The Rise of the Machines (and the Fall of Man)
A little over sixty years ago, J.R.R. Tolkien defined what he meant by a machine:
By the [ word “machine”] I intend all use of external plans or devices (apparatus) instead of development of the inherent inner powers or talents — or even the use of these talents with the corrupted motive of dominating: bulldozing the real world, or coercing other wills. The Machine is our more obvious modern form though more closely related to Magic than is usually recognised. . . . The Enemy in successive forms is always ‘naturally’ concerned with sheer Domination, and so the Lord of magic and machines.
E.F. Schumacher similarly commented upon technology in the modern world. He cites briefly the “crude” philosophical materialism that dominates the West in its efforts for technological prowess and he succinctly states the issue: “We have developed a technology as if it was a thing by itself. Not from the point of view of ‘what do people really require?’ but from the point of view ‘what can we actually do.'”
The thought of these men are all the more relevant as today’s headlines carry the latest efforts of Google to develop robot technology, Amazon delivering goods by drones, and various techie-whizz-kid hackers who seek power for pure sport. Couple this with the US government’s recent penchant for killing the nation’s enemies by drones (I recently commented on this in “The End of the Soldier”) and spying on anything that has a pulse, and we have the rising of a terrifying spectre of a world dominated by rich and powerful masters who will dispose of human interests, human flourishing, and yes, human life, by a standard of none but themselves. Am I being apocalyptic? Perhaps. But Tolkien and Schumacher are right: the powerful in these areas wish to “dominate,” “bulldoze the real world,” and “coerce other wills” just because they “can actually do it.” Just because one can, doesn’t mean one ought.
Consider tech giant Google. Its robotics efforts are aimed at “manufacturing–like electronics assembly, which is now largely manual–and competing with companies like Amazon in retailing.” As New York Times reporter John Markoff reports, “A realistic case…would be automating portions of an existing supply chain that stretches from a factory floor to the companies that ship and deliver goods to a consumer’s doorstep.” The same article quotes Andrew McAfee, an M.I.T. research scientist, “The opportunity is massive. There are still people who walk around in factories and pick things up in distribution centers and work in the back rooms of grocery stores.” Is this a bad thing? Apparently to the the machine makers. According to the Times, Google co-founder Larry Page has argued that “technology should be deployed wherever possible to free humans from drudgery and repetitive tasks.”
This is truly terrifying. This technology, these machines, and the minds behind them are not benign. They are the result of–at best–a misguided will. Far from encouraging human flourishing, they will destroy it. We are seeing the re-emergence of human sacrifice–this time upon the altar of technological and economic power. We have already seen the beginnings of the disastrous results:
- Schoolchildren fed a steady diet of technology from iPads to new computers, yet cannot memorize the St. Crispin’s Day speech or the Gettysburg Address and understand the virtues contained therein.
- Universities which were once the bastions of the liberal arts and the guardians of the Western intellectual tradition selling their inheritance for technological and utilitarian–and therefore ephemeral–training.
- Young tech nerds seeking to “dominate others” for sport. We can even see the beginnings of a “war of the machines.” Hacker (as if that is an honorable status or “profession”) Samy Kamkar mentioned, “How fun would it be to take over drones, carrying Amazon packages…or take over any other drones, and make them my little zombie drones.”
It is a rare day that I agree with Maureen Dowd, but this indeed is like an episode of the Twilight Zone. Perhaps more than ever we need to fight for the little guy–the mother at home in the drudgery of her repetitive task of changing diapers, the factory worker making a living for his family in the drudgery of his repetitive task of providing goods or services, and the grocer who performs the drudgery of the repetitive task of stocking shelves. The smart machine guys aren’t all that smart. Theirs is a world that will not make people happy–developing “their inherent inner powers and talents” for the end in which they were created–but rather a world of domination of the weak by the powerful.
For my part, I’ll stick with Tolkien, Schumacher, and the drudgery of repetitive tasks–like reading my own books, washing my own dishes, thinking my own thoughts, and blowing my own nose. I refuse to sacrifice human persons to machines; more so, I refuse to be made into a machine.
This article, The Rise of the Machines (and the Fall of Man) is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
https://bellarmineforum.org/the-rise-of-the-machines/
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.
I will agree that mechanization with the attitude to ‘do because we can’ without a forethought of its resulting human interaction often gives treachorous results in its afterthought. But I hesitate to say that machines shouldn’t be created to remove drudgery or dangerous tasks previously employed by people. Should we ditch our washing machines or water heaters? Should we throw out our furnace?
I see it (the use of machines in society today) as an imbalance which has resulted from a very materialistic view of society. A distortion of tools that should be used for good – not necessarily the’ ring of evil’ itself. No doubt, this philosophy of distortion comes from the same Father of Lies that has initiated the distortion of marital relations so prevelant in today’s society as well. Both have at their roots the lessening of the human person – and as a result – the increase in value of ‘things’.
Society as a whole lacks a moral compass. This is true of Wallstreet, government, billionaires, those in medicine, scientists, etc. All too often the question of ‘if we can do something’ is never balanced by the question of ‘whether we should do something’.
A truely frightening philosophy which has begun is the use of INTERNAL plans or devices to give extra-ordinary powers to humans. I am not talking about replacing a soldier’s limb or adding a pacemaker to help regulate a heart, but a ‘whole new world’ of the ‘cyberman’ – the ‘bionic man’. A ‘marriage’ of machine and human to create a person beyond his/her natural creative intention. But again, this philosophy has at its roots the devaluation of the human person.
Thanks for your insightful comment, C. Green. It’s overly simplistic to suggest that I am anti-all technology. Certainly there are things that have contributed to human flourishing–a furnace in MN is one! 😉
My intent in this article is to look at the issue through the Schumacher-Tolkien lens boiling it down to: is this (or any) potential technological advance good for a human being? In answering this question we need to take into account his spiritual and social make-up as well. While I admit, in this valley of tears, all things are prone to abuse, it is precisely the crude materialistic philosophy that gives us a “new model” every year and encourages a culture of waste. The bottom line is that humans need to be the center of the economy and technological advances and not the personal hobbies of Google’s founders.
Well stated Mr. DeJak, and thank you for your response – and for the thought provoking article. By no means should you throw out your furnace – especially at this time – as I understand MN is getting especially pummelled by bitter weather that the Canadians are sharing with us! 🙂
Do you also think CreateSpace is a bad thing? I can write a book and publish it there for free and when someone wants to buy it, the machine prints one book and mails it to the reader.
Thanks for your comment, Kevin. The point of my article was not to condemn all technology–certainly, though, the technology of “because we can.” My criticism is of the worship of the machine. I think the Tolkien and Schumacher quotes provide a framework in which to evaluate the advent of new technology. Again, does it contribute to human flourishing? This must be evaluated from a social as well as individual aspect. Perhaps in a subsequent article I may make the distinction between technology and machines, where the former is what man has always done in order to help him live and thrive vs. the latter which may be set to dominate man (see the Tolkien definition). To answer your direct question, I don’t think CreateSpace is a bad thing per se, but a good question would be: are there social ramifications for the mechanization of everything to the point of human beings becoming irrelevant?
How could literature ever be mechanized to the point at which human beings are irrelevant?
It takes a human being to write a book and another human being to read it. Some kind of technology always exists between those two points: a clay tablet and stylus; or a copyist, his ink and pen, and paper or vellum; a printing press and some way to ship books; electronic delivery; and whatever is thought of next.
Great post!
Au (translator, human translator…)