Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Tech, Tribalism, and the Erosion of Human Connection

What We’ve Lost Since the Enlightenment

Opinion

Tech, Tribalism, and the Erosion of Human Connection
Ai technology, Artificial Intelligence. man using technology smart robot AI, artificial intelligence by enter command prompt for generates something, Futuristic technology transformation.
Getty Images - stock photo

One of the great gifts of the Enlightenment age was the centrality of reason and empiricism as instruments to unleash the astonishing potential of human capacity. Great Enlightenment thinkers recognized that human beings have the capacity to observe the universe and rely on logical thinking to solve problems.

Moreover, these were not just lofty ideals; Benjamin Franklin and Denis Diderot demonstrated that building our collective constitution of knowledge could greatly enhance human prosperity not only for the aristocratic class but for all participants in the social contract. Franklin’s “Poor Richard’s Almanac” and Diderot and d’Alembert’s “Encyclopédie” served as the Enlightenment’s machines de guerre, effectively providing broad access to practical knowledge, empowering individuals to build their own unique brand of prosperity.


It is hard to overstate what a radical departure this was from the prior millennium, where the birth lottery largely circumscribed the determinants of one’s prosperity. Due to this striking reorientation, many historians view the Enlightenment as laying the bedrock for what we consider a modern society.

Further, one cannot deny the titanic impact of this reorientation. Consider that in 1790, human life expectancy was around 30 years, one in five children didn’t survive to age 5, and 4/5 of the world lived in extreme poverty. Today, life expectancy is over 70 years across the globe; over 99% of children survive past the age of 5; and only one-fifth of the world lives in the same extreme level of poverty. Arguably, we have unleashed more human prosperity in the last 200 years than in the prior 2000.

It is with this perspective that we must consider the gravity of our current condition. What are the consequences of having abandoned our Enlightenment ideals? Today, the era’s gifts are adrift in our bitterly polarized landscape, where the demonization of tribal politics obscures civic problem-solving. In such an environment, our ability to construct effective policy solutions becomes impossible. As vital, constructive discussions of public policy are crowded out, the unfettered interests of crony capitalism prevail. By yielding to the alignment of political and economic power over recent decades, we the people have permitted the monied classes to advance their own interests at the expense of those of the majority of the republic.

Where does this leave us? Our political discourse has devolved into a game of scoring points and laying blame for our predicaments, while the unbridled “free market” wreaks havoc on today’s working classes. As we continue to amass an immense debt burden, it deprives future generations of their own prospects.

The absurdities that emerge from our predicament become increasingly disquieting. Here are two particularly noteworthy examples:

The quest for artificial intelligence and its consequent effects on energy prices and the environment.

Unsatisfied with the intelligence with which we are naturally endowed, we have surrendered to a market-driven quest to discover and deploy a supposedly superior “artificial” intelligence. The immense anticipated demand for this AI will require significantly more computer processing power than we currently possess. Consequently, today we are building the requisite data centers, which will consume a staggering amount of incremental energy.

At the same time, our MAGA retrograde energy policy, priding itself on climate change denial, is funneling resources into the rebuilding and redeployment of coal, oil, and gas infrastructure and cancelling or furloughing green energy projects. However, due to the skyrocketing cost of revitalizing coal, this traditional energy source is now more costly than solar and wind energy. So as the NYT recently reported, in West Virginia, where the coal revitalization is centered, consumer energy prices are rising more than double the national average.

The replacement of genuine human interaction with its virtual counterpart.

As a species, we have seemingly determined that building authentic human relationships is too difficult (or painful). Fortunately, the proliferating opportunities to build digital relationships provide ample replacement. Vast chunks of our society, notably young people, are increasingly forsaking real human interaction and replacing it with its virtual cousin. As Scott Galloway reminds us: Who needs to go out on dates, when Only Fans is just a click away?

Of a bygone era are the noisy college dining halls where vivacious conversations reverberated from the rafters; today, each student eats individually with scant interaction with their neighboring diners, all glued to their screens, and many with earbuds.

Can we not tap into our better angels and return to an era of crafting solutions to pressing concerns? Unfortunately, trapped by our technologies and their supporting business models, we find it increasingly difficult to distance ourselves from the pressures of our self-chosen “mobs.” This leaves me with a meager opportunity to constructively resolve genuine policy differences. Our Enlightenment forbears welcomed technology and market competition as leveling devices for the public good. For the sake of the next generation, it might be in our best interest to follow their model.

Seth David Radwell is the author of “American Schism: How the Two Enlightenments Hold the Secret to Healing our Nation” winner of last year’s International Book Award for Best General Nonfiction. He is a frequent contributor as a political analyst, and speaker within both the business community and on college campuses both in the U.S. and abroad.

Read More

Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

Rising costs, AI disruption, and inequality revive interest in Louis Kelso’s “universal capitalism” as a market-based answer to the affordability crisis.

Getty Images, J Studios

Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

“Affordability” over the cost of living has been in the news a lot lately. It’s popping up in political campaigns, from the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia to the mayor’s races in New York City and Seattle. President Donald Trump calls the term a “hoax” and a “con job” by Democrats, and it’s true that the inflation rate hasn’t increased much since Trump began his second term in January.

But a number of reports show Americans are struggling with high costs for essentials like food, housing, and utilities, leaving many families feeling financially pinched. Total consumer spending over the Black Friday-Thanksgiving weekend buying binge actually increased this year, but a Salesforce study found that’s because prices were about 7% higher than last year’s blitz. Consumers actually bought 2% fewer items at checkout.

Keep ReadingShow less
Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

US Capital with tech background

Greggory DiSalvo/Getty Images

Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

Techies, activists, and academics were in Paris this month to confront the doom scenario of internet shutdowns, developing creative technology and policy solutions to break out of heavily censored environments. The event– SplinterCon– has previously been held globally, from Brussels to Taiwan. I am on the programme committee and delivered a keynote at the inaugural SplinterCon in Montreal on how internet standards must be better designed for censorship circumvention.

Censorship and digital authoritarianism were exposed in dozens of countries in the recently published Freedom on the Net report. For exampl,e Russia has pledged to provide “sovereign AI,” a strategy that will surely extend its network blocks on “a wide array of social media platforms and messaging applications, urging users to adopt government-approved alternatives.” The UK joined Vietnam, China, and a growing number of states requiring “age verification,” the use of government-issued identification cards, to access internet services, which the report calls “a crisis for online anonymity.”

Keep ReadingShow less
The concept of AI hovering among the public.

Panic-driven legislation—from airline safety to AI bans—often backfires, and evidence must guide policy.

Getty Images, J Studios

Beware of Panic Policies

"As far as human nature is concerned, with panic comes irrationality." This simple statement by Professor Steve Calandrillo and Nolan Anderson has profound implications for public policy. When panic is highest, and demand for reactive policy is greatest, that's exactly when we need our lawmakers to resist the temptation to move fast and ban things. Yet, many state legislators are ignoring this advice amid public outcries about the allegedly widespread and destructive uses of AI. Thankfully, Calandrillo and Anderson have identified a few examples of what I'll call "panic policies" that make clear that proposals forged by frenzy tend not to reflect good public policy.

Let's turn first to a proposal in November of 2001 from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). For obvious reasons, airline safety was subject to immense public scrutiny at this time. AAP responded with what may sound like a good idea: require all infants to have their own seat and, by extension, their own seat belt on planes. The existing policy permitted parents to simply put their kid--so long as they were under two--on their lap. Essentially, babies flew for free.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) permitted this based on a pretty simple analysis: the risks to young kids without seatbelts on planes were far less than the risks they would face if they were instead traveling by car. Put differently, if parents faced higher prices to travel by air, then they'd turn to the road as the best way to get from A to B. As we all know (perhaps with the exception of the AAP at the time), airline travel is tremendously safer than travel by car. Nevertheless, the AAP forged ahead with its proposal. In fact, it did so despite admitting that they were unsure of whether the higher risks of mortality of children under two in plane crashes were due to the lack of a seat belt or the fact that they're simply fragile.

Keep ReadingShow less
Will Generative AI Robots Replace Surgeons?

Generative AI and surgical robotics are advancing toward autonomous surgery, raising new questions about safety, regulation, payment models, and trust.

Getty Images, Luis Alvarez

Will Generative AI Robots Replace Surgeons?

In medicine’s history, the best technologies didn’t just improve clinical practice. They turned traditional medicine on its head.

For example, advances like CT, MRI, and ultrasound machines did more than merely improve diagnostic accuracy. They diminished the importance of the physical exam and the physicians who excelled at it.

Keep ReadingShow less