Manufacturing World and its Long run

Industrial Society And Its Future Paperback

Moreover, as technology continues to advance, the need for mindless conformity is further eroded. Mass production was pretty mind-numbing, but now we have robots to do the most mindless tasks, and we are getting more of them. If you want to make a grand standing against science and technology, please find another source. If you are interested in reading manifestos from murderers, which might not be the best leisure time pursuit, this one is actually good compared to the common nazi stuff. People can read it if they wan’t I did im not going to stop any one, but even if I wanted to recommend some one understand the ideas he was talking about I wouldn’t recommend him simply because he just doesn’t know what he’s on about. It’s just such an unintelligent response to the objective goals he set.

However, some psychologists have publicly expressed opinions indicating their contempt for human freedom. And the mathematician Claude Shannon was quoted in Omni as saying, “I visualize a time when we will be to robots what dogs are to humans, and I’m rooting for the machines.” Today, smoking marijuana is a “crime,” and, in some places in the U.S., so is possession of an unregistered handgun. Tomorrow, possession of ANY firearm, registered or not, may be made a crime, and the same thing may happen with disapproved methods of child-rearing, such as spanking. In some countries, expression of dissident political opinions is a crime, and there is no certainty that this will never happen in the U.S., since no constitution or political system lasts forever.

Some social scientists, educators, “mental health” professionals and the like are doing their best to push the social drives into group 1 by trying to see to it that everyone has a satisfactory social life. During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from serious psychological problems as a result of repressing or trying to repress their sexual feelings. Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted from sex to aggression. Instead of arguing for powerlessness and passivity, one should argue that the power of the INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM should be broken, and that this will greatly INCREASE the power and freedom of INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS.

It is particularly important to attract people of this type, as they are capable people and will be instrumental in influencing others. These people should be addressed on as rational a level as possible. Facts should never intentionally be distorted and intemperate language should be avoided. This does not mean that no appeal can be made to the emotions, but in making such appeal care should be taken to avoid misrepresenting the truth or doing anything else that would destroy the intellectual respectability of the ideology. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better than human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary.

They are fundamentally different sets of ideas with different potential material outcomes. The technology stack needed to divert asteroids is significant; bringing humanity to a pre-industrial revolution doesn’t guarantee the safety of the biosphere, it guarantees the biosphere is unmodifiable by human activity. That leaves the biosphere vulnerable to threats that humans could use technology to intervene against but will be unable to. Ideas still matter, and their particular expression still can have material impacts. Will Kaczynski’s work inspire the sort of material, decisive impact that Martin Luther’s works inspired during the Reformation’s wars??

“I do not agree with his ideas, let alone his means to spread them,” Apostolidès said. Nevertheless, “The role of a scholar is to go beyond my own emotions and analyze everything. “My articles will be against me if I don’t prove to them that I am not a hypocrite,” the posting read. “One has to die to make the other live. I wish I could be the one to die.” “From a cynical perspective, I write books without killing anyone – my writing will have no impact. The only way I can be listened to is to associate my writing to something.” That is, “either your own blood or someone else’s.” Yet Kaczynski’s writings and life have intrigued Apostolidès by emphasizing “the relationship between writing and killing, ink and blood.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *