Laughing Ourselves to Humility

A summary of:
Schultze, Q. J. (2002). Habits of the High-Tech Heart: Living Virtuously in the Information Age. Baker Academic: Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
Chapter 4 - Laughing Ourselves to Humility

There are certain religious communities that eschew modern technologies (Amish, Shakers, etc.); many merely adopt a posture of reticence toward technology (Christians and others). We can label these people and anyone who is a bit wary of computers as a Luddite. But the point is, we have reason to be reticent. We have probably all experienced a technological failure that exposes our techno-arrogance: e.g. the computer dies and you haven't backed up a year's worth of work; the phone, which holds all your passwords, contacts, and schedules dies, leaving you lost and in a puddle of your own tears. As Schultze says, "The resulting frustration and fear should open our hearts to the need for humility" (104).

In this chapter, Schultze argues that:

1) Technological development is an exercise in human folly: "Our high-tech endeavors are riddled with foolishness masquerading as progress" (95). We think of ourselves as experts, but how little we actually know! As Schultze says, "Fools major in the minors" (94); this seems to be our wheelhouse, focusing on the minutiae of technological knowledge. "Such fools," he writes, "lack the whole of creation, and consciousness of our obligation to it" (95). I would phrase this concern differently: that we focus on detail, but we are losing our ability to think holistically. Holism, I argue, is one of the characteristics of a spiritual mindset.

2) We have to recognize the futility of our endeavors, because whenever we think we are solving a problem with a new technology, we are inevitably creating several new problems. I often talk about how while we persevere in the pursuit of lessening our burdens, we are counter-intuitively raising the expectations for how much work we are responsible for doing, thus making our lives more difficult (see John Thomas' work). Cultivating humility is to recognize that we don't control everything: "Although the technology that undergirds the information society is the product of much rational thought and remarkable technical achievement, its social nature and moral impact largely elude us" (94). And as Havel says, "we still don't know how to put morality ahead of politics, science, and economics. We are still incapable of understanding that the only genuine core of all actions - if they are to be moral - is responsibility" (105).

3) We'd be wise to fear our technologies, because "Recognizing the potential for moral as well as technical disaster, we need to accept the humility that comes with responsibility" (93). Reticence is therefore healthy because: "if we lack any technological reticence, we also lack responsibility" (107).

4) Humor is a useful way of fostering this humility, because it "fosters a proper sense of proportion, reveals our tomfoolery, and cultivates greater patience" (93). I liked this one: "'Without software,' says Barry, 'a computer is just a lump of plastic; whereas with software, it's a lump of plastic that can permanently destroy critical data'" (111). Laughing with people is a form of empathy; it is a variation on compassion (112).

An undersold point raised by this chapter is the idea that we need to be humble enough - and brave enough - to realize that we need to make changes... even if those changes are potentially enormous. "Once a human 'project acquires a certain size and becomes vested with human dreams of "progress" or "liberation,"' writes Vinoth Ramachandra, 'it attains a life of its own, dragging human beings and societies in its wake" (102). Should we not fight against getting sucked into the quicksand? Let's design a better cyber alternative.

And while sometimes I don't know why Schultze says things where he does - they seem random - he also makes an important point in this chapter: "Either we accept informational mythology as a viable religion, or we critique it from the vantage point of a nontechnological tradition" (103). This is, in a nutshell, my approach.