@nyquildotorg ah, okay, I missed the point there, sorry.
I wonder if anyone has looked at this type of thing over time. Like, 50 years ago, were we afraid we'd lose the ability to ... I dunno, drive a stick-shift car? And now that people mostly have, does it matter?
To be more specific: I wonder if we're just imagining future trouble that will never materialize.
@nyquildotorg Or I guess a better question would be "is there a tangible example of something we lost from 50 or 100 years ago that we weren't worried about, but now is a problem?"
eating healthy natural foods instead of ultraprocessed ones, for one
reading books and newspapers instead of doomscrolling
thinking for ourselves instead of taking GenBS as truth
keeping the planet inhabitable instead of destroying everything (ok, maybe we just didn't know how to do the latter yet)
there's probably plenty more
CC: @nyquildotorg@gts.nyquil.org
> reading books and newspapers instead of doomscrolling
> thinking for ourselves instead of taking GenBS as truth
These are super interesting to dig into, because I would put these into the category of what my historian spouse describes as "we always think the current moment is the worst".
That said, I do think these particular points are symbolic/emblematic of a problematic direction/pattern. But I'm not sure it'll be so clear-cut in 50 years that it was all bad.
hey, you asked 50 to 100! 🙂
I'm pretty sure we didn't even have the notion of doomscrolling back then, and functional (err) GenBS is even more recent. so these were easy picks, even if we could debate how much the people actually read books and thought for themselves back then. some would say that newspapers were the doomscrolling of the time.
I didn't even mention "talking to each other" instead of doomscrolling, and as schools prohibit mobiles on premises, we're seeing students go back to talking and interacting as well. so I'd count that as yet another robust difference.
that said, your challenging these items is interesting and valuable too: I was going to joke about voting as one of the items, because recent elections have been pretty messed up all over. but then, in that 50 to 100y timeframe some pretty bad guys got elected as well.
CC: @nyquildotorg@gts.nyquil.org
@tim @nyquildotorg The way you phrased this question got my hackles up. There are a zillion things we've lost over the centuries, and you don't know which ones are problems right away.
Have you read Low Tech Magazine? Most of the articles are a litany of technologies that were useful in a time when energy was expensive that we really ought be reviving in the climate crisis, but one difficulty is that the concepts and practices are forgotten. My fav is the thermal cooker: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2014/07/if-we-insulate-our-houses-why-not-our-cooking-pots/
@skyfaller I'm certainly not looking to start a fight, just a conversation.
That's an interesting article, haven't seen LTM before, but at least in my mind this is distinct from the other examples being discussed. We could absolutely still build these things if we wanted to - the knowledge is there, it's not entirely lost to society.
I'm more looking for knowledge that has been entirely lost. Which, I guess, is impossible to prove, since, well, we lost it? I dunno!
@tim @skyfaller @nyquildotorg until recently, roman concrete. Lots of once common survival skills, many of which could likely be bootstrapped, but which are no longer generally practiced.
Lots of languages are endangered, and many were intentionally extinguished.
Among school kids, even basic literacy is endangered.
I worry for a time when folks can't read cursive, because it locks the average person out of their own recent history. Having to consult a historian to read a Hey Arnold comic from 30 years ago feels like a failure.
@tim @nyquildotorg I think this is not quite the right frame. Many skills can be resurrected with sufficient investment, but can you scale it up to be of practical utility to the general populace?
In a collapse scenario, perhaps we would need oxen to replace tractors: https://alaskan.social/@seachanger/115767036456124228
It may be that we could breed enough oxen to plow and feed everyone (left) in a generation, but could we train enough people to drive the teams? Got enough teachers? https://ecoevo.social/@sarae/115767094789160045
@skyfaller I think you're looking at it from a very different angle than I am (notably your use of "collapse scenario" jumps out at me). Which isn't necessarily wrong, just different! It highlights that this, as most things, is ultimately a multi-faceted and complex issue. @nyquildotorg
@tim @nyquildotorg I'm just talking about different possible futures, and the technologies that thrive in them. A future with careful degrowth involves more induction cooktops and electric trains. A future where we burn fossil fuels until they destroy civilization may suggest more rocket stoves and one-wheeled Chinese wheelbarrows: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/12/how-to-downsize-a-transport-network-the-chinese-wheelbarrow/
Because we don't know what future we'll get, we don't know what skills we need. I am certain that we need to preserve human skill in general.
