“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...
The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”
-- The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Random House, 1996
Reposted from last year because it's so damn accurate and needs to be read more widely.
if he said that 18 years ago he would've been dismissed as a hater
ReplyDeleteI posted this on Facebook some time ago, and a number of my "friends" were quick to attack me for "using college language just to confuse everyone". And, yes, they were poorly educated folks, mostly my small town Hoosier family members, who are now staunchly MAGA. I recently convinced my very highly educated, erudite, retired attorney step sister to watch Idiocracy, and she repeatedly paused it, turned to me with her mouth agape and just shook her head. Le sigh.
ReplyDeleteThis quote pops-up from time to time. And it's worth reading every time. Few are in love with Ted Kaczynski's methods, but his message was not that far from Sagan's. And there are plenty of more peaceful souls that have tried to put humanity on a different, less materially addicted path; that which closely parallels this dumbing down: Thoreau, Tolstoy, Gandhi and E.F. Schumacher come to mind. Oh, and around Christmas, it might be worth thinking about the radically anti-material message in the four Gospels.
ReplyDeleteIn China there is a version of TikTok which is full of informational and uplifting videos. There's an argument that Western TikTok is expressly there to squander people's time - something for which I can offer no proof, so little more than another conspiracy theory.
ReplyDeleteLast year King Charles appointed a homeopath to the Royal Household.
Dragon's Den, the UK version of Shark Tank (Dragon's Den came first, but wasn't the first as they and many others are based on a Japanese show. I digress) has gotten into trouble several times for backing health and medical products with no scientific basis. Never mind all the other shows about psychic powers and strange phenomena.
So that's the Royal Family and the BBC both muddying the water for science and facts. You don't get much more authoritative than that in the UK.
We're heading towards that Morlock future faster than I'd like.
The Royal Family fully supports the bleeding edge of genetic science. And yes, that was an inbreeding/hemophilia joke.
DeleteI believe for Shark Tank, in addition to being entertainment, the goal was to pick presenters that had a plan to be profitable. There was no goal of improving the world or benefiting anyone but the investors. I don't think it was anything but business 101. The contestant with the best "76 trombones" wins.
DeletexoxoxoBruce
Yes, it feels like we're in a cultural decline: no decent music or movies in years, no good literature. Back to the dark ages then.
ReplyDeleteI have been rewatching the first season of Severance prior to the second season premiering shortly. IMHO, Severance is an absolutely brilliant piece of work, overflowing with style and social relevance.
DeleteLate to comment, but I recently found this and have been sharing it. Heinlein is a product of his time, a bit dated now, but his imagination and insights are still amazing 70 years later. David Brin explains:
ReplyDeletehttps://david-brin.medium.com/heinleins-future-history-coming-true-before-our-eyes-10356a95556a
I had not seen that before. Thank you for the link, which is quite blogworthy. :-)
DeleteAnd our library not surprisingly has a copy, which is now on hold for me. Thanx again.
DeleteEnjoy! I grew up reading Heinlein; every word I could find.
DeleteIf you get a chance, look up 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress". I thought his form of 'Libertarianism" was what the word meant, only realizing in the last couple decades that those who call themselves "Libertarians" these days have very little in common with Heinlein. Also, ignore the existence of the movie and try his "Starship Troopers" (admittedly a very cringy title by modern standards, further ruined by the "Robocop" movie treatment). Is war ever 'moral'? Troopers was his was his answer, but it got him branded as a fascist for those who didn't pay attention.
Similarly, as for religion, try "Stranger In a Strange Land", but try to savor the message amid all the shenanigans.
For his best work outside of the above, look for
(appetizer) "Methuselah's Children",
(main course) "Time Enough for Love", and
(long, sometimes rambling dessert) "To Sail Beyond the Sunset"
for his main/best character (wishfully autobiographical?)
As he became more famous, and after he had a stroke, his editors let him wander a bit too much near the end, but from his short stories and novellas starting in the late 30s, through his "juveniles" in the 50s (that inspired half of NASA's space race scientists and engineers), through his social commentary adult novels through the 60s and 70s, (and even into the 80s although they were more miss than hit after his stroke,) he was always thoughtfully and sometimes provokingly entertaining.
Sorry to evangelize, but he was formative for me while growing up in the 70s :-)
Admittedly, I knew of Heinlein only tangentially. This exchange led me to visit the Heinlein Wikipedia page. My impression: a morally unhinged genius.
DeleteStranger In A Strange Land had a couple hundred pages cut from it before the publisher would release it. You can now find the unabridged version if you poke around. It turns out that almost all of the removed material was libertarian lecturing on Heinlein's part. That said, I think the character I would most like to be in all of literature is Jubal Harshaw.
DeleteAnd by the way, if you have never read the final chapter of A Clockwork Orange (the book was published in the US without it), you might want to find and read that. It changes the entire slant of the novel.
Here's a sobering video on our decline...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuY484ynNxY
xoxoxoBruce
I was thinking last night how the media claims it is just "reflecting" society, not leading society. I am not convinced, but I will give them that point. However, what the media cannot deny is that the tend to NORMALIZE behaviors that may, in society, be quite rare, etc.
ReplyDeleteConsider how America is overwhelmingly "Christian" (if not in terms of religion, then certainly in terms of our culture). Then notice how many weddings on TV are Jewish weddings (when our Jewish brothers and sisters make up around 1% of the population).
Gays make up around 5% of the population. But an alien who was reviewing our media would be likely to assume that gays make up 30% of the population.
In other words, the media over-represents certain elements, thus normalizing them. That in itself is not wrong. But when something that is morally questionable (e.g., homosexuality, living together out of wedlock, the strong cursing on hit shows like Yellowstone, etc.) is made to appear fine and dandy, there is an agenda afoot.
You asking an important question: Why do certain identity groups get a disproportionate share of attention/media coverage of all kinds? Why are the grievances/suffering of certain groups presented in ways that might exaggerate severity, relative to other groups? If someone or some other species or some ecosystem is suffering unnecessarily (experiencing injustice/oppression/degradation), this ought to call forth a moral response and the relative importance of that response can only be known in the context of some thrust toward understanding the true weight of the suffering. That's the moral realm. But we mostly don't live there. For purposes of this discussion, we mostly live in the political realm. And in the political realm, it's about political power. In this sense, it's about who has the power to make the loudest noise and how they get that power; a complicated, cultural, "values" question. But at the end of the day, it's still about power. IMO, Americans are increasingly less able to think in moral terms, while political forces continue to fill the resulting moral vacuum. This is a serious problem, but not taken seriously...as far as I can tell.
DeleteIt is very telling that you consider homosexuality, living together out of wedlock, and cursing to be "morally questionable". What it specifically tells is of an extremely narrow-minded, anti-freedom, puritanical (pardon the redundancy) weltanschauung devoid of logic and reason.
DeleteI think Arron's central point is that our values are being manipulated. I think you might agree that it isn't by way of "logic and reason." Rather, popular culture entertainment creators are exploiting an epidemic-scale lack of critical thinking. In this cultural mix we have the notion that traditional Christian values can be met with insults (such as "narrow-minded"), nothing more required. That's "telling" too.
DeleteBut when something that is morally questionable (e.g., homosexuality, living together out of wedlock, the strong cursing on hit shows like Yellowstone, etc.) is made to appear fine and dandy, there is an agenda afoot.
DeleteOr perhaps other people have other moral judgements than you.
Christian values can be met with insults (such as "narrow-minded")
Many Christian values are narrow-minded. Text-book definition: not willing to listen to or tolerate other people's views; prejudiced. This is evidenced by the aggressive nature by which (some) Christians are successfully imposing their views on others [Ref: End of Roe-v-Wade].
And this applies as well to other religions that try to impose their will onto unwilling others.
Most Americans are playing defense these days.
Against whom? Who is this powerful minority oppressing most Americans?
Isn't the absolute belief that abortion is not murder just as dogmatic as the absolute belief that it is? So, who is narrow minded? I happen to believe that abortion should not be criminalized, but if I believed it was murder, I'd believe it should be criminalized. Regardless of my position, I don't look down on people who oppose abortion, calling them "narrow minded." Their minds are open to a whole set of arguments with which I happen to disagree, but my objections cannot be said to be found in the absolute truth on the matter. Worst of all (maybe) is the left's penchant for making ridiculous arguments that could only be made in bad faith, such as the argument that those opposing abortion do so in order to hurt women, oppress women, etc. The cost of this kind of dishonesty is high, given the way "women of faith" perceive the attack. Many of these same women might be interested in an economic justice position of the sort the left has traditionally promoted, but it's way out of reach given these same women are locked into the role of evil misogynist; therefore canceled in terms of ever holding hands with anyone on the left. Could there be a pro-life socialist? Why not?
DeleteIt's easier to think in the moral realm when the political realm isn't threatening to make you unemployed and homeless. Most Americans are playing defense these days.
ReplyDeletexoxoxoBruce
I don't see any correlational between financial security and moral insight. Not in the population I observe. Probably the opposite.
DeleteI did not insult "traditional Christian values", I described them. "Traditional Christian values" were not born of logic, reason and critical thinking, but rather the fear-unifying superstitions of bronze-age desert-dwelling goat-herders. IOW, they come from a place which is the exact opposite of logic, reason, and critical thinking. They have persisted through violence, cultural inertia, and "boogeymen du jour". The bigotry and oppressive social conventions they champion have no place in the modern world.
ReplyDeleteI tend to think of describing someone or their beliefs as "extremely narrow-minded" as insulting. I doubt I'm alone in that. But, now you double-down with a description of the entire Judeo-Christian ethos/canon as bronze -age superstition. I realize this sort of thinking is de rigueur on many a college campus, etc. But I'm afraid it exposes the kind of bigotry that a college education ought to challenge rather than further entrench. Of course, when Milton is shoved aside in favor of Toni Morrison, we can anticipate the result. Right wing "intellectuals" (such as Jordan Peterson) are now having a field day with this pedagogical failure. And gaining ground in popular culture every single day. And the left has no idea why this is happening. It's quite sad.
DeleteWhether or not you are alone in that is irrelevant. Veracity is not determined by popularity. And absent objectively verifiable evidence of the Abrahamic god, "the entire Judeo-Christian ethos/canon" *is* superstition, as is the belief in any supernatural critter or chain of causality. The universe is demonstrably naturalistic, and subsequently, secular humanism is the only rational system of morality and ethics.
DeleteAnd to be frank, Jordan Peterson is as much an intellectual as he is a 16-star Michelin chef.
It's pretty obvious that the content of any religious doctrine reflects the values and the superstitions of the age in which they were created, though it is worth noting that they are mostly edited from materials that were passed down from their ancestors.
DeleteWith that in mind, a quick catalog of what the creators of the Old Testament felt was reasonable is worse than any TV show of today: genocide, slavery, turning your daughters over to a crowd of strangers for sex, sacrificing your sons based on a dream... these are only a few of the outrageous things that were condoned, encouraged and rewarded. Similar atrocities can be found in most seminal religious texts.
Joe, it's easy to cherry-pick stuff from religious texts and go on the attack. And it's not entirely unjustified, the ease aside. But, what kind of belief system (assuming we've shaken off much of this "superstition") has led to what we see today: ten or twelve thousand nuclear warheads locked and loaded and at the ready for the incineration of the world, endless war, a billion+ humans in life threatening poverty, a biosphere careening toward collapse, billions of animals suffering in CAFOs--and for good measure, from the conservative Christian point of view, millions of pre-born humans terminated every year. Add all this up and we might wonder about the belief systems of our own time.
DeleteCrowboy, you seem to have got the wrong impression from my comment. I was not going on the attack, simply stating the facts. My point was that of course our current values and superstitions dictate our current ethics, many of which (including the ones you mentioned) will be seen as hideously barbaric by people in the future - assuming that there are any people in the future, which is by no means assured.
Delete