I don't think it's the technologies that control us, it's the people who control the technologies that control us - and as long as there are people who are unscrupulous and greedy, there will be the potential for the damaging consequences of some technologies to be hidden, obscured or naysayed until vast damage is done. Which is to say, we keep fighting, and thinking, and resisting as long as we can. :)
These are some deep questions. Hubby loved the Phillip Dick book and TV series Man in the High Castle. Not my cup o’ tea but he’s a sci fi nut.
I don’t think there could have been anyone worse than Hitler to take his place had he never been born but Hitler certainly had millions of fans and supporters even in Poland.
I was thinking worse in terms of being a better leader. Hitler thought he knew better than his generals, which led to his making decisions that ultimately cost him the wAr. Thank goodness.
I’ve read a lot of time travel stories. My logical brain gets very disturbed by them and at some point I have to suspend belief or my blood pressure gets too high. Grin. But it’s a fascinating tool for investigating possibilities.
I agree with your first point about the speed of technological advancement. I’ve worked in that field and we forget that every individual thinks a little differently, so programming is rarely consistent. ‘Future shock’ is a very real concept as we grapple with what we’re developing. (I just bought a new car and the technology in it is ridiculously complex! We’re well on our way to becoming a Jetsons society where cars just hop on and off the conveyor belt.)
And like Mary B, I agree that we all come with our inbuilt moral compasses. For many of us, kindness is still an essential attribute.
Lots of food for thought here, but time and space are limited, so I’ll leave it at that. Thanks for the mind-expanding post.
Thanks, Beth. I have to suspend disbelief too! Good point about each person thinks differently. I remember your mentioning your new car, and how it wouldn’t allow you to lock it.
Time travel as a concept hurts my brain. It's a topic that has long fascinated writers and film-makers but which troubles me for exactly the reasons you mention. Adding just one element (ie: the appearance of someone from another time) to any scenario would change the outcome somehow. An insect would be stepped on, a germ introduced, an ethical dilemma revealed. IIRC, the characters in the last book I read (listened to, actually - Sea of Tranquility) with such a theme all ended up in disastrous circumstances because of it. We're in enough trouble in our own perception of reality. Heaven help us if we start bouncing forward and backward. In case you wondered how I really feel. 😂
Thanks, Elizabeth, great points. "An insect would be stepped on,". Have you read A Sound of Thunder by Ray Bradbury? That's exactly what happens, with disastrous consequences.
I think part of the draw of such stories are the paradoxical implications they create. These are interesting things to wrangle with.
Have you ever seen the film Primer? Not sure if I've ever mentioned before, but it's a total mind-melting experience of trying to understand the implications of short time-hops.
Last week, I heard about a film that dealt with time travel indirectly. The concept was that some special subatomic particle could be sent back in time and specifically targeting to an individual, killing them. So no person was going back in time, but the implications of altering history were the same. It sounded interesting and was clearly framed around the moral implications, but I can't recall what it was called! 😂
My answers to your questions: 1- yes, 2- no, 3 - no. Man can't mandate morality or kindness or hatred because that is an affair of the heart and determined by one's motivation for life, purpose, greed or gain. The hatred in America on both sides of the aisle for people, a group, or individual that ones sees as a threat to what one holds dear, is often influenced on perceived reality and not on reality. The hatred is visceral, and often misguided because for some, it's easier to believe what the loudest voices in any crowd say, without pursuing the truth. Great point, Terry, about using something that "makes it easier to discuss moral issues arising". The issues we Americans are facing today are heady with ultra-intense emotions. Sometimes those emotions leave zero room for any discussion.
Anderson asks,"And if the answer to either of these points is “yes”, what should, or perhaps more realistically could, be done about them?" My only answer would be, "Nothing." Because no one cares, they are already too thought-controlled and addicted to their technology to even hear that there is a problem. Do I sound cynical? Of course I do. As far as going back in time, I would like to turn back the clock just a little bit and hope a certain sniper could improve his aim. No. I did not say that.
This situation is just like the Hitler proposal unfortunately - ‘all the elements of a situation in which such a demagogue could take power were already in place’. There seem to be more ‘cults’ in the world these days, presumably supported by ‘social’ media? The spread of misinformation is scary.
Yes. It's like each age and event has its own dynamics. So you might be able to eliminate a particular trigger mechanism, but unless you were to go back even further and change all the dynamics, the event would still have occurred. For instance, I think WW1 would have happened even if the Archduke had not been assassinated.
Interesting thoughts on one of my favorite daydreaming topics. It all started for me when Kurt Vonnegut wrote that "Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time."
I was going to say more but I am a little put-off by some of the previous comments.
That's definitely interesting, the parallel worlds theory. I loved the series called Sliders! I think I tend towards the view that the big events, the big sweep of history, are unchangeable, because nothing comes from nothing. For example, I'm pretty sure that if the Archduke hadn't been assassinated, because someone throttled the person who did it at birth, someone else would do it instead. Have you read the short story Try and change the past? It's very interesting and enjoyable. Here's a link:
I don't think it's the technologies that control us, it's the people who control the technologies that control us - and as long as there are people who are unscrupulous and greedy, there will be the potential for the damaging consequences of some technologies to be hidden, obscured or naysayed until vast damage is done. Which is to say, we keep fighting, and thinking, and resisting as long as we can. :)
Very true. Not just unscrupulous or greedy people, but short-sighted people who never consider unintended consequences, plus idiots. 😄
These are some deep questions. Hubby loved the Phillip Dick book and TV series Man in the High Castle. Not my cup o’ tea but he’s a sci fi nut.
I don’t think there could have been anyone worse than Hitler to take his place had he never been born but Hitler certainly had millions of fans and supporters even in Poland.
I was thinking worse in terms of being a better leader. Hitler thought he knew better than his generals, which led to his making decisions that ultimately cost him the wAr. Thank goodness.
I’ve read a lot of time travel stories. My logical brain gets very disturbed by them and at some point I have to suspend belief or my blood pressure gets too high. Grin. But it’s a fascinating tool for investigating possibilities.
I agree with your first point about the speed of technological advancement. I’ve worked in that field and we forget that every individual thinks a little differently, so programming is rarely consistent. ‘Future shock’ is a very real concept as we grapple with what we’re developing. (I just bought a new car and the technology in it is ridiculously complex! We’re well on our way to becoming a Jetsons society where cars just hop on and off the conveyor belt.)
And like Mary B, I agree that we all come with our inbuilt moral compasses. For many of us, kindness is still an essential attribute.
Lots of food for thought here, but time and space are limited, so I’ll leave it at that. Thanks for the mind-expanding post.
Thanks, Beth. I have to suspend disbelief too! Good point about each person thinks differently. I remember your mentioning your new car, and how it wouldn’t allow you to lock it.
Daft technology. Can’t live with it, can’t live without it. Grin.
😆 too true!
Time travel as a concept hurts my brain. It's a topic that has long fascinated writers and film-makers but which troubles me for exactly the reasons you mention. Adding just one element (ie: the appearance of someone from another time) to any scenario would change the outcome somehow. An insect would be stepped on, a germ introduced, an ethical dilemma revealed. IIRC, the characters in the last book I read (listened to, actually - Sea of Tranquility) with such a theme all ended up in disastrous circumstances because of it. We're in enough trouble in our own perception of reality. Heaven help us if we start bouncing forward and backward. In case you wondered how I really feel. 😂
Thanks, Elizabeth, great points. "An insect would be stepped on,". Have you read A Sound of Thunder by Ray Bradbury? That's exactly what happens, with disastrous consequences.
I have not, Terry, but I just found it online. Stay tuned. :)
👍 would love to know what you think, Elizabeth
Cool stuff, Terry.
I think part of the draw of such stories are the paradoxical implications they create. These are interesting things to wrangle with.
Have you ever seen the film Primer? Not sure if I've ever mentioned before, but it's a total mind-melting experience of trying to understand the implications of short time-hops.
Last week, I heard about a film that dealt with time travel indirectly. The concept was that some special subatomic particle could be sent back in time and specifically targeting to an individual, killing them. So no person was going back in time, but the implications of altering history were the same. It sounded interesting and was clearly framed around the moral implications, but I can't recall what it was called! 😂
Sounds brilliant. I just asked AI and it said Aporia. Is that it?
I agree about the fascinating ramifications.
I think i started Primer on your recommendation but don't think i finished it. I must try ain't.
Thanks Nathan
That is indeed the film!
It's an intriguing idea. I hope it's available somewhere.
My answers to your questions: 1- yes, 2- no, 3 - no. Man can't mandate morality or kindness or hatred because that is an affair of the heart and determined by one's motivation for life, purpose, greed or gain. The hatred in America on both sides of the aisle for people, a group, or individual that ones sees as a threat to what one holds dear, is often influenced on perceived reality and not on reality. The hatred is visceral, and often misguided because for some, it's easier to believe what the loudest voices in any crowd say, without pursuing the truth. Great point, Terry, about using something that "makes it easier to discuss moral issues arising". The issues we Americans are facing today are heady with ultra-intense emotions. Sometimes those emotions leave zero room for any discussion.
Thanks Mary, you raise a great point about mandating morality. Isn't that what religion is supposed to do in the absence of an inner moral compass?
Yes, i suppose that discussing these issues in an impossible scenario provides, in effect, a safe space.
Anderson asks,"And if the answer to either of these points is “yes”, what should, or perhaps more realistically could, be done about them?" My only answer would be, "Nothing." Because no one cares, they are already too thought-controlled and addicted to their technology to even hear that there is a problem. Do I sound cynical? Of course I do. As far as going back in time, I would like to turn back the clock just a little bit and hope a certain sniper could improve his aim. No. I did not say that.
This situation is just like the Hitler proposal unfortunately - ‘all the elements of a situation in which such a demagogue could take power were already in place’. There seem to be more ‘cults’ in the world these days, presumably supported by ‘social’ media? The spread of misinformation is scary.
Yes. It's like each age and event has its own dynamics. So you might be able to eliminate a particular trigger mechanism, but unless you were to go back even further and change all the dynamics, the event would still have occurred. For instance, I think WW1 would have happened even if the Archduke had not been assassinated.
It was me what asked, not Anderson. You sound very cynical. 🙃
Interesting thoughts on one of my favorite daydreaming topics. It all started for me when Kurt Vonnegut wrote that "Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time."
I was going to say more but I am a little put-off by some of the previous comments.
PS I feel ashamed to say that I have never read Slaughter House 5, but you've just reminded me. Thanks! I will try and borrow it from the library.
Oh, that's a shame. I'd really like to hear your views, Jim.
So sorry Jim. (I’d be very happy to hear your views. It is so easy to respond to things and not stop and think.)
I didn't think you said anything terrible.
That's definitely interesting, the parallel worlds theory. I loved the series called Sliders! I think I tend towards the view that the big events, the big sweep of history, are unchangeable, because nothing comes from nothing. For example, I'm pretty sure that if the Archduke hadn't been assassinated, because someone throttled the person who did it at birth, someone else would do it instead. Have you read the short story Try and change the past? It's very interesting and enjoyable. Here's a link:
https://loa-shared.s3.amazonaws.com/static/pdf/Leiber_Change_Past.pdf