| I agree with your contention that the examples of modern annoyances chosen by the author are not hidden pinnacles of humanness to be preserved at all costs. However, I think the author's deeper point still stands, despite his poor support for the argument. Can we not agree that the _je ne sais quoi_ of humanness is threatened, on some level, by modernity? It is a very difficult empirical case to make, as you have made clear with your totally acceptable critique of _Bowling Alone_. But, in my view, supporting the claim that our "humanness" is under assault is not really where we should be focusing our energies here... It is much more interesting to discuss how we can preserve the "old good" things from our past, while somehow enabling ourselves to take advantage of the "new good" things unlocked by technological progress without being undone in the process. I'm tired of all these jeremiads bewailing the loss of all that we hold dear, ripped from our grasp by inhuman techno-corporate-behemoths. Not sure what the roadmap for a more productive discussion is--but perhaps first we must define exactly what it is we valued from our pre-industrial, supposedly unsullied past. I agree with you that we must be very critical any rose-tinted "back in my day it was better" line of inquiry, but I do believe that there are things worth preserving.
Another important question to answer is, why are those things valuable to us? Is it because they titillate our neurons in just the right way? Or is there something more there? Then we need to figure out how to implement our technological progress in a way that fosters these values, rather than undermining them. PS: above-mentioned link to Ladd's critique of _Bowling Alone_: https://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0301/p9s1.html |
The article discusses the fact that there are things beyond happiness that are important to humanity/humans. The author mentions self-determinism ("...a dystopian nightmare wherein humans are reduced to automatons") as well as seredipity and randomness ("...value of searching, browsing, being bored, being lost, failing, missing out, daydreaming, being surprised, going off script...")
My own opinion is that a liberal mindset of the form Wallace discusses in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Water is important.
If we leave human rights in-tact and preserve the 40 hour work week (or less), there's no shortage of personal freedom, serendipity, randomness, and wonder to be found in this world. But if these things do not happen naturally, then we'll need to teach them.