3 ms·
> Mead was famous, but only one of the many voices in very long debate. Whatever people were thinking 90 years ago, it had already lost its influence by the tim
by terminous 3y ago
> Mead was famous, but only one of the many voices in very long debate. Whatever people were thinking 90 years ago, it had already lost its influence by the time of AI's societal debut in the 1980s and is totally irrelevant to AI's impact today. While both may share a mindset, linking Mead to today's techno-bros is a bit of a stretch.
Plato was famous, but only one of the many voices in very long debate. Whatever people were thinking 2000+ years ago, it had already lost its influence by the time of AI's societal debut in the 1980s and is totally irrelevant to AI's impact today. While both may share a mindset, linking Plato to today's techno-bros is a bit of a stretch.
The allegory of the cave still has resonance today. Abstract ideas are timeless. That's the point of abstraction.
- tgv 3y agoBut Plato gets taught, and these writings by Mead don't. Linking Plato to tech-bros is indeed a stretch.
- gotorazor 3y agoThis is kinda how history of ideas work. People just kind of think they think and know things independently from within themselves or something. Historians who study the origins of idea traces them back and make connections to thoughts and ideas of the past. Often, the inheritors of those ideas knows nothing of how they get them and think themselves clever for coming up with them all by themselves.
- nearbuy 3y agoThis is unfalsifiable speculation though. I could make that claim about anyone (eg, I could say actually it was H. G. Wells planted the seeds of techno-optimism in the present day AI community) and you would have no way to prove me wrong. Remove Margaret Mead from the timeline and the AI camps today would probably be the exact same. Those are basically the two options with anything in life that's both useful and dangerous: optimism or pessimism, hope or fear.
- tgv 3y agoTrue, but that trace here is missing. There is no link apart from "Mead said something vaguely utopian", and that doesn't even seem specific for technology. In 1939, technology was not the most threatening thing.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoYou're joking, right ? By WW1 already, technology had changed war to the point that it became extremely economically destructive : https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/world-war-i-battlefields-uninhabitable/ https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/world-war-i-battlefie...
- _glass 3y agoLaughs in Cultural Studies. Seriously, Mead is an integral part of the curriculum in the social sciences.
- dragonwriter 3y agoAs someone with a degree in a social science whose entire contact with Mead was outside of that study, I think you are at least overgeneralizing.