Ernest Dempsey on what sci fi stories say about the stories controlling our lives.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/109/Th ... _Societies
The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
-
Philosophy Now
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
I feel the author has not made a good point. It's a bit like an article in the last issue about language being of world-disclosure status. He is saying something similar, like sci-fi is of world-disclosure status. However, it's more like language and sci-fi are tools, mostly helping to facilitate our world but not disclosing the true nature of it. Language and sci-fi address more the bubbles people live in, not the outside world that surrounds them.
The one thing I understand, like he is telling us, is that those with the advanced technology are the ones who are writing the dominant narrative, the narrative most humans live in/with. That makes sense.
But it is also more than the technological advance societies that are writing the going narrative. It is also the open societies we live in who are writing the narrative, the one most people find fair and just, the one in which we are free to criticize and exchange ideas. Our author, though, focuses on the narrative that exists in two sci-fi, closed societies.
The Soviet Union had advanced technology but only managed to write the narrative for a short period. Its narrative, in the end, failed because it could not maintain or sustain the advancement in technology. It and communism ultimately collapsed because it didn't follow the chief narrative of our times, written by people everywhere, that for societies to be able to continue and survive they must remain open and fluid so that the ideas that maintain and sustain us are free to emerge from individuals without the hinderance of the state or some authoritarian entity.
The sci-fi narratives our author focuses on are incapable and disinterested in seeking solutions to human problems. They only seem to compound them, which isn't the true nature of human existence
The one thing I understand, like he is telling us, is that those with the advanced technology are the ones who are writing the dominant narrative, the narrative most humans live in/with. That makes sense.
But it is also more than the technological advance societies that are writing the going narrative. It is also the open societies we live in who are writing the narrative, the one most people find fair and just, the one in which we are free to criticize and exchange ideas. Our author, though, focuses on the narrative that exists in two sci-fi, closed societies.
The Soviet Union had advanced technology but only managed to write the narrative for a short period. Its narrative, in the end, failed because it could not maintain or sustain the advancement in technology. It and communism ultimately collapsed because it didn't follow the chief narrative of our times, written by people everywhere, that for societies to be able to continue and survive they must remain open and fluid so that the ideas that maintain and sustain us are free to emerge from individuals without the hinderance of the state or some authoritarian entity.
The sci-fi narratives our author focuses on are incapable and disinterested in seeking solutions to human problems. They only seem to compound them, which isn't the true nature of human existence
-
Hobbes' Choice
- Posts: 8360
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
I hope you are not expecting an intelligent response from PhilX.spike wrote:I feel the author has not made a good point. It's a bit like an article in the last issue about language being of world-disclosure status. He is saying something similar, like sci-fi is of world-disclosure status. However, it's more like language and sci-fi are tools, mostly helping to facilitate our world but not disclosing the true nature of it. Language and sci-fi address more the bubbles people live in, not the outside world that surrounds them.
The one thing I understand, like he is telling us, is that those with the advanced technology are the ones who are writing the dominant narrative, the narrative most humans live in/with. That makes sense.
But it is also more than the technological advance societies that are writing the going narrative. It is also the open societies we live in who are writing the narrative, the one most people find fair and just, the one in which we are free to criticize and exchange ideas. Our author, though, focuses on the narrative that exists in two sci-fi, closed societies.
The Soviet Union had advanced technology but only managed to write the narrative for a short period. Its narrative, in the end, failed because it could not maintain or sustain the advancement in technology. It and communism ultimately collapsed because it didn't follow the chief narrative of our times, written by people everywhere, that for societies to be able to continue and survive they must remain open and fluid so that the ideas that maintain and sustain us are free to emerge from individuals without the hinderance of the state or some authoritarian entity.
The sci-fi narratives our author focuses on are incapable and disinterested in seeking solutions to human problems. They only seem to compound them, which isn't the true nature of human existence
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
Ernest Dempsey, the author of the above article, suggests that the dominant narrative is on the road to decline and tragedy. He quotes two sci-fi stories to support his claim.
The dominant narrative, which is about open societies and it achievements, was seriously attacked on 9/11 of 2001. Some thought that narrative would end because of that terrorist attack. But it didn't because the attack wasn't spearheaded by an advanced technology but by an inferior narrative.
An irony of that attack was that those who perpetrated it used the dominant narrative's own advanced technology against it. In the end, though, that terrorist attack only strengthened the resolve of the dominant narrative. The attack sparked a renewal, which moved the dominant narrative to further improve its technology. In contrast, the attackers and their culture have only gone backwards by offering no alternatives, while still relying on the dominant narrative's technology to survive.
The dominant narrative, which is about open societies and it achievements, was seriously attacked on 9/11 of 2001. Some thought that narrative would end because of that terrorist attack. But it didn't because the attack wasn't spearheaded by an advanced technology but by an inferior narrative.
An irony of that attack was that those who perpetrated it used the dominant narrative's own advanced technology against it. In the end, though, that terrorist attack only strengthened the resolve of the dominant narrative. The attack sparked a renewal, which moved the dominant narrative to further improve its technology. In contrast, the attackers and their culture have only gone backwards by offering no alternatives, while still relying on the dominant narrative's technology to survive.
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
Ernest Dempsey writes about what sci fi stories say about the stories controlling our lives.
I really find that objectionable, that there are people who think their lives are controlled by stories that somebody else wrote. But then, whatever - whatever gets one through the day and helps explain ones tiny life.
It would make me feel better if Dempsey was mocking people who believe such things rather than indulge them.
I really find that objectionable, that there are people who think their lives are controlled by stories that somebody else wrote. But then, whatever - whatever gets one through the day and helps explain ones tiny life.
It would make me feel better if Dempsey was mocking people who believe such things rather than indulge them.
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
Speaking of Hegel, he uncovered the dominant narrative of the future - CHANGE. And if any governance tries to resist or block it, like communism and the old Soviet order did, they are doomed to fail. And the lack of meaningful change in governance and everything else is what has caused the turmoil in the Middle East, where the future narrative just stinks.
The imperative and circumstances of change is the most influential element in the narrative of the future, technological, social and economic change (not the change in your pocket, for those who are slow).
The imperative and circumstances of change is the most influential element in the narrative of the future, technological, social and economic change (not the change in your pocket, for those who are slow).
Re: The Dominant Narratives of Future Societies
This essay tries to explain to us that those with the technology power write the narratives of history and it could end badly. And it almost has on many occasions. But we have always managed to pull back from the brink.
Who is holding the technological power today that writes the narrative? It is hard to tell. In most cases the technological power is evenly distributed throughout the world. For instance, there are at least nine nuclear powers in the world.
Who is holding the technological power today that writes the narrative? It is hard to tell. In most cases the technological power is evenly distributed throughout the world. For instance, there are at least nine nuclear powers in the world.