Technology is possibly one of the most hated and loved things in our world at present. On one hand, it’s very much a part of our existence. On the other, we claim we would be so much better off without it.
I got to thinking about that today because we got our first stick hoover. Before, it was good old Henry and friends for years, and, since the cats (because of a certain amount of electricity problems where we were living at the time), good old-fashioned broom.
Which took ages, especially with a fairly large space to cover and nine shedding felines plus our late (long furred) pooch Chichi. Now that power is no longer the problem, we upgraded from the witching hour to the 21st century.
Much to the dismay of our cats, who took it far better than I imagined they would, after the first shock of “IT MAKES NOISE!”.
The entire clean up took just about under ten minutes – and it’s spring, so there are tons of fur everywhere. Before that, the cleaning took two hours of careful brushing.
This is a huge difference in time and it’s that observation that we rarely even make when debating the question of technology yes or no.
Most people forget that the tasks we no longer delegate to others (including children, thus effectively minimising child labour opportunities that were abundant in previous centuries) are automatically carried out by machinery after a simple task of putting them to work. Unless you have ever been in my position, where I had no access to modern technology due to my research situation, and you beat egg whites and cream by hand, washed heavy items by hand (and I’m not the smallest person out there at 5’6, and have a fair amount of muscle), spent time deciding whether or not you could devote however many hours to a meticulous cleaning of your space or live in fluff bunny heaven because there were other, more important things to do and the day only has that many hours, lived without the normal cooking means and personal hygiene means, had no light available in emergencies and had to be inventive about contact with the outside world, you have probably never experience what it is really like to live effectively off the grid or borderline to it. And that is what refusing technology is like – it is a basic refusal of ease of living, because it is perceived as harmful by certain mentalities.
All this is very much a part of observation of the society around us. As anthropologists, we must understand why something happens and relate it to the rest of the world. We should avoid championing causes that are illogical or harmful, and yet many lose themselves in mistaking observation for reason and conviction for fact.
What I find baffling in the debate on “it was better then” or “it would be better without…” is the lack of realisation that before (or without xyz), technology existed in some form of other. As I have pointed out elsewhere (if you’re interested, check my other articles, esp. here), technology has always existed in some form. To refuse to use a washing machine is like refusing to use the sticks washerwomen used to use to stir the washing around in the big vats around them. It is to be the one ancestor refusing to use the flint tool or fire. It is shouldering the physically and emotionally draining tasks onto others by expectation of one’s beliefs to be accepted by everyone else. It is also labouring under mistaken conviction that items can make or break the happiness in one’s life. Much of our problems stem from personal issues, which are rarely resolved but too often externalised and blamed on the rest of the world. Lack of success due to bad social skills we acquired as children in a dysfunctional family is not the fault of others, but can be changed with learning how to cope and with putting our past with all the pain behind us. Unfeeling behaviour of others is not down to them having an item we don’t have; it is in part the situation, which may not call for feelings as far as others are concerned, the specific personality of the people involved (ourselves included) and the SCR perspective on expression of emotion. Taking from others won’t resolve actual problems of famine, low pay or discrimination; instead, adjusting the laws and making sure that it never comes to this again will. Removing technology will not make someone pay more attention to you… resolving why you are having communication issues, or even if they are truly not paying attention to you, will.
In short, much of the negative we feel about technology has more to do with unresolved interpersonal issues than actual problems with technology. It is also a perspective lacking realism. Not only is it nearly impossible (as well as unnecessary) to turn back the clock; it is also unrealistic not to consider the term technology to encompass more than merely our current phone, laptop, kitchen gadgets and so on, and dismiss use of then available technology in all times before, as well as the fact that animals use tools just as much as we do in daily lives, and that their mastering a new skill makes their lives easier and survival more likely.
One thing that needs to be established is legal framework surrounding potential misuse of technology in the matter of human rights. That said, refusing to acknowledge its meaning in our lives is not the way to do so; instead, focusing on real potential problems, including discrimination of people using technology such as, for example, robotic nurses in daily life by others due to misrepresentation and hate for technology, work laws and especially redundancy due to use of technology, use of technology in warfare (much like the Geneva convention, an agreement is needed to determine what we feel goes – and those who decide not to sign will already give us information on who is likely to misuse it, and anthropological observation of their social and cultural behaviour can tell us how), etc., can make sure that the advancement in technology doesn’t hurt us – not via its existence, but via the maladaptive, pathological interpersonal, intersocial and intercultural behaviours that we have been known to exhibit, regardless of the state of the technology around us at that moment in our lengthy history of conflict.