I’m trying to think about a concept in futurism that futurists tend to have differing opinions on how they might be achieved or how they would work.
What are some?
What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
-
weatheriscool
- Posts: 24488
- Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 6:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
Straight line, increased advancement or back and forth progress. Looking at history it is clearly back and forth!
One example is roman to dark ages, etc.
Another is between the "kingdoms" of china
it really depends on what part of the globe as all great empires and societies typically lead to progress and once they fall you see progress stop but somewhere else it picks up. In todays world I'd expect this would probably would be closer to a straight line because the world is interconnected but it is possible that a global war could set things back a lot.
I think as one society collapses the tech created by it will be in other great societies to pick it up without much pulse unlike the past. Another factor is the resources the society wishes to spend on the tech or the progress? We aint going to have cities on the moon or mars or amazing shit in some that wish tor practice loserterianism, whereas others that are may have far more impressive feats.
The world isn't going to progress at the same rate and some areas will go backwards for periods.
One example is roman to dark ages, etc.
Another is between the "kingdoms" of china
it really depends on what part of the globe as all great empires and societies typically lead to progress and once they fall you see progress stop but somewhere else it picks up. In todays world I'd expect this would probably would be closer to a straight line because the world is interconnected but it is possible that a global war could set things back a lot.
I think as one society collapses the tech created by it will be in other great societies to pick it up without much pulse unlike the past. Another factor is the resources the society wishes to spend on the tech or the progress? We aint going to have cities on the moon or mars or amazing shit in some that wish tor practice loserterianism, whereas others that are may have far more impressive feats.
The world isn't going to progress at the same rate and some areas will go backwards for periods.
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
Mind uploading. Some see it as the only viable path for them to become immortal, while others realize those people are still going to die, they're just leaving immortal clones behind. But you are not a clone of yourself. Anyways, that seems to be a biggie.
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
- Timing of AGI
- Timing of LEV
- Whether we should integrate with AI and become cyborgs, or not
- Colonisation of space vs. improving life on Earth
- Post-scarcity economy vs. continuation of capitalism
- Timing of LEV
- Whether we should integrate with AI and become cyborgs, or not
- Colonisation of space vs. improving life on Earth
- Post-scarcity economy vs. continuation of capitalism
-
Cyber_Rebel
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:59 pm
- Location: New Dystopios
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
Aside from what's been mentioned, I think we have a difficult time deciding what daily life in the future will actually be like. Similar to how we've lived so far just with more "ease," kind of like how we have these futuristic devices called Smartphones yet overall, the way we live or the priorities we have are very much comparable to last century. This is a simplification since we do conduct some things very differently, but it's not remotely "alien" unless we go much further back.
Or will daily life finally become radically altered due to some current revolutionary technologies within the next 10-20 years?
Or will daily life finally become radically altered due to some current revolutionary technologies within the next 10-20 years?
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
It's not a "vs", humanity isn't a hive mind that can only perform one single task at a time.
The obvious choice is to leave it up to individual preference. No one shall be forced to, nor forbidden to.
The others are definitely real points of contention.
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
I think one major cleavage is low tech versus high tech. The two are not completely incompatible, so it can often be a matter of emphasis. Emphasis can be important in making budgetary and investment decisions. It can also come into play in making career choices.
Low tech involves concepts such as sustainability, working with nature, conservation, rewilding, appropriate technology, sensitivity to environmental impacts, utilization of food sources naturally available but not previously utilized at a large scale, etc. More efficient use of water and fertilizer resources is also basically low tech although it may be influenced by high tech inputs. The growth of solar and wind technology is basically low tech although some high-tech features may come into play.
Low tech involves prevention to avoid development of large problems.
CRISPR is high tech, but in agriculture it may just involve tweaking foods that otherwise continue to be grown in a low-tech fashion.
High tech involves things such as space travel by human beings, colonization of space and other planets, hypersonic aircraft, asteroid mining, mind uploading, brain computer interface, artificial general intelligence, robots, lab grown meat, fusion energy, etc. Fission energy is aging high tech.
In health care, low tech can involve stressing the importance of diet and exercise and a healthy environment. In advanced countries a bit of a high-tech revolution has already occurred and is still in process. It includes such things as radiation treatment and sophisticated drug treatments that involve drugs that are highly artificial in nature. Diagnostic processes such as MRIs CT scans etc. are high tech. Artificially created vaccines, I suppose, can be considered high tech. I have already mentioned CRISPR. Nanoparticles and microrobots can also have medical applications.
High tech involves addressing problems created by high tech with the application of additional high tech.
Any healthy vision of the future, I think involves an integration of low tech and some high tech. Short-term planning versus long term goals might involve a shifting from low tech to high tech although many are impatient for the arrival of a thoroughly high-tech society. Others want to stay closer to nature and lean toward more or less permanent low-tech approaches.
Low tech involves concepts such as sustainability, working with nature, conservation, rewilding, appropriate technology, sensitivity to environmental impacts, utilization of food sources naturally available but not previously utilized at a large scale, etc. More efficient use of water and fertilizer resources is also basically low tech although it may be influenced by high tech inputs. The growth of solar and wind technology is basically low tech although some high-tech features may come into play.
Low tech involves prevention to avoid development of large problems.
CRISPR is high tech, but in agriculture it may just involve tweaking foods that otherwise continue to be grown in a low-tech fashion.
High tech involves things such as space travel by human beings, colonization of space and other planets, hypersonic aircraft, asteroid mining, mind uploading, brain computer interface, artificial general intelligence, robots, lab grown meat, fusion energy, etc. Fission energy is aging high tech.
In health care, low tech can involve stressing the importance of diet and exercise and a healthy environment. In advanced countries a bit of a high-tech revolution has already occurred and is still in process. It includes such things as radiation treatment and sophisticated drug treatments that involve drugs that are highly artificial in nature. Diagnostic processes such as MRIs CT scans etc. are high tech. Artificially created vaccines, I suppose, can be considered high tech. I have already mentioned CRISPR. Nanoparticles and microrobots can also have medical applications.
High tech involves addressing problems created by high tech with the application of additional high tech.
Any healthy vision of the future, I think involves an integration of low tech and some high tech. Short-term planning versus long term goals might involve a shifting from low tech to high tech although many are impatient for the arrival of a thoroughly high-tech society. Others want to stay closer to nature and lean toward more or less permanent low-tech approaches.
Don't mourn, organize.
-Joe Hill
-Joe Hill
Re: What’s the biggest “disagreement” in futurism?
As far as scenes of the future are concerned. I can visualize a low-tech pastoral picture involving a highly verdant landscape in which humans are just a very small visible component. Such a scene might include a man on a tractor or, better yet, a robotic tractor dwarfed by the surrounding wooded terrain and farmland.
A high-tech scenario would be a much more urbanized scene full of tall skyscrapers, drones, high-speed rail, and huge TV screens displaying talking heads babbling on about some latest scientific or political development. Not highly visible but definitely involved in such a scene would be the presence of monitoring cameras. Many science fiction films have displayed scenes similar to this one.
A high-tech scenario would be a much more urbanized scene full of tall skyscrapers, drones, high-speed rail, and huge TV screens displaying talking heads babbling on about some latest scientific or political development. Not highly visible but definitely involved in such a scene would be the presence of monitoring cameras. Many science fiction films have displayed scenes similar to this one.
Don't mourn, organize.
-Joe Hill
-Joe Hill