When are we at the brink of needing new technology?

Jhn4

Dear philosophy forum,

Last month, I made a topic stating that the human race has run out of ideas, and requires new technology to continue to rejuvenate its thought processes.

My topic was deleted, probably because I was asking for contacts from people in different areas and industries who might listen to my argument, or because I didn't post it in the science and technology forum like I am doing this time.

So I won't ask for contacts.

But basically, I would like to ask: philosophically speaking, when do we require new technology? When do we decide that the human race has reached stagnation and cannot collectively produce new 'content' to keep itself fresh?

I would argue that we are reaching that stage in history now, and that it poses a threat to our existence, and it is an emergency that needs tackling.

For example, how many more variations of computer games or simulated worlds, are left for us to explore?
How many written works have we left to ponder over?

And I would suggest that time is running out, unless we can find fresh visual/spatial/informational realms to explore, such as, for example, a fourth dimensional viewing apparatus, or a piece of technology that allows us to see things in new forms of symmetry.

Without this, I can see that we fall into the trap of finite existence. We run out of new object placements or diversities of imagery in simulations and games, and we run out of intelligible things to write.

I would very much like to hear about what can be done about this and what the forum's thoughts are on this matter, because I think we are faced with an emergency.

Thank you.

Frank Apisa

Question: Are you sure your previous thread was deleted?

Jhn4

Pretty sure.

Relativist

when do we require new technology? When do we decide that the human race has reached stagnation and cannot collectively produce new 'content' to keep itself fresh?...
...I would argue that we are reaching that stage in history now, and that it poses a threat to our existence, and it is an emergency that needs tackling. — Jhn4

What threat(s) to our existence are you referring to?

Jhn4

The threat I am referring to, is the inability for human beings to find activities that suitably pass the time. Such as, if we start to stagnate in the area of computing, then a programmer will no longer have a job, or a designer if we stagnate also in the visual arts. This is a threat, because people put out of their jobs would have to find something else to do, or to occupy themselves with, and if we stagnate as a race, then we are left only with functional jobs, or supply/maintenance jobs. There would be virtually no intellect remaining, and there would be great numbers of useless people without any real work to do, as the jobs would already be filled.

Frank Apisa

The threat I am referring to, is the inability for human beings to find activities that suitably pass the time. Such as, if we start to stagnate in the area of computing, then a programmer will no longer have a job, or a designer if we stagnate also in the visual arts. This is a threat, because people put out of their jobs would have to find something else to do, or to occupy themselves with, and if we stagnate as a race, then we are left only with functional jobs, or supply/maintenance jobs. There would be virtually no intellect remaining, and there would be great numbers of useless people without any real work to do, as the jobs would already be filled. — Jhn4

Plenty to do. Play golf, tennis, tend to the lawn and garden, clean the streets in the neighborhood, write, read, watch television, take walks, do art, investigate problems, do crosswords or Sudokus, paint the porch, and....so much else.

Not having a job is NOT a problem. Having lots of free time to fill is NOT a problem.

Not having enough money to buy the things we need and want...is.

Relativist

The threat I am referring to, is the inability for human beings to find activities that suitably pass the time. — Jhn4

Mankind has invented this forum. Problem solved.

PuerAzaelis

Do you think we are approaching a kind of technology singularity, like Kurzweil says?

Jhn4

Yes, I think so. But it's not some kind of instant utopia (or instant dystopia if you like) because the informational constraints of the current existence we have, should be becoming more apparent. So information, new ideas, finite expressions, will all dry up under the current technological continuum, and there is no magic formula such as "5g networks change everything and all information" that will offer a suitable change. It will literally have to be a whole new way of seeing reality. A total shift, not just and only more dynamic information flow.

180 Proof

↪Frank Apisa

:up:

praxis

philosophically speaking, when do we require new technology? When do we decide that the human race has reached stagnation and cannot collectively produce new 'content' to keep itself fresh? — Jhn4

Practically speaking, no new content is required for freshness, and indeed it may only be the habit of desiring new content that leads to the dissatisfaction of stagnation. To imagine Sisyphus happy we must abandon our old habits.

schopenhauer1

The threat I am referring to, is the inability for human beings to find activities that suitably pass the time. Such as, if we start to stagnate in the area of computing, then a programmer will no longer have a job, or a designer if we stagnate also in the visual arts. This is a threat, because people put out of their jobs would have to find something else to do, or to occupy themselves with, and if we stagnate as a race, then we are left only with functional jobs, or supply/maintenance jobs. There would be virtually no intellect remaining, and there would be great numbers of useless people without any real work to do, as the jobs would already be filled. — Jhn4

Have you considered antinatalism as a solution? :lol:

Jhn4

I had considered the possibility that we might need to terminate our existence, but I think that would be an absolute last resort.

Basically, what this boils down to, is whether it is apparent that activities day to day, intellectual or otherwise, are growing more - so finite as time goes on.

This is why, for example, a sports game will never grow old. Because there are infinite possibilities. But writing? No, I am convinced otherwise. Within the limitations of our senses and imaginations, we have already seen a lot of describable events unfold, either in real life or in fiction. There are only a finite number of ways we can describe a tree, for example.

Thank you for you thoughts.

When are we at the brink of needing new technology?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions