💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › john-filiss-technocracy.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:16:00. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Technocracy
Author: John Filiss
Language: en
Topics: primitivist, technology
Source: Retrieved on 20 January 2011 from http://www.primitivism.com/technocracy.htm

John Filiss

Technocracy

The Sibyl of Cumae, whose famous Sibylline Leaves perished in a fire in

ancient Rome, was said to have gained her powers from Apollo. The

sun-god offered to grant the Sibyl any boon if she would spend the night

with him. She accepted his offer, asking him for as many years of life

as grains of sand she could squeeze within her hand. Apollo granted

this, and the Sibyl, overjoyed at realizing her wish, refused his

advances. Thereupon her wish became a curse; an extended life, but not

extended youth. Over many, many years, her aged form shriveled up so

small that it could fit into a jar. Needing neither food nor drink, as

she could neither die of hunger nor thirst, the jar was hung from a

tree. Occasionally she would spout new oracles while children would

watch her jar and tease, “Sibyl, Sibyl, what do you wish for?” In a

faint whisper, she would reply, “I wish to die.”

The story of the Sibyl of Cumae could well be a parable on modern

medicine, with its respirators and life-support equipment. More broadly,

it hints at the nature of technology itself, its reality vis-à-vis its

promise. If we were to travel back in time a thousand years, and tell

the first person we met of the marvels of our age — of cars and

airplanes, of telephones and computers, of fruits in winter and ice in

summer — our listener would doubtless imagine a world where magic

reigned, a world where humans had become demigods.

Yet few of us who live in the present find our era magical, rather the

opposite. Likewise, most of us don’t find modern society to be

particularly empowering or enriching so much as draining and devoid of

enchantment.

The most affecting moment for me in cinema is the beginning of George

Lucas’s dystopic nightmare THX-1138. The film opens with scenes from the

Buck Roger’s series of the ‘30s, as a narrator excitedly intones, “Buck

Rogers in the 25^(th) century!” And then, the screen goes blank as the

music changes, becoming bleak and ominous. The world of ray-guns and

jet-packs is left behind and we, the viewers, know, without anything

being shown us, the unreality of such innocent imaginings in the face of

the horrors the future might hold.

The film itself is perhaps the finest vision of a technocracy yet

produced. The specifics — society moved underground; robot cops and

drone-like, human workers sustained by behavioral drugs; the complete

erasure of the individual, with even names replaced by numbers; the

total conquest of nature by an arid, lifeless landscape of the

artificial — might vary from what we expect (in fact, almost certainly

does vary from what our bleak future portends), but the concept of a

society almost completely shaped by the demands of technology holds.

The concept of technocracy is ill-understood, even by many individuals

who are knowledgeable in the societal effects of technology. Much of the

literature on technology in relation to human freedom concerns itself

with the powers of the state; whether technology has the power to

emancipate the individual from governmental coercion; or conversely,

whether technology augments state power. Salient examples can be

elicited for either side; say, encryption software for the former, spy

satellites for the latter. The topic is fascinating, but limited.

Technology touches our lives in far more ways than can check or be

checked by the state. It affects our work, our culture, our social

relations, even our desires. Recognizing technology’s breadth is a

prerequisite to reaching any conclusions on its ultimate effects.

Technocracy is defined as “the management of society by technical

experts” (Webster’s 1971). More fundamentally, it is a society which

makes sustaining and, to some extent, advancing a given level of

technical achievement an issue of central importance. It should be noted

that, within a century, it is quite likely that “technical experts” may

mean artificial intelligence systems.

All civilizations have been, to some extent, technocracies. If our

civilization surpasses all others in terms of technical proficiency, it

still affords only the barest glimpse of what may lie ahead.

Science-fiction author Vernor Vinge coined the term “singularity” to

describe the future point at which technological development would

accelerate so rapidly that nothing beyond that point could be reliably

predicted. And the innovation which will give the primary impetus to a

post-singularity future — nanotechnology — is only a few decades away

from full development.