The reasons for 21st century Luddites' resistance to new technology are rooted in the fear of job loss and economic disruption, as seen in historical examples of Luddites who opposed technological progress due to the threat it posed to their jobs.

Andrew Luck prefers flip phones over smartphones, implying he may be opposed to the complexity or distractions of smartphones.

Resistance to new technologies can be attributed to concerns about job security, lack of understanding about the benefits of new technologies, and inertia in adapting to change, as seen in the historical context of the Luddite movement.

Luddites oppose new technology due to fears of job loss and disruption to traditional ways of working, as seen in historical examples such as the British textile industry in the 19th century.

The fear of job loss is a common reason for opposing new technology, as seen in the historical example of the Luddites in the British textile industry.

The Luddite revolt was a response to the loss of jobs due to technological innovation in the British textile industry, and this historical context can help explain why some individuals in the 21st century might be opposed to new technologies.

21st century Luddites may fear a society where technology has too much control over individuals and their lives, leading to a loss of autonomy and potential negative consequences.

The metaverse is an example of a new technology that may be opposed, as it has brought about significant changes in people's lives and is developing rapidly, potentially beyond the control of individuals or organizations.

"Famous figures like Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, and Bill Gates have been labeled as Luddites for warning about the dangers of artificial intelligence, indicating that concerns about AI's impact on society and human well-being are a key reason for resistance to new technologies in the 21st century."

The reasons for 21st century Luddites' resistance to new technology are rooted in the fear of job loss and economic disruption, as seen in historical examples of Luddites who opposed technological progress due to the threat it posed to their jobs.

Title:

Content: Does AI make the arts poorer?
The real difference between the rich and the poor is the human mind.
▲ Since we have AI tools, we can do things quickly and well with a simple prompt, and the cost is low. (Illustration / Reuters)
2nd / Podcaster
I had a friend who had been unemployed for a while and asked me if I had a job for him to do, such as simple things like keeping an account and sorting out documents.
I said, if you asked me two years earlier, there must be, but unfortunately not now.
In the past, those chores took time, since the AI tool, as long as the simple prompt can be completed, the monthly fee is only a few hundred yuan, two or three hundred hourly wage students may not do so well.
He listened to me, didn ’ t believe it, and was curious to ask me how I use AI now.
In fact, the application is too broad and too complicated. To make him understand it as soon as possible, I cite my entire workflow as an example.
For example, when writing an article, in the stage of collecting materials, AI helps me to make notes of books / meetings / lectures / courses with speech, and the content is accurate and the grammar is strict. It can also be converted into various forms of charts, different lengths and various articles.
At the writing stage, I will discuss with AI what different topics can be cut into perspective, such as this article I want to know how AI is changing our society, ask it to help me summarize the main views on the Internet, and I will continue to ask for some details, and also ask it to grab the latest data for me.
Next, before po comes to the community, ask it to help me modify the typos and punctuation, the correction only takes a few seconds, and the text creation is basically completed.
I asked my friend, do you think you can do better, faster and cheaper than AI?
▲ AI can help users to take notes with voice, and the content of speech to text is accurate and the grammar is strict. It can also be converted into various forms of charts, different lengths and various articles.
(Chart / CFP)
Next, the image creation.
Now many devices, including WebCam and Monocular, the camera can lock the portrait to move in small amplitude, and even deliberately create a natural hand shake, self-portrait images are becoming more and more dependent on others.
Before the oral video, mainly rely on improvisation or reading, the former plays subtitles until the hand is broken, the latter has to get a reader to adjust the speed, now AI recognition subtitles are very common, the reader also evolved into the script will follow my words run (used readers will know how convenient this is), greatly speeding up the efficiency of recording videos.
It is also a technology derived from AI speech recognition: AI editing. Although it is not completely free from manual work, the editor is now editing by reading the text, without the need to listen with ears, which saves a lot of effort.
Music and images can be generated by AI, saving a lot of time to find materials and reducing the risk of copyright infringement.
As for the job that my friends are looking for, such as document processing and answering e-mail, I just write a SOP file to feed the robot, and it can do it flawlessly, and there is no need to rest for 24 hours.
It doesn ’ t matter if what is said above is not understood, in simple terms, I used to find two or three more people to deal with the process of chores, and it was replaced by AI, and AI did well and fast.
After all, it was all simple work.
▲ Document processing, e-mail and other things, as long as you write a SOP file to feed the robot, it can do flawless, and 24 hours without rest.
(Chart / CFP)
My friend is angry after hearing it.
I said, but I still need someone to help me, because I ’ m saving a lot of time now, have more capacity, and have the opportunity to make more money.
Do you do business sponsorship? Do you write creative scripts that are popular with young people? Do you have experience in IP marketing?
He was frustrated and said that he would not be those, as if he could only be eliminated.
Then he complained to me, saying that Taiwan's industry is serious, only the technology industry can make money, and other people live in deep water.
In fact, every technological innovation is like this, the British textile industry in the 19th century industrialization, a group of textile workers are also very angry at their loss of work, in the factory to destroy the loom.
These people are called Luddites. Now Luddites have become synonymous with opposition to technological progress. Most people also know that Luddites are marginal beings who will eventually die.
But it is obviously not accurate to attribute the fierce competition to the struggle for literature. In the example above, I am also a writer, but my property has leapt with the industrial revolution.
The difference is that I did two things: the first is the investment trend, and the second is that I treat AI as extremely cheap capital and use it to make money.
But I have taken advantage of resources, like I do not mix badly, will mix better, and mixed badly, will only mix worse.
Times change too fast, now this environment can not guarantee that you listen carefully to the classroom to teach those textbooks out of the society to eat, talent needs a flexible brain, as well as a variety of information judgment, to keep up with the pace of faster and faster technological development.
Then it is true that some people can not do, some people from the past to the present, all want to do the simplest job, they either can not find a job, or they have to get a lower salary than the robot.
▲ In the era of rapid technological changes, the advantages of language have been greatly weakened.
(Image from Google Translate)
In fact, education must be reformed as soon as possible, we need new departments, abolish some old departments, and now it seems like the pure language department of the college is really harming students, ensuring that they graduate and lose their jobs. (This sentence is easy to be misunderstood, it seems that I am belittling a particular department, I am not necessary.) And...
In my experience as a minor in Japanese at university, although I can also study culture and history, the advantages of language have been greatly weakened, and the teaching syllabus must be adjusted.)
The gap between the rich and the poor is inevitable, and policies can only try to avoid too many poor people, otherwise there will be social unrest.
Put on the beautiful idea of science fiction, before the civil unrest of mankind, I hope that robots will take care of our food like mothers.
Can you think about it? – I love this post.
Welcome to join the "cloud theory fan group" to see more!
● This article is authorized to be reproduced from the “XIX ” Facebook page.
The above remarks do not represent the position of this website. Welcome to submit "Cloud Theory" to let high-quality good articles be seen by more people, please send to editor88 @ ettoday.net or click here to submit, this website reserves the right to delete the text.
Hot Click 》
► Erotic websites can really be used for united warfare!
You want color, you want health, you don't want to be watched.
► Not "internal waters", not "territorial waters", but "territorial waters".
► Ammunition Preemptive Panic The DPP may be the initiator of the war.
► Can Singapore ’ s 3-Day Weekend Pass Taiwan ’ s Work-Time Revolution?
Share with friends:
Follow us
Back to the top.

Andrew Luck prefers flip phones over smartphones, implying he may be opposed to the complexity or distractions of smartphones.

Title:

Content: Andrew Luck Finally Upgrades His Flip Phone … To Another Flip Phone

Intro: Andrew Luck has made it clear that he’s not interested in joining the world of smartphones. He’s just fine with his flip phone, and he finally got an upgrade this week.

INDIANAPOLIS — Has Andrew Luck finally turned in his ancient flip phone for a smartphone?

No. No he has not.

But, he did get a new flip phone this week.

The Indianapolis Colts quarterback on Thursday shared on his Facebook account that his mobile carrier had hooked him up with a new phone.

In June, Luck became the recipient of the most lucrative contract in NFL history, and many wondered if the fifth-year Stanford product was going to splurge on the newest smartphone for himself.

"One, I like it. It's a comfort thing," Luck said of not giving up the flip phone lifestyle. "I think anybody can appreciate that, if you're used to that. … Two, I don't think I want to be connected 24/7, and this phone is maybe sort of a reminder that you don't have to be connected. And it's nice to get away. It's nice to turn your phone off."

Luck's phone at that time — and his new one, we assume — can send and receive text messages, and for all the newest crazes in apps and technology, he says he has an iPad.

"What else do you need?" Luck asked. "I'm not a Luddite."

Luddite | Ludd·ite | Noun: "One of a group of early 19th century English workmen destroying laborsaving machinery as a protest; broadly :  one who is opposed to especially technological change." Thank you, Merriam Webster.

Nice word choice, Andrew. Looks like his "Andrew Luck Book Club" is paying huge dividends.

While many of us (including the author of this article) remain glued to their smartphones, Luck is obviously content with what's gotten him to this point in life.

Smartphone or flip phone — or rotary phone — he's back on the field and healthy for the Indianapolis Colts, and that's all that should matter to his fans and his organization.

This article has been reproduced in a new format and may be missing content or contain faulty links. Please use the Contact Us link in our site footer to report an issue.

Related Content

2023 Season Tickets On Sale Now!

Secure the best seats, benefits & more for next season! Be there live for exciting matchups against the Pittsburgh Steelers, Tampa Bay Buccaneers and more opponents to be announced soon. Learn more today!

Advertising

Resistance to new technologies can be attributed to concerns about job security, lack of understanding about the benefits of new technologies, and inertia in adapting to change, as seen in the historical context of the Luddite movement.

Title:

Content: You will not miss us!
8,008 followers
Why robots will take your job, and what to do - panic or rejoice
Why robots will take away your profession.
Increasingly, you can hear about the challenges posed by automation and cybernization to existing professions today.
And we are talking not only about unmanned vehicles and chatbots replacing call center operators, but also about programs that can calculate bank loans and insurance rates, depriving analysts and, moreover, neural networks that claim to compete with highly qualified and creative employees.
Exemption from routine or danger of unemployment?
A cause for concern or long-awaited freedom?
History of the problem
Mechanisms of ancient times.
Competition has always existed – professions disappeared and arose, people fought for jobs with each other and with technology, philosophers and economists built forecasts and tried to predict the prospects and are still doing it.
For example, you can assess how much automation threatens your profession and how quickly robots will replace you by using Will Robots Take My Job.
Aristotle was the first to think about the possibility of transferring “work ” to machines.
In the first book of his Politics, he suggested that they could evolve to such an extent that the need for human labor would disappear.
For him, quite in line with the views of work at the time, as something distracting from participation in public life and personal development, this was an extremely optimistic forecast.
“Work ” in ancient Greece was considered to be the lot of the lower classes, and the mechanisms would only liberate slaves, considered nothing but“ machines of flesh and blood. ”
The reorientation of the economy to the export of wool led to the introduction of a policy of “enclosures ”.
The real competition of a sufficiently large mass of people technology for the first time was only more than a millennium and a half later in England.
At first, the reorientation of the economy to wool exports led to the introduction of a policy of “fencing ”, in which landlords expelled farmers from the fields in order to free the territory for sheep grazing, which led to the first massive surge of“ unemployment ” – albeit not in the current sense.
The then arising vagrancy and poverty contemporary of these events, the Chancellor of England and philosopher Thomas More described the famous "sheep ate people."
However, after a few decades it became clear that no – not eaten.
The former peasants were absorbed by the growing cities, where they found a new job in textile manufactures, processing the same wool obtained from shearing sheep.
This was the first example of how, by taking away one thing, “technology ” is able to offer something different.
But we must admit: the process of urbanization was painful, the work that replaced the cultivation of land turned out to be hard and dirty, the gap with the traditional way of life was very traumatic, and the population of England as a result of hunger and the fight against vagrancy, which was conducted, including the use of gallows, decreased, according to some estimates by 30% (to understand the scale - the Soviet Union during the Second World War lost "only" 15% of the population).
Workers in a textile factory, late 18th century.
The next episode of the confrontation between people and technology occurred a century later in the same field of light industry - the invention in 1785 by Edmund Cartwright of a mechanical loom increased labor productivity forty times.
Jobs that had just been lost were once again lost.
But again temporarily – after spinning machines, others appeared and all of them demanded new resources, and their extraction – new types of labor.
Manufactures were replaced by factories, and muscle strength by the power of steam obtained from coal.
Machine Destroyers
The Luddite movement.
This time, the changes that occurred were met with bayonets - there was a movement of Luddites.
Sabotage of work and direct action: attacks on factories and the destruction of machines caused a harsh reaction of the state, which sent troops to suppress the “army of Ned Ludd ”.
It is characteristic that no one at the top bothered to convey to the workers the idea that there will still be work for them, even if not the one to which they had time to get used.
The fact is that the “top ” themselves at that time did not think too much about how all this was arranged, and people were perceived as expendable material, while the inertia of consciousness of ordinary workers who had just recovered from the transition from the agrarian to the urban way of life was also very high.
The First Industrial Revolution at the beginning of the 18th century.
The theoretical basis for the interaction of technological innovations and the masses of labor began to be summed up only by economists and philosophers of the middle of the XIX century.
They were the first to suggest that the disappearance of certain types of work in the process of technological development entails the emergence of new ones, and “work ” as a whole is not something final, which may be“ not enough ”.
The First Industrial Revolution was in full swing and the optimism of its apologists only grew stronger over time.
By the end of the century, it seemed that progress would eliminate not only social problems and contradictions, but could also rid humanity of wars.
However, while some spoke of the "Luddite delusion", others spoke of the "enslavement of the masses" and the need to hand over to the "factory workers", predicting that as long as the instruments of production are in the hands of the big proprietors, their employees will remain disenfranchised, and the lack of social security will cause explosions of unemployment at any moment.
Second wave
The Second Industrial Revolution.
The word “unemployment ” came into being at that time.
The fact is that a peasant working in the fields or a craftsman who provides for the needs of himself and the small surrounding community could not face something like this - he himself formed his employment.
When the scheme of selling labor on a strict schedule became mass within the framework of fulfilling a strictly regulated set of duties, the challenge arose to lose such an opportunity.
The Second Industrial Revolution was on the way.
The basics of streaming production were laid at the end of the 19th century, and by the beginning of the 20th century, the combination of Ford ’ s marketing strategy (he invented that the car was not an attribute of the elites, but a mass need) and the conveyor he introduced led to new changes that went beyond factories and factories.
On January 18, 1886, the first car invented by Karl Benz was released.
It was the emergence of technology on the streets of cities that brought a new wave of competition.
Look at the photos of the streets of the beginning of the last century: here they are dammed with carts, among which a lonely clumsy car is trying to maneuver, but ten years later, the only horse frightened by the roar of engines and sobbing of klaxons is clutching to the sidewalks.
Here it will be important to note how unpredictable this jump became: “At the beginning of the 20th century, the French Academy warned about an environmental disaster, which inevitably should lead to the accumulation of horse manure associated with the development of horse-drawn transport in Paris, ” recalls, reasoning about the prediction of the future Stanislav Lem.
However, note: in those regions where human labor is cheaper, technology can not replace it, as we are shown, for example, rickshaws, until recently used their own muscle power and only with a sharp drop in the cost of small vehicles motorized.
A more modern example is “computer rickshaws ” – hundreds of thousands of low-skilled Chinese, hacked captchas all day, because their work costs less than the introduction of scripts.
Technological unemployment
The line of the American unemployed during the Great Depression.
In the 1930s, Maynard Keynes, who gave the world the theory of the “social state ”, from the attempts of which many economies have not recovered so far, introduced the term“ technological unemployment ” into mass circulation.
Since then, the debate about whether the introduction of new technological solutions and opportunities can create a long-term job crisis or whether everything is limited to repurposing, when obsolete professions are replaced by new ones, and it is enough for people to change or improve their skills.
Until the end of the last decade, most experts were inclined to believe that “technological unemployment ” is always a temporary phenomenon, leading to the renewal and improvement of the professionalism of workers.
Mechanical labor was replaced by physical labor, the operator - a profession more status and highly paid than the worker, the reduction of costs leads to the release of time - these are the main theses sounded then.
Pessimistic views remained largely the domain of marginals, such as Theodore Kaczynski, famous for his terrorist struggle against progress under the name of Unabomber and primitive philosophers.
Pessimism
The first full-fledged computer in the USSR BESM-1.
Cautious voices expressing doubts about the correctness of this approach sounded even then.
And if in one of his speeches in 1962, President Kennedy said that “if people are able to invent new machines that take away their jobs, even more so are able to invent new jobs, ” then two years later, a letter from scientists and activists concerned with the problem of technological unemployment, sent to his successor, Lyndon Johnson, stated that“ a revolution in cybernetics will create a separate nation of poor, unskilled unemployed. ”.
Theorists disputed the impossibility of long-term unemployment, as did Martin Ford in the book “Light in the Tunnel: Automation, Acceleration of Technology and the Economy of the Future ” or Marshall Brains in“ Robotic Nation ”.
Gasne-Peter Martin and Harald Schumann, in their Global Trap, describe a society in which the labor of twenty percent of the population is enough for the world economy to continue to develop.
There are those who see it as a threat and a danger, like Paul Krugmann in his article “Sympathy for the Luddites ” or Frey and Osborne in“ The Future of Work. ”
In addition, in practice, it turned out that technology is not so freeing up time – for example, representatives of professions requiring high qualifications, at least in the United States today work more than 30 years ago, and technologies that provide remote access to working tools allow them not to break away from professional tasks and in their “free time ”.
It is also important that new jobs, as it was noticed at the beginning of the XXI century, are created not so much by technology as by the change in the way of life that they entail.
So in the mid-2010s, nine out of ten working people are employed in professions that did not exist a century earlier, but only 5% of the jobs that appeared from 1993 to 2013 are in high-tech areas, such as IT or telecom.
However, the question is whether this does not mean that indirectly they still arise due to technologies that provide an opportunity for development for the service sector.
Is it bad?
A shot from the film "I, Robot" (2004).
Harvard economics professor Lawrence Summers, who previously served as U.S. Treasury Secretary, said in 2014 that he no longer believes that automation will always create new jobs and that it is not some hypothetical possibility in the future; it is something that is emerging now.
In his opinion, the changes will be very global and will lead to mass unemployment not only among low-skilled employees, but also for “blue ” and“ white ” collar workers, because “there are many reasons to think that the software revolution will be even more significant than the agrarian one. ”
The robot prepares food.
However, this is what allows us to look to the future with optimism.
Summers ’ s thought of the meaning of the digital revolution echoes the position of futurologist Alvin Toffler.
As early as 1970, in his book Future Shock, he wrote that by comparing the Digital Revolution with the Industrial Revolution, we downplay its significance and it would be more correct to draw a parallel with the exit of mankind from caves and the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture and cattle breeding.
Potentially, this means that humanity is on the verge of an unprecedented, unknown written history civilizational leap of colossal proportions.
And, due to the fact that the speed of changes in the world has increased many times and now, the fact that in the case of the end of the Stone Age, took millennia, is being carried out in front of one, a maximum of a couple or three generations, this breakthrough, of course, will be painful.
However, having reviewed the usual way of life, the attitude to it and their values, will not humanity be able to break through to the conditions of life, previously even unimaginable.
"Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991).
We are easily accustomed to such changes in “work ” as freelancing and remote work, quite calmly came to a repeated change of professions, instead of a continuous, decades-long“ career ” and even were able to include them in your life, saying that this is the way to find yourself.
So is it not time to begin to accustom ourselves to the idea that, as economic historian Robert Skidelsky said, “Sooner or later we will run out of work ”?
After all, freelancing and remote employment are about freedom, about leaving the “office slavery ” and searching for the way of life that is convenient for us.
Yes, to get used to the idea that the traditional “work ” is over and now we will have to independently invent what to occupy ourselves will not be easy.
It will require responsibility, but it is freedom.
Isn ’ t it time for us, joyfully exclaiming “Glory to the robots! ”, to go in search of our place in the new world?
Why robots will take away your profession.
The fact that it is not only about robots, but also about the “work ” itself and the possibility of life without it, about the risks associated with negative scenarios of confrontation between people and machines and the possibilities of overcoming them, we will talk in the next parts of the cycle.
source
If you liked this post, please share it with your friends:
And don't forget:
Subscribe to my Instagram
Link to the original source
Picture of the day
top

Luddites oppose new technology due to fears of job loss and disruption to traditional ways of working, as seen in historical examples such as the British textile industry in the 19th century.

The fear of job loss is a common reason for opposing new technology, as seen in the historical example of the Luddites in the British textile industry.

The Luddite revolt was a response to the loss of jobs due to technological innovation in the British textile industry, and this historical context can help explain why some individuals in the 21st century might be opposed to new technologies.

21st century Luddites may fear a society where technology has too much control over individuals and their lives, leading to a loss of autonomy and potential negative consequences.

Title:

Content: In October 2021, Mark Zuckerberg announced the arrival of the metaverse generation.
In fact, humans have already lived in a virtual world to some extent; the emergence of the metaverse will accelerate the process of virtualization and keep approaching virtual reality.
Even if our family lives under the same roof, in the virtual world, they have their own circle of friends, political views, spiritual consolation way.
The metaverse will increasingly expand such personalization and alienation, and people's lives will inevitably be controlled by various algorithms.
When machines can read human thoughts, ask, high-tech development in the end where to go? This kind of problem has a long history, but humans have been unable to solve.
In other words, the form of the problem is constantly changing, but the main part of the nature of the problem has never changed.
On the one hand, we are happy to know that many brilliant ideas of civilization represented by Greece are still helpful to us; on the other hand, we are sad to find that the development of high technology is changing rapidly, but the ability of human speculation has not surpassed that of the philosophers or theologians of history.
The metaverse has brought about changes in people ’ s lives, not just in the realm of private life.
High-tech development, like a wild horse.
Everyone, including the legal person, has no control over the direction of high-tech development, and even has no right to speak.
High-tech development occupies the top position of the production line, affecting the vast majority of industrial chains.
The author speculates that high-tech industries will eventually launch a war for human control against various political forces.
In the initial stage of the war, the high-tech industry will compromise or cooperate with various political forces to a certain extent, but according to the current development trajectory, the high-tech industry will eventually win.
Sadly, the controllers of the high-tech industry do not intend to govern society, they will directly rule humanity.
When we discuss this point, we will find that whether it is "mathematical physics" or "literary merchants" in the general sense, they provide the key that does not solve the above problems.
Because the core of the development of high-tech industries is whether human beings can master the uncontrolled desire and creativity of human beings; perhaps the field of law can be inked, but after extending upward, it must enter the field of philosophy, and even the field of theology.
In this process, we can not avoid the question is, the human reason has its limits, the reason is not enough, how should mankind deal with? This part of the discussion, theological field has long been heated debate; but the impact of the dispute, is not only the storm in the ivory tower, because the scope of its reference, related to the progress of human civilization.
The author believes that a positive contribution caused by the "side effects" of the metaverse is likely to be theological research sealed in the hidden place of the academic circle by factors such as the industrial revolution and capitalism, and will once again come to the forefront, affecting both secular and spiritual fields.
But how does theology function as the ultimate moral guide?
This proposition, limited by human rationality, will always be controversial.
There is no need to be too pessimistic that when humanity realizes that it needs to turn to God, even if a significant number of people are necessarily going down the wrong path, it is better than all of them falling into the abyss together.
At this point, it is necessary to review what is "theology"? The concept of "theology" first appeared in ancient Greek thought; there are similar legends in other civilizations. Karl Barth, a famous Swiss theologian in the 20th century, said that in ancient Greek thought "the word about God" is "the word of God to man."
In the works of Plato and Aristotle, there are many conflicts with theology, which constitute the record of metaphysics.
After the coming of Christ, "theology" gradually became exclusively used by Christian scholars, and diverged from the "theology" of polytheism.
The main concern of theologians is the salvation of God and the reconstruction of human order.
Later, whether it is scholarly philosophy or the Theological Encyclopedia, theology is regarded as a critical and theoretical science.
After the Middle Ages, theology began to have the image of practical science.
In the 19th century, the German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher understood theology as a field of evidence; he believed that through “godliness, ” spiritual experience and assurance were obtained.
There are two problems that need to be solved here: one is how to rebuild (or correctly understand) the scientific nature of theology in the arrogance and madness of mankind; the other is how to lead God to hope for the direction of human struggle through the establishment of a relationship between God and man.
The second question, beyond the author's ability, can be left to continue this discussion in the future or others.
The last thing I want to talk about today is how to correctly understand the science of theology.
In fact, “scientificity ” is a deceptive term, and the so-called scientificity is nothing more than a verifiable model of knowing things under certain conditions.
On the one hand, there is a strong subjectivity, and on the other hand, there is a strong neutrality.
Evangelical theologian Professor Alister McGrath, of the University of Oxford, said that Neo-Atheism believes that people can only believe what they can prove, and should ignore questions of faith that are justified and motivated.
Moreover, Neo-Atheism seems unable or unwilling to evaluate its own ideas by its criteria for evaluating the beliefs of others.
British philosopher A.C. Grayling argues that theological reasoning is unacceptable to a rational person because it is carried out under the “premises and parameters ” of a system.
However, most of the thinking and argument takes place under certain “premises and parameters ” of the system, including mathematics and logic.
Observation and interpretation are intertwined in an inevitable cycle.
Willard Quine, the great American philosopher / logician of the 20th century and a professor at Harvard University, argued in his book The Two Doctrines of empiricism that what really matters is the ability of a theory to explain the world as a whole.
Our beliefs are connected in an interconnected network that is related to the boundaries of sensory experience, not at its core.
Thus, Quinn argues, the only valid test of a belief is its suitability for an interconnected belief network that is consistent with our experience as a whole.
In other words, one of theology ’ s chief intellectual virtues is to provide a coherent, rationally motivated explanation of the world, connecting the transient, seemingly disconnected world we experience through a hidden web of meaning that is revealed.
No matter how fragmented our experience world may seem, there is a large translucent picture linking things together, its footprints connecting things that might otherwise be disconnected and meaningless, forming a web of meaning.
In fact, the rationality of the human world is not predetermined by pure reason, but is to be discovered by dealing with the human world.
The basic question for scientists to ask is not “Is this reasonable? ” but“ What is the reason for believing it to be true? ” Man cannot prescribe in advance what the “rational ” character of the universe is; rather, it must be by letting the universe tell us, or finding a way to unmask it.
Therefore, the rationality of science is that it is the best way to discover things, not that it is some pre-determined or predicted “truth. ”
Paul said, “Do not be like the world, but change the mind ” (Romans 12: 2); this is to change the way you see the world through the renewal of your thoughts.
Paul used a series of images to describe the fundamental changes in the way people see things: our eyes are opened, the scales fall off, and the veil is removed (Acts 9: 9-19; 2 Corinthians 3: 13-16).
Christianity calls for an imaginative adjustment through which people see the world with new eyes, a transformation brought about by grace, not by human wisdom or achievement.
This passage captures the empirical experience of the theologian Schleiermacher about the feeling of “godliness. ”
On the basis of this understanding, when we re-examine the impact of the metaverse on humanity, we can understand that the value and worth of human existence will be different under different paradigms.
High-tech industries are not regulated by any external forces in pursuit of the “progress ” of human life, which is an enhanced version of atheism and materialism, or can be described as an extreme form of capitalism.
Under this extreme capitalism, human beings will be placed under the control of the technological maniac, and all human beings, including the technological maniac, will be consumed by the desire itself because of this crazy and uncontrolled material desire.
If this situation cannot be changed as soon as possible, humanity will first fall into the bottomless abyss on Earth in the process of pursuing interstellar migration.
The author believes that if there is a historical moment in the 21st century, that is, theology with faith as its core, it will be the moment to be exalted again; if this historical moment does not appear, then the technological maniac will take his turn and become the golden bull of human worship.
※ The above statements do not represent the position of Wangzhong Media Group ※
# Theology # Human # A # Problem # Development

The metaverse is an example of a new technology that may be opposed, as it has brought about significant changes in people's lives and is developing rapidly, potentially beyond the control of individuals or organizations.

"Famous figures like Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, and Bill Gates have been labeled as Luddites for warning about the dangers of artificial intelligence, indicating that concerns about AI's impact on society and human well-being are a key reason for resistance to new technologies in the 21st century."

Title:

Content: The new is the old well forgotten.
Where in the Network there was a fashionable insult to the opponents of AI
In the Internet discourse, deep in the study of sarcastic comments of anonymous persons, you can find the term "Luddite".
This label is often referred to as people who dare to express the slightest inclination to inhibit the constant development of artificial intelligence (AI).
Related video
Interestingly, such prominent figures as Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking and Bill Gates have been awarded the Luddite Award, which is recognition of their cautionary position regarding the potential dangers associated with artificial intelligence.
During the ceremony, Robert D. Atkinson, the organizer of the award, noted: “Unfortunately, luminaries such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have contributed to the feverish refraction of hands about the impending apocalypse of artificial intelligence, ” writes IFLScience.
In Focus.Technology appeared its own Telegram-channel.
Subscribe not to miss the latest and exciting news from the world of science!
Atkinson also explained: "Do we consider any of them personally Luddites?
No, of course not.
They are pioneers of science and technology.
But they and others have done a disservice to the public — and undoubtedly have helped and comforted the increasingly common neo-Luddist impulse in modern society — by demonizing AI in the popular imagination.
But how did the term come about?
Its roots can be traced back to the early 1800s in England.
Before the industrial revolution, skilled craftsmen who knew a lot about textile production made clothes using their own machines and specialized tools.
However, a situation arose when new technologies and methods of mass production appeared, as a result of which artisans were unable to compete.
The result was a movement whose purpose was the destruction of the textile industry and the destruction of new machines.
Although there is some truth to this story, it does not reflect the whole essence of the Luddite movement.
Their actions were not driven solely by a reaction to new technologies; rather, they were a response to the profound transformations taking place in their professional activities.
While it is true that they often attacked a knitting machine known as a stocking frame, as well as other mechanized fixtures, their main concern was the labor practices associated with these machines.
Kevin Binfield, editor of the Luddite and Compassionate Works, explained their motives: "They simply wanted machines to produce high-quality goods, and that these machines employed workers who had been trained and received fair wages.
It was their only concern. ”
The nickname "Luddites" comes from the nickname "Ned Ludd", an apocryphal figure who allegedly sabotaged a textile factory in 1779, although historical evidence suggests that this man was most likely a fictional one.
In a 2007 paper, researcher David Linton explained: “Some say that a young man, possibly with cognitive impairment, named Ned Ludd once misunderstood an order and accidentally broke his frame machine.
Others argue that this was done deliberately, in a fit of anger.
Whatever the motive, it seems to have become a joke phrase that whenever the machine breaks, for whatever reason, you can say something like, "Ludd must have been here."
From this construction, it is a short step to the ironic application of the name Ludd to vandalism for political purposes. "
Between 1811 and 1816, the Luddite movement held sporadic and somewhat unorganized protests, characterized by the destruction of cars and the burning of factories.
In response, the mill owners resorted to extreme measures, using deadly force against the Luddites.
In April 1812, there was a grim turning point in Huddersfield, where at least four people died at the hands of the mill owners.
In retaliation, the Luddites killed the owner of the mill, William Horsfall, who boldly declared his intention to "smear himself with Luddite blood to the saddles."
Horsfall was shot while sitting on his horse.
Faced with these uprisings, the government immediately sent thousands of soldiers to quell the protests.
Moreover, they adopted a law according to which the breakdown of cars was subject to the death penalty or sending to colonies.
Subsequently, the movement dissipated, but the stable expression "Luddite" could not accurately convey the ideals and goals of the Luddites.
Previously, Focus wrote about the first IPSO in the history of mankind.
It turns out that it was invented in Babylon and it concerns the Flood.