2 ms·
This is just a more clever way to project the same nostalgia as adventured's comments. What evidence do we have that 1950's America was a font of innovation and
by twoodfin 13y ago
This is just a more clever way to project the same nostalgia as adventured's comments. What evidence do we have that 1950's America was a font of innovation and civilization that 2013 cannot match? "Civilization" is an odd term for a place with millions living under legalized segregation, and an entire half of the population largely consigned to domestic labor.
Not to mention, much of the prosperity of the '50's was a "fringe benefit" of most of the rest of the industrialized world blowing itself up for the second time in 30 years.
And of course there's survivorship bias: No one remembers all the terrible inventions of the '50's. (Had they come up with Smell-O-Vision yet?) All we remember is the transistor radio and the hydrogen bomb. Look back on the 2010's in 60 years and you'll see all sorts of amazing stuff that made its mark on the future, I'm sure.
- adventured 13y agoIt's not about nostalgia. It's: what do you get for your labor, what can it buy and for how much, what kind of savings do you have, how hard do both parents have to work to make ends meet, what does an education cost and what income can you get for it, how many jobs are available? Simple questions that can be easily answered with real data that was available in 1970 and today.
- twoodfin 13y agoI started to make a list of all the things you can get in 2013 that you couldn't get at any price in 1970 (notable ones included Gleevac and a Blu-ray set of the Godfather trilogy) but I am just going to give up. If you think you'd be happier living as the median American in 1970 than as the median American in 2013, especially in the Socratic satisfaction sense of knowing the experiences of both, I just can't imagine how to convince you otherwise.
- enko 13y agoWith respect, I think you're coming at this from the wrong angle. In my opinion, availability of blurays, or whatever, has no correlation whatsoever with the general health and happiness of a society. In fact, the essay I linked specifically seeks to factor that out, on the presumption - that I share - that it is basically irrelevant. Are you a miserable, miserable man today because you can't get 2025's GreenRay UHD or super-ultra-holo-3d or the iPad 20 or whatever? Would any of those things make you a long-term happier person? Of course not. Technological knick-knacks do not bring long-term life satisfaction. Convenience does not equal happiness. You will not die with a smile on your lips because you own a retina display. I'd advise you to read the essay I linked. It might change your thinking on a few things.
- twoodfin 13y agoIf I get a certain variety of leukemia, and I'm in a society which hasn't discovered Gleevac yet, I will probably die. That's a pretty awful consequence. Not getting to see the Godfather movies in glorious 1080p is perhaps a lesser tragedy, but all these little things add up. Sure, there are all sorts of "holistic" measurements of society's overall happiness, but I'll come back to the Socratic question: Would you really be happier in 1970, knowing what you're missing from 2013? And again, we're assuming straight up that you're not in some woefully underprivileged demographic that would be seriously screwed by having to live under 1970's mores.
- l33tbro 13y agoCan we please stop using "happiness" as some kind of value. It is such a loaded and slippery term. Happiness is a fluid and multi-dinensional state of being. It doesn't quantify well.
- megablast 13y agoYou make a fair point, but look at housing prices.