05-23-2020, 08:02 AM
I too acknowledge technology as playing a critical role in defining cultures. The very definition of the Industrial Age depends on the steam engine, the printing press, gunpowder and democracy. The first three are obviously technology. The fourth is not directly tied to it, but is somehow the result of the changing technologies I’m sure.
The biggest difference is that I am looking for a basic pattern transformation with nukes and computers. You have incorporated many observations of one age, and tried to apply them in another. I don’t think you can. The basic pattern would shift, but you are still looking at how things were before the change. Thus, if anything, you are not seeing how technology drives progress enough. The process of how nuclear powers step closer to crisis confrontation would be very different from in the Industrial Age. Yet, you are still looking at xenophobia rather than the much changed way that governments send messages to each other these days. You are stubbornly refusing to see that nukes traumatize.
For example, the Industrial Age awakenings were centered around the Great Awakening and the Second Great Awakening. Very religious. Very emotional. Quick to burn out. In the 1960s Consciousness Revolution we had hippies, protests, significant changes in the roles of gender and race and major legislation. I concluded that awakenings would be very different in the Information Age, and anticipate that the next awakening would be closer to the 1960s than the old religious revivals. It might even be transformational in the way only crises used to be.
On the other hand, the latest unravelling had much the same flavor as always. I am much more inclined to accept the basic patterns observed by S&H as holding. This is what I mean by having to double check observations made in one age before just assuming they will hold in another. You may not have to throw them out as obsolete, but you may. Confirm, not assume.
On my part, I acknowledge being less interested in places like Africa and South America. There is a large hole in my thinking that needs to be filled.
The biggest difference is that I am looking for a basic pattern transformation with nukes and computers. You have incorporated many observations of one age, and tried to apply them in another. I don’t think you can. The basic pattern would shift, but you are still looking at how things were before the change. Thus, if anything, you are not seeing how technology drives progress enough. The process of how nuclear powers step closer to crisis confrontation would be very different from in the Industrial Age. Yet, you are still looking at xenophobia rather than the much changed way that governments send messages to each other these days. You are stubbornly refusing to see that nukes traumatize.
For example, the Industrial Age awakenings were centered around the Great Awakening and the Second Great Awakening. Very religious. Very emotional. Quick to burn out. In the 1960s Consciousness Revolution we had hippies, protests, significant changes in the roles of gender and race and major legislation. I concluded that awakenings would be very different in the Information Age, and anticipate that the next awakening would be closer to the 1960s than the old religious revivals. It might even be transformational in the way only crises used to be.
On the other hand, the latest unravelling had much the same flavor as always. I am much more inclined to accept the basic patterns observed by S&H as holding. This is what I mean by having to double check observations made in one age before just assuming they will hold in another. You may not have to throw them out as obsolete, but you may. Confirm, not assume.
On my part, I acknowledge being less interested in places like Africa and South America. There is a large hole in my thinking that needs to be filled.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
