A
very interesting model that has been created to describe the history of
technological development is one that perceives this history as being
punctuated by different technological revolutions. According to this model, up until now, there
have been four of these revolutions. The
first one was based on the development of steam power and mechanical
production. The second was marked by the
use of electricity and the development of assembly lines in factories. The third revolution was impelled forward by
the creation of computers and digital technology. The fourth and most recent one is founded on
the development of smart computer-based systems for both the factory and the
home. In the factory, these systems
automate many factory processes by having different machines work together in
networks to produce products that can be both easily customized and also made
with fewer defects. People will no
longer be needed for the supposedly boring repetitive manufacturing tasks, and
instead can focus on skilled management and even on creative input. In the home, the Internet of things connects
different devices to supposedly make daily life for humans as comfortable and
efficient as possible.
The
major criticism that has been directed against the fourth revolution focuses on
employment. There are those who feel
that automation could conceivably lead to a loss of jobs for humans. That didn’t happen at a factory that creates
controllers (the boxes that contain the machine brains for factories) in Amberg,
Germany. However, according to an
article in Newsweek by Rose Jacobs, “Rise of Robot Factories Leading ‘Fourth
Industrial Revolution’ ” (3/5/15), the increase in efficiency probably
prevented other factories from being built to make the same products.
I am
definitely concerned about how automation can create a loss of employment
opportunities. If machines displace
people, then those people have no easy means for economic survival or for building
a strong economic future. But the main
focus of my column is on how people are affected experientially by
technological change. Although
technological change has done so much to secure the place of the human species
in the world and has created impressive consumer products and services, by the
same token, each new industrial revolution has created technology that has
acted as a further wedge between humans and their natural environment, a field
of experience where people can directly sensorily interact with their living
environment, have rich vibrant life experiences, make, receive and preserve
organic imprints, and prepare for death with a surrogate immortality of their preserved
organic imprints.
The First Industrial Revolution created
machines that changed the way that people worked. Machines operated on the
basis of defined discrete angular rhythms, the rhythms of behavioral entities
that were relatively free from the flowing blendable continual organic rhythms
that humans and animals had operated on from within themselves. People working in factories had to adapt to
the rhythms of these machines, and this proved very stressful. In addition,
employers worked the workers hard like machines and kept them in miserable conditions. The workers and the machines of the First
Industrial Revolution increased the output of goods, but more organic craft
skills were diminished in importance as a result. These early machines were powered by steam,
and by freeing human beings from direct interaction with primary materials,
they were experienced by humans as free-floating figures operating in a vacuum
and tension-pocket environment. Areas of
understimulation from the monotonous repetition of the machine processes filled
with pockets of overstimulation from the friction of the moving parts. Getting a lot of work done without constant physical
participation by humans in all aspects of the work process. Because humans didn’t participate so directly
in all aspects of the work process, they experienced themselves as having been
put to a certain extent in an experiential vacuum. Which is what humans wanted, because it meant
that they were separating themselves from the organic perishability of the
natural living environment. They were no
longer directly grappling so much with basic tools, other artifacts and
products.
In
the Second Industrial Revolution, electricity became the major source of energy
and mass production techniques were developed.
Whereas steam power had become a more focused defined discrete source of
energy than the organic nutrients used to power humans and animals, electricity
became an even more focused defined discrete source of energy than steam. Assembly line work became a more efficient
form of human energy output. By reducing
their work processes to a few relatively simple steps within a larger process,
humans were able to increase the efficiency involved in their work
involvement. But by focusing on just a
few basic steps, there is a sense in which humans became machine-like
themselves. In assembly line work,
humans were no longer involved in leaving their own organic imprints.
In
the Third Industrial Revolution, computers and digital technology were
developed. More and more human work
became involved with entering a total field of experience of free-floating
data, defined discrete images and defined discrete audio and video experiences
all within the experiential vacuum represented by a computer screen. It represented a further separation from the
primary experience world of direct human interaction with other humans, with
non-machine human artifacts and with more natural environments.
And now
we have the Fourth Industrial Revolution where the Internet of Things allows
machines to work with each other and form free-floating figures systems that
exist in what is basically a frictionless experiential vacuum living
environment for humans. There are so
many layers of machine involvement, whether in the factory, the office, or the
home, that the organic imprint of humans in the processes that surround them is
very attenuated. There is less and less
opportunity for humans to experience the organic friction needed to feely fully
alive, and this is because there is less and less direct grappling with the
living environment.
On
the other hand, the Hopi Indians of Northeast Arizona in the U.S. have
developed a culture that accentuates some kinds of organic friction, organic
imprints and direct grappling with the living environment. In my last article, I discussed how the
Kachinas, the spirit entities of the Hopis, interacted with humans through the
Kachina actors that dressed up as Kachinas.
The Kachinas, through the conduct of the Kachina actors, stimulated the
flow of life over generations, not only of humans but of other animals and of
plants as well. The Kachinas did this
through the intense primary experience interactions they generated in their
encounters with humans.
Other
preliterate tribes have had other mechanisms by which they have stimulated the
flow of life in humans. One noteworthy
example is the kula trade of the people of eastern New Guinea and the Trobriand
Islands. The kula trade is not trade in
the ordinary sense. It is rather a
system of ritualized exchanges where traders from one tribe exchange items with
members of another tribe on whose island they have landed. It is more like ritualized mutual
gift-giving. Furthermore, each side of
the transaction gives the other side objects they already possess. The gifts get passed along a ring of islands
in southeast Melanesia (the group of islands where New Guinea and the Trobriand
Islands are located). Red shell
necklaces are passed along in exchange going clockwise in the ring of islands
and white shell bracelets are passed along the ring of islands
counterclockwise. Someone is successful
in the kula trade if he can execute a lot of exchanges. Necklaces for bracelets, bracelets for
necklaces. This is definitely not trade
in the ordinary sense. These exchanges
do not lead to profit in the ordinary sense.
They lead instead to intangible gains for the trader. Social prestige that comes from the quality
and size of his trade network. And the
canoe trips between islands are dangerous, and require preparation. So successful canoe trips where the travelers
come back safe have to also be part of the package that leads to consideration
for prestige by others.
This
ritualized gift giving serves several related purposes. Giving a gift is a way of making an imprint
on someone. Giving several gifts over
time to someone who gives back gifts in return and thus forming an ongoing
relationship as a result creates the means for mutually making, receiving and
preserving organic imprints. Having
these relationships over a large geographic area creates an extensive
experiential grounding for people.
Making these trips and having adventures in the process leads to the
development of an interesting varied life narrative.
In
other words, the kula trade satisfies a whole bunch of fundamental human needs
that each succeeding industrial revolution has inadvertently worked to
repress. The kula trade creates a whole
rich flow of primary experience. The
four industrial revolutions have sought to repress this flow of primary
experience in order to protect humans from organic perishability. But humans are becoming so increasingly
protected, that they are living less and less in any traditional sense. All the traditional hall marks: organic
imprints, flow of primary experience, rich vibrant individual life experiences
and rich life narratives are disappearing.
So those who look with excitement at the appearance of each new
industrial revolution should be a little more cautious in their excitement. Particularly the fourth industrial revolution
is threatening to shut people out not only of opportunities for working and
making a living, but also from having a well-lived meaningful life.
(c) 2015 Laurence Mesirow
No comments:
Post a Comment