do nothing on their own. But when looking at the affect 'things' have had on us, you have to consider how those things interact with human nature. Take it to a personal level, there are millions of alcaholics that do not drink. They don't drink because they know, their personality and/or genetics won't allow them to do it responsibly. So they choose not to. In this way, something like the car, which can't be blamed in and of itself, can be found to be something humans just can't handle. So the question is still valid, given the combined consideration of human nature as well as the inanimate object.
Posted by: Wonko at February 7, 2003 09:42 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)