The Technological Pinnacle

“The truly apocalyptic view of the world is that things do not repeat themselves. It isn’t absurd, e.g., to believe that the age of science and technology is the beginning of the end for humanity; that the idea of great progress is a delusion, along with the idea that the truth will ultimately be known; that there is nothing good or desirable about scientific knowledge and that mankind, in seeking it, is falling into a trap. It is by no means obvious that this is not how things are.” Wittgenstein

I seek to argue here the claim that the product of science-the ostensible benefits of technology- are trumped by the specter of the mass destruction which they cause. Science, in seeking objectivity, unleashes forces which not only fate man to not only ethical suicide but quite an actual one. To avoid ambiguity on the meaning of technology, I want to specifically refer to the rise of technology in the 20th century which allowed humans to change the environment at an alarming rate and harness atomic energy and micro technology. This is type of innovation is a double edged sword, and this is the technology which is cause for concern.

The benefits of technological improvement in the 20th century are clear: great interconnectedness in communications and travel, nearly instantaneous fluid interaction of ideas, and the improvement of the living standards of millions of individuals, particularly in the developed countries of the United States and Europe. It must be conceded that technology has also promoted lives which are longer and more prosperous with the advent of new medicine and procedures, which are of course, restricted mainly to the 1st world.

However, the 20th century is replete with examples of the destructive military capabilities which have been created through technological innovation, causing mass killing and genocide. This includes gunpowder, high explosives, automatic weapons, and rapid long-distance communications. During World War I, machine gun technology and bombers led to the death of 15 million. World War II- 55 million due to “total war”. Ten of the twenty highest mortality rates during war and/or genocide have occurred in the 19th/20th century, in no small part due to the increase in technological capacity. There are also estimates that 75% of all casualties in conflict since 0 B.C. have occurred in the 20th century. It is estimated that each year, over $1 trillion dollars is spent on the arms trade alone. Don’t worry; you can rest easy knowing the United States, who contributes to half of the world’s entire spending, is cashing in on those profits to contribute to our GDP.

With the introduction of nuclear armament in the post World War II era, thanks physicists such as Oppenheimer, the problem becomes even more dire. The nuclear option reaches a point of gravity that war between nuclear powers must be avoided at all costs. And indeed, this has the temporary benefit of preventing the escalation of conflict due to mutually assured destruction. But how many hundreds of years will it take for one deranged dictator or another Republic promoting a Star Wars defense shield to upset the delicate nuclear balance and the policy of deterrence and encourage a new arms race? Or worse yet, utilizing nuclear weapons as a first strike policy or minimalist nukes as an alternative to traditional bombardment (i.e. Bush's plan for "mini-nukes")?

In addition to the nuclear threat, technology poses the risk of severe global environmental problems as is the case with global warming caused by anthropogenic sources. The burgeoning production of fossil fuels has caused the emission of carbon dioxide which has perhaps irreversibly altered the environment leading to climate change. Such industrialization coupled with deforestation leads to a decrease in biodiversity, and rapid species extinction. Worldwide improvements in the overall standard of living have led to rapid increases in population growth which leads to future sustainability issues. Although such growth has slowed down significantly throughout Europe, the third world suffers from very high rates of growth and equally high under-5 mortality rates. If the exponential growth of the world eventually outruns our creative ability to adapt, a Malthusian fate is plausible. (On this point it is important to note that the alarmist projections of economist Paul Ehrlich who favors placing restrictions on reproduction have not yet occurred) Lastly, such technological adaptations have arguably created dependency issues by creating the expectation of efficiency or leisure through artificial electronic devices and severing our connection with nature and the outdoors.

I speculate here five logically possible scenarios which due to the rise of technology could lead to irreversible damage to the planet and the fate of mankind:
1) Nuclear Holocaust- This is the most likely due to the uncertainty of an anarchical international political realm with no significant central power to prevent usage.
2) Global Warming- We irreversibly alter the environment causing glacier retreat, ice shelf depletion, sea level rise, further species loss, and eventually the disruption of the food chain.
3) Genetically Engineered Supervirus- We unleash a superbug which has the ability to mutate indefinitely
4) The Singularity- Micro-technology reaches an apogee which results in machines which have the ability to self-correct exponentially until their operation is beyond human understanding. If such machines are hostile to humanity, then this is the “Terminator” scenario.
5) Brave New World Scenario- Mankind realizes that social stability can only be ensured through genetic manipulation, and in an effort to avoid nuclear war, we use eugenics to artificially create humans in test tubes who are programmed to be passive and enjoy their role in society. Steven Hawking mentions that the elimination of aggression in humans through genetic manipulation is actually necessary for mankind to survive and avoid nuclear war. There is hope yet.