Technological progress is polarizing. The ridicule, criticism, and even demonization of innovation is nothing new. Christian Varter, a technology philosopher and historian, told DW, “Even in the earliest documentation we have of technology theory, you can find a skeptical view of technology.” .
He said there are various reasons for this skepticism, including the complexity of technical inventions and the lack of knowledge and understanding that accompanies them, such as the fear of losing control and emotions.
But according to Helmut Trischler, director of research at the Deutsches Museum in Munich, skepticism about new technologies is not evidence of a general fear of technology. “There’s a limited awareness behind this assumption. It’s good that people think things through rationally,” he says.
Varter, who distinguishes fear from panic, also emphasizes the difference between a rational assessment of the possible consequences of technology and an irrational, uncontrollable defensiveness to it. “I think the ‘concern’ is very legitimate and very necessary, especially if we want to actively co-shape a future shaped by technology in an informed democracy.” he said. “But the ‘panic’ usually leads to an uncontrollable flight.”
The fact that technical inventions can cause both concern and panic to the same degree can be seen in the railroad example.
Devil’s Transport: Railroad
Nearly 200 years after its invention, railroads are a common way of transporting people and goods around the world, and are part of the fabric of modern society. However, in the early days, some thought the railroad was the work of the devil.
The world’s first public railway opened in England in 1825. Then steam trains raced across Europe fast, noisy and smoking. With it came the fear of trains, and in Germany “Eisenbahn crankheit” or “railroad sickness.” It was thought to be caused by the bone-rattling vibrations felt while standing.
Despite the growth of railway networks across Victorian England, criticism of the mode of transport remained persistent, as illustrated by caricatures and police reports.
Trischler said the reaction was “perfectly understandable” in the context of the time. Technological advances require a reorientation that provokes fears, premonitions of direness and anxiety. “At the end of the day, new things evoke emotions. Technology is basically always tied to emotions,” he explained.
Fear of atom splitting
But not all technological inventions necessarily evoke negative emotions. For example, in the new era of nuclear energy, attitudes were different. Germany’s first research reactor was built in Munich in 1957, and four years later nuclear energy entered the national grid for the first time. In the 1960s, nuclear power was seen as a cheap and clean alternative to oil and coal, raising hopes for a new industrial boom.
The first outcry in Germany came in 1975 when demonstrators occupied the site of a planned nuclear power plant. Critics in the southwestern German town of Wil have warned of potential safety hazards related to climate change, declining groundwater and nuclear power plants. The anti-nuclear movement gained momentum, and incidents such as the 1979 U.S. Three Mile Island accident and the 1986 Chernobyl meltdown further spread fear and anxiety among some. Nuclear energy was the subject of debate in Germany for decades, until the Fukushima accident in Japan in 2011 finally decided the German government to permanently phase out nuclear energy.
While nuclear power is still seen as a good alternative to fossil fuels in some parts of the world, it evokes almost existential anxiety in others. “When we think about why people worry about nuclear energy, we can point to the problem of nuclear waste such as Chernobyl and Fukushima. It’s a dependent situation,” Varter said.
He and Trischler believe there is a democratic success story in the debate over nuclear energy. Varter said society relies on the goodwill, understanding and support of its members “if it doesn’t want to be a technocrat and wants to remain a participatory democracy”. “Something could come out of the discussion about tech skepticism,” Trischler said, adding that it was about society’s struggle for co-determination and co-negotiation.
Human vs machine?
The current debate around AI shows just how fine the line between benevolence and skepticism, support and rejection can be. American computer and cognitive scientist John McCarthy coined the term “artificial intelligence” in 1956 to describe the branch of computer science aimed at creating machines with human-like intelligence. I made.
While there have been decades of development in the field, discussion around the topic has recently focused specifically on the chatbot ChatGPT, which was released in November 2022 and quickly sparked controversy. In March, Italy responded by becoming the first country to block the software, at least temporarily. It is now allowed again, but only if proof of the user’s age is presented.
Despite AI’s promise of many benefits, including better healthcare and better road safety, there are plenty of criticisms of the technology. Anxiety he seems to spread in two directions. Some worry about the potential for abuse, fabrication, and disinformation, their professional future and intellectual property, while others worry about future technological developments that may lead to AI’s gradual increase in capabilities, resulting in the loss of humans. Some worry. Control.
Trischler sees the general fear of AI as rooted in the complexity of the technology. “Particularly concerns arise with large technical systems that appear to be anonymous,” he said. For example, the question of how AI might actually affect one’s profession, Vater said, is a legitimate concern rather than an outright fear of machines.
“It is panicking to predict that machines will take over the world in the near future, as the spread of AI will make all human creative efforts superfluous,” he said.
Skepticism breeds doubt
So is a degree of skepticism about new technologies a normal and understandable human reaction? Christian Varter and Helmut Trischler think so.
“In hindsight, these concerns are often unrealized,” Trischler said, adding that it’s understandable given the circumstances at the time.
The ability to make predictions “helps us look to the next step in our development as a group, as a society, and even as a human being,” Varter said. “In fact, it’s a normal situation when things don’t turn out the way you expect them to.”
This article was originally written in German.
