Anybody have faith in technological advances?

[Richard Masters]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?

[Giraffe107]

To an extent- for example medical advances such as building replacement organs and similar.

[shadron]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?

All the time. I live by Clarke's laws; in this case, mainly the second:

Arthur C. Clarke formulated the following three "laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adage)" of prediction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prediction):
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic

[godless dave]

I don't have faith. I'm optimistic about a lot of advances, but not absolutely sure they'll happen.

[Bikewer]

We have, in the course of a single century, gone from the most primitive of internal-combustion engines to exploration of the solar system. When I was a kid, the device that I'm using to post this on the forum was only barely in the realm of science fiction.
Similar advances don't require faith; they seem inevitable.

[bokonon]

I worry a lot about the future of civilization if the energy problem is not solved. I have confidence that technology will continue to advance, but I'm not confident there will be no backsliding.

[Olowkow]

I believe without evidence that scientific advances will continue to be made if there continue to be clever minds to invent and others willing to buy the fruits of these advances. I guess you can call that faith. Sounds like a slam dunk, since the only reason to doubt this is the prospect of a return to the dark ages of superstition and fear of the unknown. Not likely, but not to be ruled out.

What is interesting to me is that there is so much science already well known and understood but too arcane for much of the public to begin to comprehend.

[MattusMaximus]

I have faith in Google (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/) :D

[MattusMaximus]

I worry a lot about the future of civilization if the energy problem is not solved. I have confidence that technology will continue to advance, but I'm not confident there will be no backsliding.


Imo, this is one of the biggest misconceptions about technological development and the advancement of our knowledge and status as a civilization - namely, that somehow progress is "inevitable" and we're on some kind of deterministic path of ascent into the future.

In reality, civilizations rise and fall - why should ours be any different?

[slingblade]

I don't know what that means. Having faith in tech.

I greet each new thing and each advance as a surprise. That's what it all is to me. I thought we were done inventing everything when I was 9. I lack imagination, and that sort of smarts.

So...no.

[quixotecoyote]

Tech will advance until the raw materials run out. Then it's back to sticks and stones. I suppose we could get some sci-fi nanotech going, but I wouldn't be surprised if we hit a grey goo scenario first.

[fishbob]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?

Don't get me started.
No faith, no belief.

[drkitten]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?

Of course I think that way; it's part of my job as a scientist to anticipate trends and to plan for them.

But I don't think that's "faith." Where's the line between "faith" and "a reasonable expectation based on evidence"? I left my beloved cats at home alone this morning, secure in the belief that my house will not suddenly explode and kill them. Is that "faith" or is that simply a rational prediction of the future.

Heck, I walked into my office this morning and drank a cup of coffee without even testing it for arsenic. Is that "faith" that no one will try to poison me this morning or is it just common sense?

[RobRoy]

Heck, I walked into my office this morning and drank a cup of coffee without even testing it for arsenic. Is that "faith" that no one will try to poison me this morning or is it just common sense?

I dunno, there are some mornings I wonder if my co-workers wouldn't like to see me as a corpse! :D

I don't have faith in technology as a whole. I have hope for it, a reasonable expectation based on past discoveries and advances, that will yield results.

I especially have high hopes for the discovery of a cure for Crohn's Disease, but that's purely selfish in nature.

[Rasmus]

In reality, civilizations rise and fall - why should ours be any different?

I am completely ignorant: Do we now know of civilisations that fell and with it lost their (most advanced) technology?

In today's world, would it be reasonable to expect something similar to happen?

As in: If there is a small tribe on an isolated island with some technology that is advanced for their time, then a single hurricane. volcano, tidal wave or epidemic of the common flu might wipe out both the people and their knowledge.


But today, it seems to me, it would require something of global proportions to destroy the current level of technology; the fall or disappearing of a nation, empire or single culture (if there is such a thing) will not negatively impact the current stand of our technology.

[Irony]

That question is pointless unless you specify which definition of faith you are using. If "faith" means confidence, then yes, I have confidence technology will continue to progress for the near future at least. If "faith" means belief without evidence, then no, I have evidence for my belief.

[Marquis de Carabas]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?
I think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but maybe advances in technology will deal with this in the near future. If not, then there still will be nothing I can do about [X]. So, sod it."

[Darth Rotor]

I am completely ignorant: Do we now know of civilisations that fell and with it lost their (most advanced) technology?
Yes. Some of the Roman tech has been lost, in particular the fabrication of some of their mortars for building large structures. (Info gleaned from an archeological tour of the Roman Ampitheater in Pozuolli, Italy.)

But today, it seems to me, it would require something of global proportions to destroy the current level of technology; the fall or disappearing of a nation, empire or single culture (if there is such a thing) will not negatively impact the current stand of our technology.
You seem to be pointing to a robustness in globalization, in terms of spreading tech, that would act as a buffer against a massive tech loss. Possibly a topic for another thread? Flip side, can you play 78 LPs with the tech you have? ;)

DR

[Jimbo07]

Sounds like a slam dunk, since the only reason to doubt this is the prospect of a return to the dark ages of superstition and fear of the unknown. Not likely, but not to be ruled out.

Except that technological advances like the stirrup and windpower were products of the so-called dark ages. You don't think there was superstition and ignorance in Rome?

I'm not sure that civilizations fall, so much as metamorphise into something else. Technologies could be lost, but more gained, I imagine...

[Scazon]

Complex trading arrangements spread the products of technology without spreading the means to reproduce that technology. Technology is taken for granted, and most people don't inquire into how it works, just how to use it. Most areas would not be able to replace the more complex technologies, and would have to adapt to not using them once the current infrastructure broke down. Moreover, without the global markets, even those areas with the ability to reproduce the technology would not be able to find a market.

Something like that happened in Britain with the collapse of Roman power (and collapse it was, a matter of a few years). Money went out of use, the established potteries collapsed, cities ceased to function as centres of trade and even centres of population, and as far as can be made out, society broke up into locally self- sufficient units. there was also, in the following few hundred years, a huge decline in population- Roman Britain had somewhere between 2.5 million and 5 million people, Norman Britain 600 years later maybe 1.5 million at most, despite influxes of immigrants from Germany and Scandinavia.

It takes a great deal of organisation just to keep things going in the western world- power, water, sewage, transport, communications. Russia very nearly collapsed after the Soviet era (mainly thanks to idiot neocon economic advisers), and in the event of catastrophe our society might well go the same way.

[MattusMaximus]

I am completely ignorant: Do we now know of civilisations that fell and with it lost their (most advanced) technology?


I don't know about technology, but after the western Roman empire fell they lost nearly all of their knowledge that went back to the ancient Greeks. Were it not for the Byzantine and Arab worlds back then, that knowledge would've likely been lost for good.


But today, it seems to me, it would require something of global proportions to destroy the current level of technology; the fall or disappearing of a nation, empire or single culture (if there is such a thing) will not negatively impact the current stand of our technology.


True, but there's no law of nature that forbids a disaster of global proportions from occurring. Statistically, something really nasty will happen to our planet... eventually. The only question is will it happen while we're around? And when it does happen will we survive in our current state?

My guess is that if it is a disaster of global proportions (such as a major meteor strike) then I would have to say that our civilization will likely be taking a serious step backwards technologically.

[Skeptic Ginger]

There was a thread about irrational beliefs and I realized maybe I put too much faith in technological advances. Does anybody ever think along these lines: "There's nothing I can do about [X] now, but advances in technology will deal with this in the near future."?I'm confused. Are you saying this is irrational?

If the technology is close, then saying, "will" be able to deal with the issue is not irrational. That would be based on past experience with the progress of technology. If the research is not close maybe one needs to say, "may be able to".

I just don't get your point.

[joobz]

Flip side, can you play 78 LPs with the tech you have? ;)

DR
Certainly. All I need is a wheel and axle, a needle and a paper cup. Now if I only could remember what speed I'm supposed to spin the wheel to play a 78....Hmm, I'm sure it'll come to me....

[Whack01]

I am completely ignorant: Do we now know of civilisations that fell and with it lost their (most advanced) technology?

In today's world, would it be reasonable to expect something similar to happen?

As in: If there is a small tribe on an isolated island with some technology that is advanced for their time, then a single hurricane. volcano, tidal wave or epidemic of the common flu might wipe out both the people and their knowledge.


Library of Alexandria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria)

This is probably the single most lamented loss in academic history.

Also Europeans became ignorant of the Greek classics for nearly a millennium until Muslims re-introduced them to Europe. Atleast if I have my history right.