4 ms·
The article paraphrases Ellul criticizing the modern world, "mankind no longer saw technology as merely a tool but now pursued its advancement as an end in itse
by tlb 9y ago
The article paraphrases Ellul criticizing the modern world, "mankind no longer saw technology as merely a tool but now pursued its advancement as an end in itself. Society served technology, not vice versa. Individuals were valued only insofar as they served this end." That was a major influence on Kaczynski.
When you say it's tragic that he didn't end up contributing to mathematics, you're judging his life by the values he revolted against.
I believe that advancing technology (and knowledge in general) is among the highest callings a person can have, so I agree with you. But he wouldn't.
- FooHentai 9y agoHe aha te mea nui o te ao? He tangata, he tangata, he tangata! What is the most important thing in the world? It is the people, it is the people, it is the people! The advancement of technology and furthering of knowledge is a noble endeavor, but only in pursuit of a higher goal. Advanced technology not used, or great knowledge never applied, is of no value. It is only with a higher intention for the use of these things that they have any value at all. That higher purpose could be a number of things - The betterment of mankind, of all forms of life, of society. But something greater than the self and certainly greater than no purpose at all. Of course, it's not possible to specifically link advancements in technology and knowledge with specific goals before the advancements are made. What I'm curious about is: Do you view what I've said above as agreeing with your belief, or closer to the view of Jaques Ellul?
- tlb 9y agoIf you think that overall, knowledge improve people's lives, then you can take either position and act the same way. If you think that knowledge overall hurts people, then you have to decide (and you should probably go with the people.)
- fundabulousrIII 9y agoHell is other people.