This will be a recurring topic that I post about, but I am wondering if we are in a distinct period of pessimism about the future that is hampering our ability to solve global problems. This could be because of a lack of compelling visions to believe in, too many real and self-imposed constraints to our actions, and global systems that have too much inertia and cannot be changed radically. I definitely think this is true in the United States, but I am unsure what the rest of the world thinks about this.
The global recession, tepid recovery, austerity plans, environmental catastrophes, scandals, prolonged wars and security situations, diminishing trust in institutions, all contribute to this general negative view of the future. We don't seem to be able to solve any problems any more. We are told that the solutions to our problems are to do more with less - less money, less energy, less people, and less opportunity. I fear we are becoming trapped by the economic, technological and social systems that have made us so successful. We are now just playing on the edges, holding on.
There was an interesting recent editorial in the New York Times entitled, "When Greatness Slips Away", by Bob Herbert. It is related to this increasingly negative view of the future in that we feel more and more helpless when it comes to the problems of our time. We cannot rise to the great challenges any more with a sense of "can do" and optimism. We can't win a war, can't stop an oil leak, can't jump start the economy, can't save our cities, can't fly to the moon, can't negotiate peace, can't shift to renewable energy...are we really in an era of "can't", or is this just a difficult transition period?
I think that the fine fictional philosopher and scientist Reed Richards sums it up (below) quite well in a speech he gave in a recent issue of the Fantastic Four comic. He is speaking to a group of individuals at what looks like is a Singularity University conference. He states that people are increasingly afraid of the future and believe we should plan for a world where we fight over increasingly limited resources. He proposes instead of trying to desperately preserve what we have, we should risk more to see what we can truly achieve.
Those are just some of my initial thoughts on the subject. I'll revisit it now and again and try to build some sort of theory and supplement with examples. I hope I am wrong about this trend, but unfortunately, I don't think I am.
Interesting topic Dave! Great idea for a blog too, I'll add you to my weekly reading list. Some thoughts on your post, numbered, but in no specific or cogent order:
ReplyDelete1) Do you think that our 'idea stagnation' is a result of the U.S. entering a new period (like middle age) in it's life cycle?
2) Like any aging entity, could we be more bogged down by the weight of our past? For instance, do we keep trying to do new things with old ways of thinking (Apollo on steroids, asymmetric warfare with cold war weapons and tactics, dynamic commercial environment with large corporations)?
3) I can't help escape the feeling that, for better or worse, ubiquitous access to information makes it difficult to for unified visions (solutions) to take hold. Personally, I prefer the too much, even at the expense of unity.
3) Are we hand-tied by having 'too much to loose' as the world's wealthiest and most powerful nation? Americans (as a nation, not as individuals) don't seem like to be seen as failing, and consequently I suspect that impacts our risk aversion.
4) Related to #3: our society is currently dominated by a large generation approaching an important point in their lives, that may cause their collective decision making to be risk averse (not wanting to risk nearing retirements for future ones, etc).
Anyhow, these are off the cuff, extemporaneous thoughts that may not hold up to any kind of fleshing out, but I'm very interested in the thoughts of a trained futurist!
Troll on!