Industrial Society and its Future - Kaczynsky Manifesto

friendface

I'm not sure if this is the most appropriate section for this topic so feel free to move it as needed.

I was watching a program called Human V2.0 on RTE2 tonight about how technological advances are allowing for creation of computers with far superior artificial intelligence.

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/singularity/ for details.

It's predicted that by 2029 computer intelligence will equal the power of the human brain. Some believe this will revolutionise humanity - we will be able to download our minds to computers extending our lives indefinitely. Others fear this will lead to oblivion by giving rise to destructive ultra intelligent machines.

During the program, there was mention of Ted Kaczynsky (aka the Unabomber) who publicly called for a revolution against the rise of technology. I just read his manifesto there this evening and some of his ideas are intrigueing. I would really suggest anyone who has the time to read through it.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Future#Industrial-technological_society_cannot_be_reformed

It's a fairly long article but well worth the read. He speaks about society as a system which is effectively controlling humanity (I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything, I don't really buy into the whole secret groups controlling the world).


THE POWER PROCESS
He says that the industrial revolution led to terrible consequences for humanity, attributing many of todays social and psychological problems to the disruption in the natural human way of life, or a disruption in what he calls the "power process".

The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later.

In order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.

Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed.....One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.....Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression...

Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.

We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort; (2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives of the second group.

Kaczynski goes on to claim that "n modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups, and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives." Among these drives are "surrogate activities", activities "directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the 'fulfillment' that they get from pursuing the goal"

In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs.... Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction... For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next.

I won't describe all of Kazcynskys work as I will just be quoting him directly.

I guess the conclusion of his article is that in a society driven by surrogate activities which are never fulfilled, and where technology is continuously being advanced, we are headed for a world where humanity is destroyed or reduced to an insignificant species on a planet run almost entirely by computers and machines.

I guess this sounds a bit like the script for Terminator but it does seem entirely possible that this may be where we are headed. I'm not saying we would be enslaved by machines but eventually our presence will barely be necessary with many tasks being carried out by machines. We are becoming so dependent on technology that it's hard to imagine life without it or even life without any one of our modern conveniences.

What is human society really working towards? What is our goal?

What do ye think? Are these just paranoid theories or is there some justification behind them?


Just a few more links to some interesting articles;

Interview with Ted Kaczynsky http://www.primitivism.com/kaczynski.htm

Ship of Fools (Kaczynskys Short story symbolising societies voyage toward destruction) http://bigoil.gnn.tv/blogs/6607/Ship_of_Fools_by_Ted_Kaczynski

Ship of Fools (Lego Video ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKh1mOeXfqE


While I don't agree entirely with Dr. Kaczynsky's argument, some of his work does strike me as being really interesting and well worth a debate. Like how technology is constantly encroaching on human freedom and how we as individuals have increasing less control over our lives. I agree with him on this, though I am not sure as to how much of a part this has to play in causing human suffering (boredom, depression etc). His argument however does get you to think outside the box, about where humanity is headed.

Look at the advances made in science and technology over the last decade or so. It's true to say that todays sci-fi is tomorrows reality. The advancement of technology is a task which never ends. At what point should we stop. Imagine computers with processing power far superior to the human mind, where factories could produce super-computers on vast scale, where tasks become completely automated and computers become self-advancing...

What place would human beings have in a world controlled by technology? At best our lives would become menial with little/nothing to do but feed and sleep. :eek:

Wagon

I'll be honest, I love computers. I love building them and love learning new things about them and their capabilities. I work with them every day. I play games and use Skype and MSN and got a facebook. I'm a nerd, through and through.

Computers were always faster than humans. Even a calculator can complete complex mathamitical functions extrememly quickly. Press ctrl+alt+delete right and click on the "processes" tab. No human could hope to do that all at once. That's why computers were built; to assist us in solving problems that were far out of our own mental reach or would take far too long to calculate ourselves.

The concept of using them as a tool to help us in our lives is gradually evolving into making them an extension of your brain. Something that will do everything for you. There's nothing wrong with playing games, using MSN to chat to your mates miles away etc... You are in control of that and it's still the piece of equipment you need to do those things. But it's getting to the stage of having your PC automatically send your weekly shopping order to tesco at the same time every week rather than going and buying it yourself. It's easier to have someone else do it for you.

Many factories are automated now, which is good as it reduces costs and makes things more affordable for the common man. On the other hand, where do you stop automating? Do you eventually give a computer complete control of your factory? Yep cos it's easier. And besides if something goes wrong the computer gets the blame. This may be pretty far fetched, but it probably isn't far away from happening. It might have already bloody happened somewhere.

Computers now relieve humans of responsability. They are an escape from realisty for some. Look at that godawful World of Warcraft! People literally live their lives on that thing! The internet is a great way to communicate what you are too afraid to communicate in real life (you see it on boards all the time).

That siad, I'm glad they're here. They are the best parts of a TV, radio, phone and newspaper combined but like all those things, they are just a tool and should be treated as such. They can never match humans as they don't have the emotional capacity to do so. And remember humans have to build them in the first place. It's up to them to draw the line and see the difference between versitility and intellegence.

friendface

I agree that computers play a very important role in all our lives and we would be lost without them. I too am a big computer user. Technology is something I have always been interested in from a very young age. I remember getting our first computer about 10 years ago and putting it together. (I think I was about 11 at the time) The excitement of using even simple programs like MS Paint and Minesweeper :rolleyes: Prior to having a computer, games consoles were always a huge part of my childhood. I had a Commodore64, Super Nintendo, N64, PS, PS2... I was hooked. Since then, I have kind of grown out of games consoles (though I still enjoy the odd multiplayer shoot-em-up on the PC with mates).

What do you think of Kaczynskys argument that society would be better off without the advanced technological infrastructure thats present today. He says that our lives are consumed by pursuing tasks which are practically unattainable. The entrepreneur is always trying to make more and more money. The scientist finishes one problem, but no sooner than he fisishes than he moves onto a new problem. We are using 'surrogate activities' to fill the gap left in the 'power process' by most of our basic needs being provided for by society with little need for exertion of any effort. Kaczynsky obviously explains this far more articulately in his article so I won't try to elaborate here.

He claims that these pursuits leave a lot of people feeling unfulfilled. Although, of course, there are exceptions and many people are perfectly content to continue doing what they are doing and their job provides them with complete fulfillment. Do you think early man was happier though. He knew his task, what he needed to do for survival. He had to hunt and when this task was completed successfully he would have been fulfilled. He also had a lot more freedom than modern man, in that he had more control over his surroundings. Kaczynsky claims that modern man has a lot of decisions imposed on him by society and this is one of the underlying causes for social and psychological problems that are rampant in todays world.

Technology, while appearing to solves our problems and improve our lives, seems to lead to more serious problems in the long run. Scientists are constantly coming up with ways of extending human life. This seems to be great on the surface but will lead to increased populations and more strain on resources in the future. I know that this goes against all modern thinking. It seems counter-intuitive to be claiming that these technological advances are actually bad for humanity. I am constantly having conflicting thoughts on the subject since I started reading the article.

There an interesting anecdote that kind of sums up the problem in simple terms. I found it fairly amusing.

Dr. Resnick, also a Harvard alumni, once posed the following question in a seminar on political legitimacy: Say a group of scientists asks for a meeting with the leading politicians in the country to discuss the introduction of a new invention. The scientists explain that the benefits of the technology are indisputable, that the invention will increase efficiency and make everyone's life easier. The only down side, they caution, is that for it to work, forty-thousand innocent people will have to be killed each year. Would the politicians decide to adopt the new invention or not? The class was about to argue that such a proposal would be immediately rejected out of hand, then he casually remarked, "We already have it--the automobile."

Every advance in technology seems to create more problems further down the line. Thus, there is a never-ending pursuit of solving these problems through technology, leading to more and more problems. To what end are we working towards. Imaging a world in te future where every part of the globe becomes intensely populated. We will have overcrowding on a mass scale. I guess the only way to stop this becoming a problem would be to enforce a limit on human reproduction? All in all, it seems we are heading towards a society where our freedoms are becoming incresingly reduced. While it seems our lives are getting better, could it be that they are actually worsening.

In one passage, Kaczynsky envisages a future where humans become menial beings, reduced basically to the status of sort of domestic pets where all of our basic needs are looked after by 'the system'.

Also, I realise computers have also had more processing power than humans. But the worrying prospect is the future development of artificial intelligence where atomic computers are being developed with 'thought' capabilities. They may not be human in the classic sense but there may come a time when we end up putting computers in charge of decision making in society because any decision they make is surely better than 'man-made' decisions. That day may not be far off either with the current rate at which technology is advancing. I can imagine computers being developed to take control of factories, and making decisions when necessary without the need for human input. When that day comes, it won't be long before we start appointing computers to make more important decisions which influence peoples lives. I am not saying computers will take over or turn against humanity or anything of the sort but there may come a time when it will be seen that important decisions should be made by computers because of their superior 'thought-capabilities'. There may still be politicans 'in-charge' but whose to say what will be done 'fo the good of humanity'. Every advance in technology is considered to be 'for the good of humanity' but are we in effect making the human race 'obsolete'.

Maybe i'm getting ahead of myself here. It makes sense when you read Kaczynskys article. The section entitled 'The Future' makes for particularly interesting reading.