- Some people love tearing things apart.
- Others like putting things together.
- And still others like to take things apart and put them together in new arrangements for new uses.
I enjoy number three. If there really is nothing new under the sun, then creativity lies in redoing what others did. In fact, that’s the way that societies develop. We take a little from historical models, and we rearrange to suit our needs and ideals. And if we don’t take from historical models, we merely stumble into repetitions of societies long gone and forgotten. There are only so many ways people can build societies. Only so many ways people can interact.
But there are dangers associated with all three, even and especially with my favorite, number 3.
Tech
You might disagree here: The only difference between societies past and societies present is the level of technology. Yes, older societies had technologies that served them well, but not such advanced tech as that used by today’s engineers and scientists. Modern tech is a heretofore unavailable social influence on human life.
But there’s a fly in the modern soup. We’ve come to rely on technologies as mechanisms for running societies; yet, those who analyze, synthesize, and modify those technologies don’t always act with pure altruism in their hearts.
Are We Just Too Numerous?
Social constructs require some kind of control: Ultimately self-control, but falling short of that, imposed control both spoken and unspoken. Laws exemplify the former. Culture exemplifies the latter. The “state” exerts the pressure of obedience to Law. Tradition and contemporary culture exert the pressure of obedience to propriety. With almost eight billion people, the collective societies today find the exertion of both types of pressure necessary for avoiding chaos. Deep down, most people want order because it assures security. But deep down, most people want freedom, also, so there’s a pushback from both groups and individuals who are motivated by either altruism or evil.
That among eight billion people there are those with evil intent seems undeniable. Crime, abuse, murder, war all attest to an ever-present and ubiquitous tendency of some toward evil. And that evil is enhanced by technology that enables a person or group of persons to inflict evil directly or indirectly, either by overt attack or by subterfuge. Thus, the only protection we have against technology-assisted evil is technology-assisted protection under watchful eyes of the vigilant and informed.
Are there more evil people today than there were in ages past? Probably. And that’s the product of absolute numbers. But is the percentage of evil people greater? Maybe not. It’s impossible to prove the percentage has increased because we have no numbers on past percentages. We just know by axiomatic thinking that every society has its share of evildoers, and the larger the societies, the more numerous the evildoers. (Had any intrusions by hackers recently? Any scammers call to warn you about some Amazon order you can’t remember? Any theft in your checked in baggage at the airport, where a Biden transvestite appointee searches for luggage with new women’s fashions?)
Tech Protection
The number of dangers might be increasing because of technology. Humans have always succumbed to threats both seen and unseen, and in attempting to protect themselves from such dangers they have employed various technologies. Think garlic.
Yes, garlic. During the Black Plague of the fourteenth century, garlic necklaces were the tech of choice. Obviously, we’ve upped our level of technological sophistication: Antibiotics and antivirals are our tech of choice unless we are Jehovah witnesses, Amish, or some other group that shuns medical tech on religious grounds.
Three sketchy anecdotes as examples of a danger unknown in previous societies: Recently, A Fairfax Country, Virginia man was arrested for shining a laser pointer at a police helicopter; a Brevard County, Florida man was arrested for shining a laser at a police helicopter; and, though this next example resulted in no complaint or arrest, as I walked with my wife to a restaurant one night, a member of a group also walking toward the restaurant shined a red laser toward me for a second. I brushed off the brief but potential threat by assuming the bearer was either ignorant of the potential consequences or acting without malice. But here’s the point. Although I do not know the intention of the person who from the distance in the dark directed the laser pointer in my vicinity, I do know that the two men recently arrested did have malicious intent. And the tech was so simple to use and so fast to apply that the pilots of those helicopters were lucky to survive the laser attacks.
So, do we all wear mirrored glasses to reflect most of the lasers that evildoers might flash at our faces? But then there are those military lasers, powerful and still in the hands of armies and navies both belligerent and friendly. All military weapons are subject to adaptation by evildoers. Dangerous lasers, which are unseen and unheard in application, are coming to an evildoer near you. Sorry to say, but that’s probably true.
And what of the tech used to convert an already deadly virus into an even more deadly virus, aka SARS-CoV-2, the virus of the recent pandemic? Tech supposedly gave us a protective antiviral vaccine, but it was a catchup process. The disease took many lives before any technical response quashed its spread (assuming, of course, that the virus did not weaken as many viruses do).
No Controls Are Guarantees
In all those historical societies, controls were either low tech or human intervention. But in twenty-first century societies, tech adopted for dangers can inflict harm before any counter-tech can be devised for protection. And the reason is that with so many people acting in so many places with so many new variations of established technologies, those devoted to protecting the society and the individuals within society can’t respond immediately to new forms of attack.
And What of Those Opening Numbered Statements?
1) Some People Like Tearing Things Apart
Fortunately, some people in the medical profession know how to take things apart. DNA analysis of SARS-CoV-2 is an example. Unfortunately, some people in the military know how to take things apart, so any captured weapon technology is subject to analysis.
2) Some People Like Putting Things Together
Seems to be the case that the Iranians reverse engineered a downed US drone. Seems to be the case that the Chinese researchers in the Wuhan lab synthesized a new form of SARS-CoV-2. Seems to be the case that weapons of mass destruction can be synthesized by unknown actors.
3) Some People Like Taking Things Apart and Putting Them Together in New Arrangements.
And this is where unexpected dangers lie. Somewhere out there in the mass of almost eight billion people there is a tech-savvy evildoer who with state sponsorship, private sponsorship, or no outside sponsorship, is currently at work on a new version of an older technology. We won’t know until it is unleashed on the world.
Scary, but All the More Reason to Heed the Principal Tenet of This Website
This is not your practice life. You live in the midst of risk and danger both natural and artificial. And the very societies that encompass us can exacerbate the risks and dangers because people like to analyze, synthesize, and modify through technologies. The safety in numbers societies profess to offer isn’t a guarantee since those same societies contain individuals and groups that seek to bypass or overturn the controls that people rely on for safety.
RSS Feed