Before I start, I would like to point out that I DO believe that technology DOES have a place in modern society; however we should be mindful of the effect that technologies have us personally, the affect on our communities and the affect on the planet. We so often embrace new technologies without a full understanding of the impact they ultimately have, further more we also have a tendency to become so ‘dependant’ on these technologies that we don’t realise what they are doing to us, our communities and the planet.
In Back to The Basics (in case you haven’t read the posts), I did away with as much tech as possible, to see what affect it had on me and my life style. The overall affect has been to make me more conscious of the technologies that I use and the way that I use them.
What really prompted this post was an interview in ‘The Scientist’ with Kirkpatrick Sale a gentleman who describes himself as a Neo-Luddite. So I’ve done a little researched into the Luddite philosophy.
Who Were The Luddites
The Luddites were a social movement of the early 19th Century in England. They destroyed the new automated machinery, as a protest against the advancement of the Industrial Revolution and mechanisation of the textile industry, from where they rose. Their objections were primarily that the automation of the woollen mills was having an adverse effect on both them as individuals and their communities as a whole.
The Neo-Luddites and Reform Luddites
The Luddite movement is still around today in the form of the Neo-Luddites and the more moderate Reform-Luddites. The Neo-Luddites are pretty much the modern day equivalent of the original Luddite movement (with less technology smashing). The Reform-Luddites recognise the many benefits and inevitable advancement of technology, however they are opposed to the adoption of new, seemingly useful innovations that have unanticipated consequences, or even known consequences. The Reform-Luddites are also very much of the thought that it’s up to the individual to either embrace technology or reject it, to make the choice to ‘turn it on’ or ‘turn it off’, but to do so with the full knowledge of the consequences and affects.
I am NOT advocating that we should start smashing up all Tech! What I am saying is that we should be more conscious of the affect that these technologies have on us.
For Example
A prime example is genetically modified crops, an advancement that would, on the surface, seem to be generally positive one (disease resistance, increased yields); HOWEVER they have been introduced with little consideration of the affect that they have on the population and the planet as a whole (I plan to discuss GM foods at some point in the future). This is an advancement that has been foisted upon us without giving us the choice to accept or reject it.
Another example would be the mobile telephone; an advancement in technology that undoubtedly has its place in modern society, however the way we chose to use this technology does come into question. The mobile phone is partly to blame (so I believe) in the erosion of common courtesy and good manners.
Social Media web-sites, another example, this one for me is a double edged sword. On one hand it erodes the local communities and face to face interaction. Then on the other hand it builds whole new communities that transcend country boarders.
Technology For Technologies Sake
I know many people who upgrade or embrace new technologies for no other reason than it’s there, with no consideration of the affect that it will have on them.
All I am advocating is that we embrace the technologies consciously, with the full knowledge of all the consequences that come with them, not just for us but also our communities and the planet. Just because a new technology seems to replace an older process doesn’t mean that that process is redundant or useless, nor does it mean that we must embrace this new technology.
We have a choice so chose wisely with a conscious mind, just because it’s new doesn’t mean its better.
Not logged in
Dear Chris,
I just want to say I think your post is bang on. Erosion of common courtesy and good manners has also, in my humble opinion, taken place due to the prevalence of mobile phone usage. The use of such items on the trains and even walking down the street where others are present with complete disregard for communality of space and understanding that the sounds that flow into one’s ears is a shared responsibility – has undoubtedly been a side impact of mobile telephones in our current society.
I feel that computers and the advent of email as such a central component of people’s daily lives, has also had a significant effect on the make up of inter-personal relations. I mean, gone are the days when people would take you on as a new hire (well almost!) based on the correctness of one’s manners and the appropriateness of how one explains how one fits into a particular role. I often find people say nowadays “go online”, “fill out the form online”, – online this, online that. Almost to the extent that people just use it as a tool not to exercise their brains. They have, so it seems, forgotten about the decency and empowering effect of just having a conversation and helping someone out based on one-to-one conversation. People hide behind the “safety” of a computer screen nowadays is what I mean. You know, email to this info@ address, blah, blah. It’s a fairly sorry state I believe, because quite often it is the people who have the brazen, dogged mindset of walking in to places a la Woody Allen, who are the ones who can help shape things.
I believe the same is the case with Social Media. It’s a safe game. It’s a secure environment for the onset of lazy, barrier driven social interaction. It nurtures a form of paranoia in my opinion because it all takes place behind a form of sketched, artificial, protected and inaccessible alter-ego. What happened to the wits associated with real interaction? What happened to judging people on the merits or the pitfalls displayed in front of one’s eyes? On the perceptions elicited and evoked in an instinctive or intuitive conversation? That for me is the shame of our current, long-lasting and intensifying digital computer revolution. That what makes me believe in Reform-Luddism or whatever it is called.
Anyway, aside from my fairly pungent views
I wanted to say that I think your blog post is spot on! It’s great there are people like you to discern this full throttle trend towards technological over-reliance. I mean it’s like people and regular, normal conversation that we were used to back in the 1990s and before that, has been swept under the carpet for just vintage collectors to take a part in. You know the old guard, the archaic standard bearers. I feel that is shameful for our new generations. The won’t grow up with a pen in their hands, or a pencil, or whatever. It’s all about their latest ring tone that represents them, or what their “Profile” on a social media site has chosen to demonstrate to others that it likes or dislikes. What happened to books and what they represent? You know working for things. Not taking the quick route, perhaps even the cheating route of whacking a few words into an online Encyclopedia environment. Or checking a website quickly to gain a quick fix. How about dictionaries, poetry books, buying artists manufactured music because one is paying homage to their art; to their creative work; the time spent on channeling their love and their passion into creative form.
Anyway, lots of issues raised, and I apologise if my technological and evolutionary angst is flowing out. I feel strongly about the way our world is changing. Of course there are many benefits, but the “exciting, great trends” that we are promised by social media and other advances – e.g. email, online prevalence – could in my opinion be tempered somewhat by critical Luddist principles.
Have a wonderful day Chris, and I hope you garner a similarity in our mind-set.
All the best,
Feather.
Feather I do believe that you are spot on with your observations, in fact I was having a discussion along these very lines this morning. I think that I summed it up quite well when I said that technology was a tool for us to use, it’s not a tool for us to rely on and most definitely shouldn’t be tool behind which can hide. It is also most definitely not an excuse to be lazy, ignorant or rude, and I’m afraid that I see more and more people putting there mobile phones, mp3 players etc before real human-beings and real human interaction, and as you say it is most prevalent but not exclusive to the younger generations. I guess the big question is why is society accepting such behaviour? I don’t and it’s not difficult to say so, and when you explain why most people understand, there are a few who don’t, but they the minority.
Thanks for taking the time to drop by and leave such a wonderful comment,
Blessings Chris