Is technology killing our gut instincts and intuition?

[Halford]

I must admit in the end I have little sympathy for the 'technology is killing craftsmanship' position.

Take, for example, the heat we use to cook.

We no longer have to hit rocks together to make sparks to start a fire. Or rub sticks together until we carefully, and with great effort, get a baby fire going. These were once highly prized and economically critical skills! The came technology: People invented tinderboxes, and then matches, and then safety matches, and then lighters, electric switches, piezoelectric igniters for gas stoves, microwaves, induction cooktops...

And now we've "lost the craftsmanship" of spending an hour kindling the fire on which our survival through the cold night depends.

So since we stopped spending hours every day on these basic necessities for survival, we have managed to produce the greatest works of art and literature, built thriving enterprises, and spent intimate time with our families and friends -- and of course developed sophisticated and delightful ways of preparing and enjoying food -- where once we were too busy rubbing sticks together so that we might avoid dying tonight.

Technology is not the problem. The question is how we use what it gives us.

 

[Dali]

Would you have a greater sympathy for "technology is killing our first-hand experience"?

 

[CropDusterMan]

I do not think the sky is falling.

Is that in reference to "The 9 Billion names of God"?

Gotta love Arthur C Clark.

 

[Halford]

Would you have a greater sympathy for "technology is killing our first-hand experience"?

From this angle (sitting behind a screen that's mediating the world to me) yes, I guess so

There are tradeoffs of course but yes -- but this is part of why I'm here at APUG.

 

[CropDusterMan]

Is that in reference to "The 9 Billion names of God"?

Gotta love Arthur C Clark.

As far as it killing our gut instincts and intuition...I don't think so. I do think it can distort reality, make us lazy
and make us accept sub-par material. When did you ever say "Sorry, you cut out there" when talking on a land line. lol

With all of the CGI in films, action has gone over the top and become acceptable as believable action. I liked the older
50's 60's and 70's era when stuff was real, but I think the technology on a whole is making many of the aspects of
life better.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

There are really just a couple of concerns I can think of regarding our dependency of modern technologies and conveniences.

1. We're losing our basic survival skills such as digging our own wells, building our own permanent shelters, growing our own food, hunting/gathering, basic triage skills... the most basic of human needs. If all our modern conveniences were to suddenly become unavailable to us then 99 percent of us would be screwed.

2. All those modern conveniences can be used to control the populace.

 

[markbarendt]

Would you have a greater sympathy for "technology is killing our first-hand experience"?

The question I see is, first hand experience at what?

What I'm getting at is that in 20 years first hand experience driving cars may be a very quaint thought, new cars might only accept destination addresses from a smartphone as input.

 

[markbarendt]

There are really just a couple of concerns I can think of regarding our dependency of modern technologies and conveniences.

1. We're losing our basic survival skills such as digging our own wells, building our own permanent shelters, growing our own food, hunting/gathering, basic triage skills... the most basic of human needs. If all our modern conveniences were to suddenly become unavailable to us then 99 percent of us would be screwed.

Knowing how to dig a well and grow food wouldn't fix the problem.

If all our modern conveniences were to suddenly become unavailable most of us are screwed regardless of what we know. Heck just stop global transportation systems and were in deep doo doo even if everything else is working.

 

[frank]

I think technology is really cool. Our lives at times are dependent on it. However, I have a feeling that technology is killing our gut instincts and intuition. We have digital cameras that give you instant feedback of your image along with a histogram, GPS units that give you pin point accuracy of your location. New technology is killing old skills that people relied on daily. For example, when my wife first met and I cooked her rice for our dinner, she asked "How could you cook rice without a rice cooker". I asked her how did folks cooked their rice before the rice cooker was invented. Millennials has lost people skills from being on their smart phones all the time. I think even the medical profession with all the high tech test have killed gut instincts. A lot of doctors have to back up their guesses with a test. So what's your take on the advancement of technology?

+1

Automation is reducing/eliminating a need to understand how things fundamentally work which in many cases can be a bad thing. So maybe it's not "gut instincts and intuition", but basic understanding that is eroded.

 

[MontanaJay]

Most people probably won't be adversely effected by their reliance on 21st century technology, but out here in the wild, wild west there have been rare instances of people trusting their GPS and driving to their deaths because some programmer failed to note a forest trail is only open seasonally. Then there's hikers who find themselves in a box canyon with no cell coverage or GPS acquisition, whose lives depend on whether they retain enough fieldcraft knowledge or whether they packed a back-up paper map and a analog compass to get out of their fix. Not all of them do.
These are the same people who go to Yellowstone and try to take a selfie with a bison.

 

[Helios 1984]

Guts is required while driving/piloting

There are really just a couple of concerns I can think of regarding our dependency of modern technologies and conveniences.

1. We're losing our basic survival skills such as digging our own wells, building our own permanent shelters, growing our own food, hunting/gathering, basic triage skills... the most basic of human needs. If all our modern conveniences were to suddenly become unavailable to us then 99 percent of us would be screwed.

2. All those modern conveniences can be used to control the populace.

1. There is already a good 50% of the human race living without modern conveniences.

2. The only way to screw us all would be to somewhat manage to erase the collective knowledge, and I mean we all go back before Homo habilis(not happening).

3. Agriculture is not a basic skill.

 

[Helios 1984]

These are the same people who go to Yellowstone and try to take a selfie with a bison.

Natural selection :-/

 

[Luckless]

Technology doesn't kill off skill, instinct, or intuition, it merely removes the need for some while unlocking the use for others.

One of my friend's kids is 12 or so, and recently got his hands on a non-functioning camera. It was an old worn out thing, but he slowly disassembled it and took dozens of photos each step of the way, and eventually built up a computer model of the entire thing. Then he pulled it into some physics/engineering simulation software and started playing around with everything. Apparently took the kid a few weeks of tinkering, but he eventually figured out what the problem was and then redesign a few pieces on his computer and had a robot spit out replacement parts for something older than his father that he never even managed to identify.

The kid used technology to reverse engineer and understand what had been a paperweight and turned it back into a functioning usable camera.

 

[Jim Jones]

I can peek around the computer monitor and see the Canyon de Chelly ruins taken in 1873 by Timothy O'Sullivan and printed from a file downloaded from the Library of Congress. Almost 70 years later Ansel Adams made at least two exposures from almost exactly the same location. I prefer the early version. A photographer who had to travel to a remote location with a pack train, set up a darkroom, prepare a wet plate, and immediately shoot and develop the plate was motivated to do it well the first time. O'Sullivan had developed his skills under Mathew Brady and others before and during the Civil War. Working with rapidly evolving technology under such pressure is motivating. Now we have it too easy. Some still push the frontiers of photography, but most of us are content to do little, if any, better than what we see all around us.

 

[Dali]

The question I see is, first hand experience at what?

What I'm getting at is that in 20 years first hand experience driving cars may be a very quaint thought, new cars might only accept destination addresses from a smartphone as input.

First hand of everything. Posters already noticed that individuals are more prone to interact with their phones than with their neighbors at a dinner table. People don't interact that much (do you know who all your neighbors are?) but have dozens of "friends" on FB. Drive your car without a GPS device nowadays: it is challenge because you are supposed to use one and very little is done to improve road signs. Try to pay in any circumstance with bills and coins; obviously, anything is done to prompt people to use debit or credit cards. In some countries, it is already forbidden for an employer to pay employees wages in cash: check or bank transfer only. Try to call a customer service without having to answer nasty question from nasty machines: good luck! At school, some districts take for granted that you have internet at home: every communication with parents is done through the school portal and even assignments are posted there only. At work, it is now easier to connect via emails than talking face to face with colleagues. I can multiply the examples and go on like that for pages.

More and more we are disconnected with the real which is "translated" through technology. Companies and their army of engineers already decided what is good and what is bad for you. What I mean is that technology is not neutral anymore but most of the time a weapon to dictate the so-called progress (do you really think you are happier than your ancestors?). If I want a cell phone which just call and receive calls, I can't anymore. If I want a car without all the fancy stuff, I can't. If I want my kids to obey the school rules without internet, I can't.

Now, ask yourself why it does happen this way and if it is really what we want or it is more likely what we are suggested to want...

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

As for me, I'm overly dependent on my light meter. But Fred Parker uses his intuition for his exposures. Take a look at this.

http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I see you... you see me.

No, we see reflections of one another.

No, we see digital interpretations of each other.

If we're together then we must interact face-to-face.

Our digital interpretations can be switched off and ignored.

Where is everybody? Where did everyone go? Hello? Hello? Hello?

 

[DREW WILEY]

Food sure tastes better when he have to hunt it yourself and roast it over a fire you started yourself, as the sky darkens and the stars come out,
and you ward off the cold. And a picture always looks more beautiful when your own hands were involved in the process. I realize that one is an
outdoor process, the other indoors. That's why cellphone and smartphone cameras are so nice. You can take them outdoors in the mountains, find
a lovely still lake with nobody else around, and skip those stupid flat electronic devices right over the water. Best thing ever invented for where no
flat pebbles are laying around!

 

[Cholentpot]

If not for Digital I would not shoot film.

Pencils are still useful. Linotype is not. I would love to use a Linotype machine though.

 

[Michael Guzzi]

Most people probably won't be adversely effected by their reliance on 21st century technology, but out here in the wild, wild west there have been rare instances of people trusting their GPS and driving to their deaths because some programmer failed to note a forest trail is only open seasonally. Then there's hikers who find themselves in a box canyon with no cell coverage or GPS acquisition, whose lives depend on whether they retain enough fieldcraft knowledge or whether they packed a back-up paper map and a analog compass to get out of their fix. Not all of them do.
These are the same people who go to Yellowstone and try to take a selfie with a bison.

Reminds me of a couple cases of tourists in Rio de Janeiro who blindly took directions of the GPS in their cars, and ended up getting shot several times by drug dealers inside a favela, because that was the shortest route the GPS could see. It wasn't the safest though.

 

[removed account4]

some people have used this argument for NOT using a light meter and using sunny 16 / 11,
and using manual functions on a camera,
and often times it is suggested that not using machines/tools/helpful devices &c doesn't add to any creativity
and it doesnt' make anyone less of a gut instinct, or intuition, it allows people to pay more attention to
their intuition and let the machines do the other "stuff"

i've got more than a few robots that help me with what i need to do; and i spend more time doing other things ..

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I think technology is really cool. Our lives at times are dependent on it. However, I have a feeling that technology is killing our gut instincts and intuition. We have digital cameras that give you instant feedback of your image along with a histogram, GPS units that give you pin point accuracy of your location. New technology is killing old skills that people relied on daily. For example, when my wife first met and I cooked her rice for our dinner, she asked "How could you cook rice without a rice cooker". I asked her how did folks cooked their rice before the rice cooker was invented. Millennials has lost people skills from being on their smart phones all the time. I think even the medical profession with all the high tech test have killed gut instincts. A lot of doctors have to back up their guesses with a test. So what's your take on the advancement of technology?

You are right but ,there only is a problem if we think we can use technology to replace experience or creativity;that only leads to mediocrity!

 

[markbarendt]

First hand of everything. Posters already noticed that individuals are more prone to interact with their phones than with their neighbors at a dinner table. People don't interact that much (do you know who all your neighbors are?) but have dozens of "friends" on FB. Drive your car without a GPS device nowadays: it is challenge because you are supposed to use one and very little is done to improve road signs. Try to pay in any circumstance with bills and coins; obviously, anything is done to prompt people to use debit or credit cards. In some countries, it is already forbidden for an employer to pay employees wages in cash: check or bank transfer only. Try to call a customer service without having to answer nasty question from nasty machines: good luck! At school, some districts take for granted that you have internet at home: every communication with parents is done through the school portal and even assignments are posted there only. At work, it is now easier to connect via emails than talking face to face with colleagues. I can multiply the examples and go on like that for pages.

More and more we are disconnected with the real which is "translated" through technology. Companies and their army of engineers already decided what is good and what is bad for you. What I mean is that technology is not neutral anymore but most of the time a weapon to dictate the so-called progress (do you really think you are happier than your ancestors?). If I want a cell phone which just call and receive calls, I can't anymore. If I want a car without all the fancy stuff, I can't. If I want my kids to obey the school rules without internet, I can't.

Now, ask yourself why it does happen this way and if it is really what we want or it is more likely what we are suggested to want...

http://imgur.com/gallery/WkHHpZ1

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Yes, Mark, but that example is strangers on a long train ride. There's a difference between that and friends who get together and almost never talk anymore but just sit and mess with their phones, in what was once a social situation.

 

[markbarendt]

Yes, Mark, but that example is strangers on a long train ride. There's a difference between that and friends who get together and almost never talk anymore but just sit and mess with their phones, in what was once a social situation.

The interaction on the phones is with real people, just like this conversation with you is real.