New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: As a reader of NewMars forum, we have opportunities for you to assist with technical discussions in several initiatives underway. NewMars needs volunteers with appropriate education, skills, talent, motivation and generosity of spirit as a highly valued member. Write to newmarsmember * gmail.com to tell us about your ability's to help contribute to NewMars and become a registered member.

#1 2003-05-06 20:44:04

Critter
Member
Registered: 2003-05-06
Posts: 6

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

Having just finished reading the contemplations of a madman (is he crazy?) I have to say I'm no longer the technonut that I once was and have developed afresh a love hate relationship with advanced technology.  The big theme seems to be that the more technological we become the more regulation that is required to keep tabs on the technology and the easier it is for the authorities to keep tabs on its individuals and manipulate them in various nefarious ways.  He also blasts technologic civilizations for depriving people of a 'power process' over there own lives.  He asserts Neolithic hunter-gatherers had the superior type of civilization and I think he makes some good points in that direction.  To sum up it all up in a phrase I think you could say the theme is that engaging in agriculture was the biggest mistake humanity ever made!  I'd really suggest reading it, my little surmise does it no justice.

Offline

#2 2003-05-06 22:03:13

Josh Cryer
Moderator
Registered: 2001-09-29
Posts: 3,830

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

I have read the Unibomber Manifesto several times. The first time was due to a slight fascination in serial killers (a friend of mines mother is fascinated with serial killers, and she got me curious about this sort of thing). Later times were to verify that the things he said were false (I'd commonly found some of his quotes on Luddite lists- and being technologically inclined, I have to consider the source).

The only points I thought he might have been at least somewhat right about were Democratic or Republican party motivations. But this is basically a two sentence blurb out of quite a few pages of senseless ranting.

Though I'm not about to write a ten page piece about how absolutely wrong he is (it would probably take more pages than that since we're talking about an insane man), I'm open to further discussion.

I think that the idea that technological civilizations deprive people of the ?power process over their own lives? (which I assume is individuality in this context) is silly, and is in fact the exact opposite, given a decentralized form of organization (one must note that rarely does he mention whether or not systems could work if their form of organization is changed).


Some useful links while MER are active. [url=http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.html]Offical site[/url] [url=http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/MM_NTV_Web.html]NASA TV[/url] [url=http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004/]JPL MER2004[/url] [url=http://www.spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/statustextonly.html]Text feed[/url]
--------
The amount of solar radiation reaching the surface of the earth totals some 3.9 million exajoules a year.

Offline

#3 2003-05-07 10:18:12

clark
Member
Registered: 2001-09-20
Posts: 6,362

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

Man creates tools to enable him to thrive within his environment. That is our nature. To suggest that we not create tools, or turn our back upon the utilization of tools to enable us to thrive, is to be an unnatural act. It is contrary to our very nature.

As soon as Thag learned to hurl a rock at an antelope's head, we became 'human'.

The Unibomber may have some points to ponder, a perspective that allows us to assess how we employ our tools, but the ultimate solution is untenable.

We cannot be anything less than what we are.

Advanced technology undermines larger scoieites becuase of a misappropriation of the distribution of resources. Advanced technology allows one dissassitfied individual, or a small dissatisfied group, to threaten the security of larger groups.

That's the problem, not technology. Greater leathality in our technology, coupled with individual access to this technology, creates the impetus and neccessity to ensure that said technology does not come into the hands of those who might threaten others.

No one wants the madman to have the bomb. But then again, no one wants to give up modern medicine to prevent him from having the bomb either.

Society is a structure that looks to balance the needs of the many- technology is the tool that recalibrates that balance.

Offline

#4 2003-05-07 12:00:32

Palomar
Member
From: USA
Registered: 2002-05-30
Posts: 9,734

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

Having just finished reading the contemplations of a madman (is he crazy?) I have to say I'm no longer the technonut that I once was and have developed afresh a love hate relationship with advanced technology.  The big theme seems to be that the more technological we become the more regulation that is required to keep tabs on the technology and the easier it is for the authorities to keep tabs on its individuals and manipulate them in various nefarious ways.  He also blasts technologic civilizations for depriving people of a 'power process' over there own lives.  He asserts Neolithic hunter-gatherers had the superior type of civilization and I think he makes some good points in that direction.  To sum up it all up in a phrase I think you could say the theme is that engaging in agriculture was the biggest mistake humanity ever made!  I'd really suggest reading it, my little surmise does it no justice.

*Yeah, good old Ed.  He tried to get his point across by maiming and injuring innocent persons who never did him any wrong.  Now there's an intelligent, classy guy for you!  ::smirk::

As for technology, it's like anything else:  IT'S WHAT YOU DO WITH IT.

I have no time for people who would prefer we all go back to a stone-age way of living; if they really feel that way about it, let them start by tossing their computers out the window and canceling their ISP subscriptions.  Maybe they should read Voltaire's challenge to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, after Rousseau insisted mankind would be better off living like apes in the forest.

My 2 cents' worth.  That's all, folks.

--Cindy


We all know [i]those[/i] Venusians: Doing their hair in shock waves, smoking electrical coronas, wearing Van Allen belts and resting their tiny elbows on a Geiger counter...

--John Sladek (The New Apocrypha)

Offline

#5 2003-05-07 12:19:21

clark
Member
Registered: 2001-09-20
Posts: 6,362

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

He tried to get his point across by maiming and injuring innocent persons who never did him any wrong.

I apoligize, but the statement struck me.

It perfectly encapsulates the entity of a terrorist, or a politician.

Now, back to my bridge...

Offline

#6 2003-05-07 12:44:29

Bill White
Member
Registered: 2001-09-09
Posts: 2,114

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

I post this link with some measure of trepidation, since I believe most (or all) of this is pure bullshit, however, if anyone is attracted to the Unabomber's ideas (if not his methods) this link might give a kinder and gentler way of saying something similiar.

To sum up it all up in a phrase I think you could say the theme is that engaging in agriculture was the biggest mistake humanity ever made!

Whether this is true or not, that bridge has been crossed and burned behind us. Regret for that choice is no longer an option.

Offline

#7 2003-05-07 14:01:39

Josh Cryer
Moderator
Registered: 2001-09-29
Posts: 3,830

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

BGD, oh, I wholly understand the point that for every technology there are tons of technologies supporting it, but I think about it differently.

First, I have the philosophy that as technology evolves, it gets (or it can potenitally get) simpler. On the face of things, this may sound quite insane; a motherboard, for every generation, is getting stuff added onto it for backwards compatablity and so on. Ten years ago we just had serial ports, now we have serial, printer, USB, FireWire, and so on. This is obviously a case of technology getting more dependent on the supporting structures (before all we needed was UHART, now we need USB controllers, FireWire controllers and so on- all of these things have to come from somewhere).

The key is that this isn't the ?only? way for technology to evolve, this kind of hacked up evolution is more due to capitalism than anything. We need to keep our markets as open as possible, because getting rid of that serial port is a potential profit killer!

Your question as to whether or not I can make a lighbulb is obvious; no, I can't. But I do know how lighbulbs function, or at least, have a marginal understanding. I know how electricity works, and given a little scientific practice, I could probably rebuild an electrical system from the ground up. But if I was in such a situation, I wouldn't really be worrying about electricity, not until my food situation was taken care of, and I'm good at the agriculture thing, or so I like to tell myself. Higher level technologies are more luxuries when you talk about surviving (well, on Earth, anyway). Why would I need electricity when I'm most likely going to spend the nights actually sleeping instead of needing light to do whatever? Once I got the agriculture thing sorted out, I'd probably think of ways to make farming easier. I can already imagine iragation systems working via windpower. Everything based on wood, of course, since smelting and other things of that nature isn't within my reach. Perhaps that's what I'd build next, though.

Perhaps I'm optimistic when I suggest that I could get along after a major disastor (assuming I lived).

I just think that the ?collaspe? of civilization is exaggerated. As long as the knowledge survives, of course. I mean, I think a book burning could have more implications than a lot of people simply dying off. Roman Catholics kept their people illiterate for how many hundreds of years? People, obviously, aren't capable of knowing everything, but they can have a basic understanding of all these concepts (hey, I have a science journal, only about 100 pages, which discusses everything we have ever learned with physics and non-organic chemistry, etc), and I think if given the scientific process, they can rebuild things the way they were (and perhaps in the process of rebuilding, they'll design things simply- what need does a rebuilding civiliztion need for non-standardized technologies?).

It's not like we have to figure out how to make aluminum all over again! Most children, with a good understanding of science, could do this.


Some useful links while MER are active. [url=http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.html]Offical site[/url] [url=http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/MM_NTV_Web.html]NASA TV[/url] [url=http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004/]JPL MER2004[/url] [url=http://www.spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/statustextonly.html]Text feed[/url]
--------
The amount of solar radiation reaching the surface of the earth totals some 3.9 million exajoules a year.

Offline

#8 2003-05-07 16:48:41

Bill White
Member
Registered: 2001-09-09
Posts: 2,114

Re: Unabomber Manifesto - Food for thought?

Why we need civilization:

Emily Dickinson wrote the following poem.

THE PROPS assist the house 
Until the house is built, 
And then the props withdraw? 
And adequate, erect, 
The house supports itself;         5
Ceasing to recollect 
The auger and the carpenter. 
Just such a retrospect 
Hath the perfected life, 
A past of plank and nail,         10
And slowness,?then the scaffolds drop? 
Affirming it a soul.

Civilization or culture is what allows a child to become a human self. Can our civilization be improved? Of course. Can we abolish it? No.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB