Technological utopianism

Technological utopianism(often calledtechno-utopianismortechnoutopianism) is anyideologybased on the premise that advances in science and technology could and should bring about autopia,or at least help to fulfill one or another utopian ideal.

Atechno-utopiais therefore an idealsociety,in which laws, government, and social conditions are solely operating for the benefit and well-being of all its citizens, set in the near- or far-future,as advanced science and technology will allow these ideal living standards to exist; for example,post-scarcity,transformations in human nature,the avoidance or prevention of suffering and even theend of death.

Technological utopianism is often connected with other discourses presenting technologies as agents of social and cultural change, such astechnological determinismormedia imaginaries.^[1]

A tech-utopia does not disregard any problems that technology may cause,^[2]but strongly believes that technology allows mankind to make social, economic, political, and cultural advancements.^[3]Overall, Technological Utopianism views technology's impacts as extremely positive.

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, several ideologies and movements, such as thecyberdeliccounterculture, theCalifornian Ideology,cyber-utopianism,transhumanism,^[4]andsingularitarianism,have emerged promoting a form of techno-utopia as a reachable goal. The movement known aseffective accelerationism(e/acc) even advocates for "progress at all costs".^[5]Cultural criticImre Szemanargues technological utopianism is an irrationalsocial narrativebecause there is no evidence to support it. He concludes that it shows the extent to whichmodernsocieties place faith innarratives of progress and technologyovercoming things, despite all evidence to the contrary.^[6]

History

From the 19th to mid-20th centuries

Karl Marxbelieved thatscienceanddemocracywere the right and left hands of what he called the move from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. He argued that advances in science helped delegitimize the rule of kings and the power of theChristian Church.^[7]

19th-centuryliberals,socialists,andrepublicansoften embraced techno-utopianism.RadicalslikeJoseph Priestleypursued scientific investigation while advocating democracy.Robert Owen,Charles FourierandHenri de Saint-Simonin the early 19th century inspired communalists^[who?]with their visions of a future scientific andtechnological evolutionof humanity using reason. Radicals seized onDarwinian evolutionto validate the idea ofsocial progress.Edward Bellamy'ssocialist utopiainLooking Backward,which inspired hundreds of socialist clubs in the late 19th centuryUnited Statesand a national political party, was as highly technological as Bellamy's imagination. For Bellamy and theFabian Socialists,socialism was to be brought about as a painless corollary of industrial development.^[7]

Marx andEngelssaw more pain and conflict involved, but agreed about the inevitable end.Marxistsargued that the advance of technology laid the groundwork not only for the creation of a new society, withdifferent property relations,but also for the emergence of new human beings reconnected to nature and themselves. At the top of the agenda forempowered proletarianswas "to increase the totalproductive forcesas rapidly as possible ". The 19th and early 20th century Left, fromsocial democratstocommunists,were focused onindustrialization,economic developmentand the promotion of reason, science, and the idea ofprogress.^[7]

Some technological utopians promotedeugenics.Holding that in studies of families, such as theJukesandKallikaks,science had proven that many traits such as criminality and alcoholism were hereditary, many advocated the sterilization of those displaying negative traits. Forcible sterilization programs were implemented in several states in the United States.^[8]

H. G. Wellsin works such asThe Shape of Things to Comepromoted technological utopianism.

The horrors of the 20th century – namely Fascist and Communist dictatorships and the world wars – caused many to abandon optimism. TheHolocaust,asTheodor Adornounderlined, seemed to shatter the ideal ofCondorcetand other thinkers of theEnlightenment,which commonly equatedscientific progresswith social progress.^[9]

From late 20th and early 21st centuries

The Goliath of totalitarianism will be brought down by the David of the microchip.^[10]
— Ronald Reagan,14 June 1989

A movement of techno-utopianism began to flourish again in thedot-comculture of the 1990s, particularly in the West Coast of the United States, especially based aroundSilicon Valley.TheCalifornian Ideologywas a set of beliefs combiningbohemianandanti-authoritarianattitudes from thecounterculture of the 1960swith techno-utopianism and support forlibertarianeconomic policies. It was reflected in, reported on, and even actively promoted in the pages ofWiredmagazine, which was founded in San Francisco in 1993 and served for a number years as the "bible" of its adherents.^[11]^[12]^[13]

This form of techno-utopianism reflected a belief that technological change revolutionizes human affairs, and that digital technology in particular – of which theInternetwas but a modest harbinger – would increase personal freedom by freeing the individual from the rigid embrace of bureaucratic big government. "Self-empowered knowledge workers" would render traditional hierarchies redundant; digital communications would allow them to escape the modern city, an "obsolete remnant of theindustrial age".^[11]^[12]^[13]

Similar forms of "digital utopianism" has often entered in the political messages of party and social movements that point to theWebor more broadly tonew mediaas harbingers of political and social change.^[14]Its adherents claim it transcended conventional "right/left"distinctions inpoliticsby rendering politics obsolete. However, techno-utopianism disproportionately attracted adherents from thelibertarian rightend of the political spectrum. Therefore, techno-utopians often have ahostility toward government regulationand a belief in the superiority of thefree marketsystem. Prominent "oracles"of techno-utopianism includedGeorge GilderandKevin Kelly,an editor ofWiredwho also published several books.^[11]^[12]^[13]

During the late 1990s dot-com boom, when thespeculative bubblegave rise to claims that an era of "permanent prosperity" had arrived, techno-utopianism flourished, typically among the small percentage of the population who were employees of Internetstartupsand/or owned large quantities of high-tech stocks. With the subsequentcrash,many of these dot-com techno-utopians had to rein in some of their beliefs in the face of the clear return of traditional economic reality.^[12]^[13]

According toThe Economist,Wikipedia"has its roots in thetechno-optimismthat characterised the internet at the end of the 20th century. It held that ordinary people could use their computers as tools for liberation, education, and enlightenment. "^[15]

In the late 1990s and especially during the first decade of the 21st century,technorealismandtechno-progressivismare stances that have risen among advocates oftechnological changeas critical alternatives to techno-utopianism.^[16]^{[non-primary source needed]}^[17]^{[self-published source?]}However, technological utopianism persists in the 21st century as a result of new technological developments and their impact on society. For example, severaltechnical journalistsand social commentators, such asMark Pesce,have interpreted theWikiLeaksphenomenon and theUnited States diplomatic cables leakin early December 2010 as a precursor to, or an incentive for, the creation of a techno-utopiantransparent society.^[18]Cyber-utopianism,first coined byEvgeny Morozov,is another manifestation of this, in particular in relation to theInternetandsocial networking.

Nick Bostromcontends that the rise ofmachine superintelligencecarries bothexistential risksand an extreme potential to improve the future, which might be realized quickly in the event of anintelligence explosion.^[19]InDeep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World,he further explored ideal scenarios where human civilization reaches technological maturity and solves its diverse coordination problems. He listed some technologies that are theoretically achievable, such ascognitive enhancement,reversal of aging,self-replicating spacecrafts,arbitrary sensory inputs (taste, sound...), or the precise control of motivation, mood, well-being and personality.^[20]

Principles

Bernard Gendron, a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, defines the four principles of modern technological utopians in the late 20th and early 21st centuries as follows:^[21]

We are presently undergoing a (post-industrial) revolution in technology;
In the post-industrial age,technological growthwill be sustained (at least);
In the post-industrial age, technological growth will lead to theend of economic scarcity;
The elimination of economic scarcity will lead to the elimination of every majorsocial evil.

Rushkoff presents us with multiple claims that surround the basic principles of Technological Utopianism:^[22]

Technology reflects and encourages the best aspects of human nature, fostering "communication, collaboration, sharing, helpfulness, and community".^[23]
Technology improves our interpersonal communication, relationships, and communities. Early Internet users shared their knowledge of the Internet with others around them.
Technology democratizes society. The expansion of access to knowledge and skills led to the connection of people and information. The broadening of freedom of expression created "the online world...in which we are allowed to voice our own opinions".^[24]The reduction of the inequalities of power and wealth meant that everyone has an equal status on the internet and is allowed to do as much as the next person.
Technology inevitably progresses. The interactivity that came from the inventions of the TVremote control,video gamejoystick,computer mouseandcomputer keyboardallowed for much more progress.
Unforeseen impacts of technology are positive. As more people discovered the Internet, they took advantage of being linked to millions of people, and turned the Internet into a social revolution. The government released it to the public, and its "social side effect… [became] its main feature".^[23]
Technology increases efficiency andconsumer choice.The creation of the TV remote, video game joystick, and computer mouse liberated these technologies and allowed users to manipulate and control them, giving them many more choices.
New technology can solve the problems created by old technology. Social networks and blogs were created out of the collapse ofdot.com bubblebusinesses' attempts to run pyramid schemes on users.

Criticisms

Critics claim that techno-utopianism's identification ofsocial progresswithscientific progressis a form ofpositivismandscientism.Critics of modern libertarian techno-utopianism point out that it tends to focus on "government interference" while dismissing the positive effects of theregulationofbusiness.They also point out that it has little to say about theenvironmental impact of technology^[25]and that its ideas have little relevance for much of the rest of the world that are still relatively quite poor (seeglobal digital divide).^[11]^[12]^[13]

In his 2010 studySystem Failure: Oil, Futurity, and the Anticipation of Disaster,Canada Research Chairholderin cultural studiesImre Szemanargues that technological utopianism is one of the social narratives that prevent people from acting on the knowledge they have concerning theeffects of oil on the environment.^[6]

Another concern is the amount of reliance society may place on their technologies in these techno-utopia settings.^[25]For example, In a controversial 2011 article "Techno-Utopians are Mugged by Reality", L. Gordon Crovitz ofThe Wall Street Journalexplored the concept of the violation of free speech by shutting down social media to stop violence. As a result ofa wave of British cities being looted,former British Prime MinisterDavid Cameronargued that the government should have the ability to shut down social media during crime sprees so that the situation could be contained. A poll was conducted to see if Twitter users would prefer to let the service be closed temporarily or keep it open so they could chat about the famous television showThe X-Factor.The end report showed that every respondent opted forThe X-Factordiscussion. Clovitz contends that the negative social effect of technological utopia is that society is so addicted to technology that humanity simply cannot be parted from it even for the greater good. While many techno-utopians would like to believe that digital technology is for the greater good, he says it can also be used negatively to bring harm to the public.^[26]These two criticisms are sometimes referred to as a technological anti-utopian view or a techno-dystopia.

According to Ronald Adler and Russell Proctor, mediated communication such as phone calls, instant messaging and text messaging are steps towards a utopian world in which one can easily contact another regardless of time or location. However, mediated communication removes many aspects that are helpful in transferring messages. As it stands as of 2022^[update],most text, email, and instant messages offer fewer nonverbal cues about the speaker's feelings than do face-to-face encounters.^[27]This makes it so that mediated communication can easily be misconstrued and the intended message is not properly conveyed. With the absence of tone, body language, and environmental context, the chance of a misunderstanding is much higher, rendering the communication ineffective. In fact, mediated technology can be seen from a dystopian view because it can be detrimental to effective interpersonal communication. These criticisms would only apply to messages that are prone to misinterpretation as not every text based communication requires contextual cues. The limitations of lacking tone and body language in text-based communication could potentially be mitigated byvideoandaugmented realityversions of digital communication technologies.^[28]^{[dubious–discuss]}^{[dead link‍]}

In 2019, philosopherNick Bostromintroduced the notion of avulnerable world,"one in which there is some level of technological development at which civilization almost certainly gets devastated by default", citing the risks of apandemiccaused by aDIY biohacker,or anarms racetriggered by the development of novel armaments.^[29]He writes that "Technology policy should not unquestioningly assume that all technological progress is beneficial, or that complete scientific openness is always best, or that the world has the capacity to manage any potential downside of a technology after it is invented."^[29]

References

^Natale, Simone; Balbi, Gabriele (2014-04-03)."Media and the Imaginary in History".Media History.20(2):203–218.doi:10.1080/13688804.2014.898904.hdl:2318/1769720.ISSN 1368-8804.S2CID 55924672.
^Segal, Howard P.Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology and The American Future, "The Technological Utopians", Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.
^Rushkoff, Douglas. EME: Explorations in Media Ecology, "Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative". Hampton Press, 2002, p. 41-57.
^Hughes, James(2003)."Rediscovering Utopia".Counterfutures.Archived fromthe originalon 2007-09-27.Retrieved2007-02-07.
^Chowdhury, Hasan."Get the lowdown on 'e/acc' – Silicon Valley's favorite obscure theory about progress at all costs, which has been embraced by Marc Andreessen".Business Insider.Retrieved2023-11-20.
^^a ^b"People Generally Do Not Act on Information on the Effects of Oil on the Environment".ScienceDaily.May 28, 2010.Retrieved17 Nov2010.
^^a ^b ^cHughes, James(2004).Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future.Westview Press.ISBN 978-0-8133-4198-9.
^Haller, MarkEugenics: Hereditarian attitudes in American thought(New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1963)
^Adorno, Theodor W. (29 March 1983).Prisms.MIT Press. p.34.ISBN 978-0-262-51025-7.Retrieved31 March2011.
^Rule, Sheila (1989-06-14)."Reagan Gets A Red Carpet From British (Published 1989)".The New York Times.Retrieved2023-08-12.
^^a ^b ^c ^dBorsook, Paulina(1996)."Cyberselfishness".Mother Jones.Archived fromthe originalon 2007-09-29.Retrieved2007-02-06.
^^a ^b ^c ^d ^eBorsook, Paulina (2000).Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech.PublicAffairs.ISBN 978-1-891620-78-2.
^^a ^b ^c ^d ^eBarbrook, Richard; Cameron, Andy (2000)."The Californian Ideology".Science as Culture.Retrieved2007-02-06.
^Natale, Simone; Ballatore, Andrea (2014-01-01)."The web will kill them all: new media, digital utopia, and political struggle in the Italian 5-Star Movement"(PDF).Media, Culture & Society.36(1):105–121.doi:10.1177/0163443713511902.ISSN 0163-4437.S2CID 73517559.
^"Wikipedia is 20, and its reputation has never been higher".The Economist.9 January 2021.ISSN 0013-0613.Archivedfrom the original on 31 December 2022.Retrieved29 August2022.
^"TECHNOREALISM".technorealism.org.
^Carrico, Dale(2005)."Technoprogressivism Beyond Technophilia and Technophobia".Retrieved2007-01-28.
^Mark Pesce (December 13, 2010)."The state, the press and a hyperdemocracy".Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
^"Nick Bostrom on the birth of superintelligence".Big Think.Retrieved2024-04-07.
^Bostrom, Nick (March 27, 2024).Deep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World.ISBN 978-1646871643.
^Gendron, Bernard (1977).Technology and the Human Condition.St.Martin's Press.ISBN 978-0-312-78890-2.
^Rushkoff, Douglas (2002). "Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative".Explorations in Media Ecology.1(1):21–32.doi:10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1.
^^a ^bRushkoff, Douglas (2002). "Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative".Explorations in Media Ecology.1(1): 26.doi:10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1.
^Rushkoff, Douglas (2002). "Renaissance Now! Media Ecology and the New Global Narrative".Explorations in Media Ecology.1(1): 24.doi:10.1386/eme.1.1.41_1.
^^a ^bHuesemann, Michael H., and Joyce A. Huesemann (2011).Technofix: Why Technology Won’t Save Us or the Environment,New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada,ISBN 0865717044,464 pp.
^Crovitz, L. Gordon (August 15, 2011)."Techno-Utopians Are Mugged by Reality".The Wall Street Journal.
^Adler & Proctor II, Ronald B. & Russell F. (2011).Looking Out Looking In.Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 203.ISBN 978-0-495-79621-3.
^"tcworld.info – technical communication".tcworld.info.
^^a ^bBostrom, Nick (2019-09-06)."The Vulnerable World Hypothesis".Global Policy.10(4):455–476.doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12718.ISSN 1758-5880.S2CID 203169705.