If technology is changing the world at an increasing rate, is it also creating this disruption in our society, communities, relationships, and personal lives?
One of the most common terms used today is “disruptive technology” and everyone wants to create the next big one. Any majorly successful invention would be considered disruptive. E.g. phone, computer, cell phone, email, cloud computing, etc…
It seems apparent that more and more disruptive technologies are being created, so the question is, disruption limited to the product or company, or does it extend into our daily lives? I see two parts: direct and indirect disruption.
1. Direct Disruption
The simplest view is that as a new company is created, it often replaces old ones. Creative-destruction. Creating a better mousetrap puts the old mousetrap out of business.
And it does not just put the mousetrap out of business, but also the people at the old company, and their livelihoods and families, etc… which I am not suggesting is bad, but the question becomes: is there an acceptable rate of job replacement, or “commoditzation”? If we have to retrain ever 5-10 years to a new field, does that make sense?
A good example is the taxi business, which was largely replaced overnight by some technology companies. It’s possible that the quality of rides improve with greater accountability, and that prices dropped, as you would typically expect with technology, but what will the middle-aged taxi driver do now (assuming the tech jobs pay less)?
Perhaps a job or career change is not terrible, but at the current rate, disruption is happening faster and faster as tech increases its speed and ability to disrupt. Eventually, all jobs will be replaced in theory (most AI theorists agree).
2. Indirect Disruption or Disruption of Culture
The second way it disrupts our lives is the larger indirect effects of our behavior and societies. In other words, it disrupts culture. Here are a few definitions of culture:
- Culture: “the behaviors, beliefs, values, and symbols that they accept, generally without thinking about them, and that are passed along by communication and imitation from one generation to the next. “
- “Culture refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, values, attitudes, meanings, hierarchies, religion, notions of time, roles, spatial relations, concepts of the universe, and material objects and possessions acquired by a group of people in the course of generations through individual and group striving.”
- Culture: Tradition. Yes, Fiddler on the Roof is one of the best metaphors for the changes that technology (or in its case the changing modern world) is bringing. Do we fight it, or do we accept it? Which of it is more harmful (his last daughter who married a Russian outside of his faith) than others (his first daughter that married for love instead of via a match-marker)? In a way, it says that some changes were acceptable, or okay, but in the long run great changes will corrupt. How is it possible that when the world is finally freed to love (no arranged marriages) do the divorce rates (rejection of love) skyrocket?
Now to look at each:
Beliefs/Religion:
Is technology increasingly changing beliefs? Yes. Never in history has there been greater exposure to competing beliefs because never in history have so many people been exposed to them.
We can even look at abstract belief systems like religion. Some say that the internet is causing a decline in religion, but few suspect:
A. It simply more exposure to competing belief systems, regardless of truth.
B. It creates competition for attention, and is more successful because its provides more immediate pleasure (e.g. religion seems comparatively boring)
C. Re-seeing the internet as great wealth never before seen in history, it, like pleasure, substitutes the need for religion, as history as always shown.
Behavior/Values:
How did the current values and ethics of recent generations form, and was technology, and the ease of life to blame?
How many of the complaints of the current generation be attributable to technology in any way?
- Self interest (narcissism)
- Low work ethic
And just as importantly, is the adoption of these new behaviors increasing more as each new technology increases its speed of adoption? I hope you will not be surprised.
Symbols/Communication/Meaning:
Family traditions are increasingly changing. Culture that existed for 100’s or even 1’000s of years is disappearing quickly as people spend more time in technology (media, entertainment, social media, etc…). We first saw this as we explored the jungle, and it continues today in advanced countries at unprecedented rates.
Internet memes and ideologies, and popular entertainment (TV) dominate discussion in daily life both at home and work, far more than traditional community, and human-centric driven dialogue.
Our media culture is engulfing us as it provides the common experience for which we decide to communicate with others in a global world. Undoubtedly, even much of this article is influenced by my understanding of the world, and ideas I have collected from, the internet.
As with many other trends like hierarchy, globalism is increasing its pleasure against localism.
Language
As for language, “The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is based on the idea that people experience their world through their language, and that they therefore understand their world through the culture embedded in their language. ”
Has language changed as a result of technology? Decades ago, the growth of technology led to globalism, and English became a global language. Today, the internet has its own version of changing language through fast growing memes and digital entertainment–LOL. It is creating a global language trend, which competes with community and local language. Even the auto-suggest feature of search engines is shaping thought in subtle ways, as it encourages our language to replicate whatever the most common behavior (search terms) are..
The sheer magnitude of ideas that I have heard in recent years, which became popular via the internet, is astounding. Of course, this is not new of course as books and newspapers for examples were great precursors. But as technology companies increasingly push for more content to engage users more (read: spend more time on their platforms) even books will be replaced. Within a decade or two, advanced AI, and the ability to instantly share our thoughts at light speed to a global world, will continue to replace the need for books and writers, and likely fiction books, generating all content in real-time. Will it contain truth, or simply what we want to hear in a pleasure-seeking, power seeking, society?
Knowledge
It is clear that AI will create all knowledge, regardless of our ability to know if any of it is true. We will all sit with our attention firmly focused on it, with few daring to look away.
Hierarchy
Hierarchy is a complex thing. It can be incredibly valuable and meaningful, but only in certain ways and context, and if its voluntary. E.g. we give authority of teh state to protect us from external threats, yet, we would never want the state to usurp the power (e..g. tyranny). Additionally, the larger the hierarchy, the increased likelihood of cultural mono-culture, and elimination diversity, local hierarchy.
We are witnessing a downward pressure on traditional hierarchies including, community, national, and even familial hierarchies. As we all grow more powerful, the world is indeed flatter than ever.
The End of Communities and Families
The community, tribe, and even family is evaporating. Time spent with family is decreasing. What does disruption mean if it commoditizes the most core of relationships?
We can connect this to the idea of globalism as well, even if it’s virtual. the more time we spend in a given culture outside our core groups, the more influence the external, and less the internal group, has. It is the global community. Eventually, as computers get better at creating content better and cheaper than people, it will teache and transmit the bulk of all culture.
Even third world countries adopt new technologies at an increasing rate. I recently traveled to the jungle in central america, and while the workers walked around with machetes and shirtless, in $5000 houses, they would not be caught dead without a cell phone.
Reliability of Work is Continually Disrupted
The last few recessions may be largely due to technology replacing jobs (e.g. 1 job at a search engine today replaced 100 jobs in the news, or yellow page business). It’s a shout for success, but at some point, will we will shout as technology replaces most of our jobs?
Since most people will not “work” within a few decades, the behavior of people is likely to change dramatically.
If the future promises technology that changes every second in the blink of an eye, so will our lives. Life will change so fast, that any semblance of solid ground will not exist.
I found the Liquid series books by Zigmant Bauman to reveal much more of this trend.
When Does a More Predictable World, Make the World Less Predictable
The question should be asked: if technology brings change, with the goal of increasing physical predictability in a world full of chaos, is it possible that there are diminishing returns and it is in reality filling our world with more social and cultural disorder and instability?
Then the Enlightenment brought us, it was the ability to control nature, and our surroundings. In other words its goal seems to be to create greater predictability. But is there a point of diminishing returns?
Today, the average person switches jobs, communities, and even families on a regular basis. Is this stability, or unpredictability? Deep, meaningful relationships (on average) get shallower by the year.
Using the Core Indicator of Disruption (Divorce) as Evidence of Disruption
Many studies claim that rates of violence are decreasing, or mental health is worsening, but looking at murder rates over time is probably a better indicator, because you are either dead or alive, and its carefully tracked. So, if we want to examine violence to society, or meaningful relationships, perhaps the best indicator would be marriage and divorce rates.
Not just because its easily measurable, but like murder rates, it is painful. Divorce is cited as being the second most painful event next to death, and yet increasing rates of divorce, is what untold wealth likely brings as a plasure fill life causes us to see other people as burdensome and unnecessary.
Is it mere coincidence that the countries with the highest per capita GDP, which is access to technology, or comfort/pleasure, are the same countries with the highest rates of core, familial disruption, measurable by divorce?
Some have pointed out that net divorce rates (percentage of divorce by percent that are getting marries) are falling in the US, but the long term, global picture does not, so perhaps a temporary issue, but perhaps its due to less people getting married.
So if success in long-term, committed, and giving relationships began to decline with marriage (again, more common in European countries with with divorce rates) , then cohabitation and the decrease in marriage rates are simply a continuation of that trend, with relationships even easier to discard.
Serial-monogamy (or modern polyandry) is but a click away.
Swipe right.
Technological Diminishing Returns
I think most things in life have diminishing returns, which is to say, “all things in moderation.” Is occasionally eating a sweet, fatty, salty, or large meal bad for us? Probably not, but few would argue that the current obesity epidemic is evidence that occassional has been replaced with regularly or most of the time.
Likewise, does the long term of technology have diminishing returns? A point at which, we will have so much, and it is so pervasive, that maintaining a healthy physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, and relationship-strong, life is decreasingly possible?
When change no longer creates a predictable, stable, and meaningful life, but instead, brings the world of change directly and indirectly into our lives.
Greater Technological Change Coincides with Greater Unpredictability
For 1000’s of years, technology barely changed. Most people were farmers. Social fabric and life in general was predictable (excluding disease and disasters). Change was uncommon. You did not spend years and even decades trying to figure out what you were going to do, who you were going to marry, and how would retire. It was pretty much clearly laid out the moment you were born.
The modern world is great boon to freedom, but the paradox of choice more choices we have, the less satisfied we are with any of those choices.
- This inevitably leads many to second-guess our existing choices (what if I had tried a different flavor?).
- As it continually presents more choices, it also makes it easier to change our decisions after the fact (I want to sample more flavors).
- As concrete decisions become less necessary for survival, more people delay making any decisions. Never have we lived in a time where kids where each generation continue to grow up slower than the previous (e.g. delaying/avoiding marriage, no idea what to study in school). In 100 years, the world may be full of eternal babies. Perhaps my biggest claim is, the advance of technology and wealth erodes the need for people, relationships, nnd life in general.
Life may not have always been comfortable, but it was predictable, and that provided comfort in a different sense. Do people value a predictable world over a world of comfort?
When you realize that technology is mainly a vehicle for creating safety and pleasure (a.k.a. wealth), then we could rephrase it: when does pleasure, convenience, and comfort outweigh meaning, purposeful life? Perhaps so many kids today complain about trying to find purpose in the workplace because the increasingly modern world deprives them of real challenge and meaningful relationships. And yet, some just cannot wait for the machines to take our jobs. Can anyone see the risk?
Will Social Disruption End When Our Jobs End, or Will Technology Increase it Exponentially?
Again, as the world gets safer due to tech, this article shows that in a way, its less predictable, or changing faster.
But like how technology indirectly causes recessions, is it possible that it, through a variety of ways, is also the cause of tension and war as it magnifies differences between groups of all kinds? and also possibly the cause of decline in trust in most institutions?
When the majority “living wage” society is separated from those who are above the living wage society (e.g. technologists), and disagreement on how to solve problems increase, will this create direct and indirect disruptions?
When science takes the role of govt, and increasingly is both in and out of the reach of govt, will there be disruption?
Probably.
If there is something I would like to predict, it is that the future will provide the greatest risks for all sorts of disruption.
HumanIT 