From: Anders Sandberg (asa@nada.kth.se)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 05:52:53 MDT
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 03:14:28AM -0700, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> Spudboy100@aol.com wrote:
>
> >Future Shock would only occur, if a fully developed technology, came
> >springing, as Athena did, from the head of Zeus, to a neighborhood or a
> >drive-in, near you.
> >
> >Toffler greatly underestimated the capacity of the humans to adjust to
> >change.
>
> It may be coincedental. But I don't think the millions of
> prescriptions for anti-depressants in the US and other developed
> countries are a sign of good adjustment.
The main reason (beside the easy availability and a culture that says it
is OK to use antidepressants) may be stress. Stress occurs when one
feels that one cannot cope with stressors; it has little to do with how
large the stressors are, just how they measure compared to one's coping
abilities. If you feel less in control over your work or life you will
experience far more stress. One reason people are stressed may be that
society really is accelerating or changing in ways that increase stress,
another could be that people cope less well, either due to being
somewhat spoiled by a very safe society or by experiencing less control
over their lives in a larger society (or a combination between these
factors, of course).
Jared Diamond mentions in _Guns, Germs and Steel_ that some tribes on
New Guinea have made the (deliberate) step from a neolithic to fairly
modern lifestyle in one generation. If future shock was a human constant
they ought to be in total future shock, but my impression (more data
would be nice!) is that this is not the case. My guess is that they
viewed the change as something they were in control of, and hence were
not strongly stressed. Other tribes may have suffered future shock by
not accepting new technology and then seeing their way of life
encroached by their neighbours, but again Diamond's descriptions doesn't
seem to imply that they were stressed by the arrival of the future, but
rather just social change.
So my guess is that the real issue is not the arrival of new tech, but
whether it is viewed as something that happens on its own, outside of
human control, or whether it is seen as something created by humans for
human needs that one can use for one's own aims. If people think along
the first paradigm, then they will be stressed and start to regard the
new stuff as something negative. If they think along the second
paradigm, they will be eager to adapt and use it.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:50 MST