In Part Two of this series, Dan Tofan explains some of the downsides to our ever-increasing reliance on technology and the implications of heavy technology use as a threat to humanity.
When Did The World Go Digital?
The last 25 years were marked by the widespread use of the information technologies, aka computers and Internet, which I will refer to from now on as “digital technology” or just “the digital.” We have achieved, supported by the digital, putting our lives on fast forward. Everything that can be done online is faster than it was 25 years ago. We have entered a continuous race to do more and more every day at the click of a button. Babies nowadays learn how to swipe before even saying “mama.” As stated before, and please don’t get me wrong on this, digital technology has clearly had a positive measurable impact upon humanity, but let’s look a little at the downsides.
The Downsides
Mainly, the digital changed the way we read or interpret data. An activity that was formerly done mainly through books is now done via various types of screens. Nonetheless, although we don’t fully perceive the difference, our digital gadgets do not really behave like books. One digital device typically incorporates many data sources such as emails, Facebook, Twitter, chats, etc. All these compete for parts of our time and struggle to get it through innumerate methods (notifications, sounds, email alerts, etc.). For some years now, they have also started invading our cars and wearables. You are basically connected at all times, anywhere, and your attention is distracted by different triggers that just want part of your time.
The real issue is that we are not physically built for this. Our brains are not designed to ingest that much data from so many sources and in such a disruptive mode. After hundreds of years of reading books, adapting to the new media is at least challenging, especially for the first generations to start using the new digital media. By using books for so many years as our primary medium, we got accustomed to sustained focus on relatively narrow topics. This uninterrupted pursuit of a mental thread allowed us to develop abilities like analytical thinking and creativity. By memorizing the information through reading, we managed to make connections, as neurons linked together through many synapses. By making connections, we also gained a profound understanding of preferred topics and become very knowledgeable. That knowledge definitely served as a base for progress.
On the other hand, the new digital media promotes the complete opposite of the above, meaning fast reading, multitasking, and coverage of many topics in a short amount of time. Digital media doesn’t let us focus too much or deepen any subject. The amount of dopamine released by all these notifications on our mobiles, that we think might unveil something new and useful, is just too high, and we cannot resist it. That is why we have all these pop-ups on our screens, maybe even as you read this blog post. But, is this the right way to do it, or to better put it, does this modus operandi make us smarter? Not at all. On the contrary.
Nicholas Carr argues that the new technique we use to ingest information affects our profoundness, creativity, and focusing power, and, as a result, we become more superficial. It is true that the Internet gives us access to more information than ever before, but we just cannot seem to get enough. “One inch deep and one mile long” is an expression that perfectly describes the new habit. Most of the time, we stick to merely reading titles, diagonal reading, and fast scrolling of news feeds. We are using the Internet as an extension of our memory. Everything can be found there, so why bother memorizing? But with no memories, connections can’t be made. The complexity of our brains, as a result of thousands of years of evolution, is just put aside by relying on technology to do the interesting part.
Other authors have also exposed the negative influence of technology upon humanity. One notable book on this topic is Henry Kissinger’s World Order. The book explores how world order has changed over the years, and how nations managed to grow strong and dominate others. One of the key factors that the author considers to have influenced world order is technology. At present, a digital arms race is unfolding. Developed countries invest a significant amount of money into cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and quantum computers because these are tactical advantages that might turn the tables in the near future.
On the current use of digital technologies, the author has also some key remarks. He mentions that the content of the human mind can be classified into several components: data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. Our objective, as humans, should be to obtain wisdom. The digital realm focuses only on the first part of this chain: data and information, by facilitating its availability everywhere and at any time. Yet, a surplus of information might hinder the acquisition of knowledge and prevent us from achieving wisdom. The internet is shrinking the human perspective.
Digital media also brought some improvements such as eye-hand coordination (games), reflexes, and visual processing. But these are not qualities that could actually make us more intelligent. Multitasking is just not for humans, at least not in these times. Just like Seneca puts it: “To be everywhere is to be nowhere.”
To summarize, the way we use digital technology nowadays may not be suited for our current level of cognitive development. We are becoming more superficial with a very high chance of irreversibility. Of course, technology was meant to extend and improve our aptitudes, but the question is whether we should give up some of our native abilities just because technology can take them over. Is it appropriate, or even fair, in the context of the natural evolution, to give away our unique capabilities?
What Next?
One can argue that there might be another point of view on this matter. Natural evolution is sluggish. Enhancements are barely visible in one generation only (drinking milk as adults, missing a wisdom tooth), as usually, genetic evolution is rather slow. On the other hand, our society is characterized by anything but patience. People want to see, feel, and do all kinds of stuff within their lifetime. Seeing their bodies evolve overnight is something that many eccentrics dream about. And there comes one possible solution – bioengineering, or the science of improving human abilities by adding mechano-electrical parts to our bodies.
Many authors are now developing this idea. One of the most popular views upon the topic is shared by Yuval Harari in his book, Homo Deus. In his view, in a few years, we might start seeing a new kind of super-human, bioengineered to possess enhanced abilities. Maybe you want a better memory, or a bionic arm/eye. Basically, everything will be possible at the right price. This might even lead to the creation of a new enhanced race, one that could eliminate the archaic homo-sapiens.
Should such things really happen? Or how soon is this possible? It remains to be seen, but the thought of it is just thrilling. An exciting article on this topic, written by Kevin Warwick, can be found here. The author explores several scenarios, from brain implants (that already happen) to biological brains in robot bodies, while also providing the current status of research. What would you call a half-human, half-machine entity that can think faster and better, that is permanently connected to the internet, makes use of artificial intelligence algorithms to extend its natural abilities, and is also much stronger than a human? Should that be a human, a cyborg, a robot, or what?
Conclusion
Just as in the example above on the ancient debate between literature vs. poetry, digital technologies have given us opportunities to progress one step further. Books have serious downsides when it comes to finding pieces of information. Reading a book requires time, and time is a precious resource in our days. The memory extension that we got through connecting to the Internet is just massive, almost making the default human memory redundant. We argued that memory is implicitly important when developing intelligence. Nevertheless, we need to be very careful with our next steps as trading higher intelligence for speed might not be the winning trade-off.
Beyond doubt, technology has supported human development over the years, representing, at the same time, the ultimate achievement of our cerebral superiority. No other species on Earth can develop tools with such precision as humans. I reaffirm that this is not an anti-tech manifesto, but I reckon that it might be at least unwise to lose part of our human traits by outsourcing our most important and magnificent skills to machines. Nature might consider that we don’t need them anymore. Cautiousness should be expressed when using such technologies and side effects should be properly analyzed and treated, should we need it.
Corporations are usually driven by financial interests and might not have the proper incentive to adopt human-friendly policies if it could affect their profit margins. Thus, governments, academia, and NGOs should and must take action. We need coherent public policies that should ultimately lead to a coherent strategy for the development of humans, not the brutalization of our good sense and judgement. HAL, Skynet, Wall-E, Jarvis, Tau (AI movie characters) and others, are just around the corner, waiting for their turn.
____
This is Part Two of a two-part series. Find Part One here.
