Thank you for your thoughtful and considered response. Obviously, I resonate with everything you say. As a man, a human being, and someone deeply concerned about our potentials and the real world, I tend to come down on the side of possibility, of potential. Crises transform human beings, and sometimes things have to become really dire before we rise a rung on the developmental ladder.
I believe that technologies are not inherently bad, any more than language is. But they are both more dangerous than we imagine, because they are not precisely made or used by human beings. What is making and using them then? Well, that’s a long story. Let’s simply say that when one mixes certain ideas and habits with … groups of humans who become involved with them, the product can be terrifying. Take science, for example. In essence? Stainless. But in our actual cultures, scientific ‘advances’ become technologies of war or domination, and thus profit. Science will not have been useful if our cultures use its results to wipe each other… or the planet out. So the question isn’t really are science or language or technology (or money) evil or deadly, they aren’t. They are neutral. The question is can we become relationally, ecologically and cognitively intelligent enough to survive our own inventiveness?
I believe it’s possible, but we have to actually focus upon and attend this goal together, and it may begin with understanding the hidden threats and dangers that our business has kept us too involved to attend, or see alternatives to.
And this we must do together, with and for each other and our world.
