It's a question I think we really need to ask in thinking about the interaction between the physical human world and the digital world, and definitely one I can't answer. How far do we go? American society, at least as I perceive it, is very much concentrated on the next big thing, the next best thing. Advancement and efficiency are very much valued in the United States. I would say that only outliers not active in the way that American society functions are capable of disassociating themselves from this fast paced civilization. We've developed this idea that innovation and industrialization are so insanely important but will we not eventually come to the point where there is major tension between this advancement and our own survival?
Murray discusses throughly the humanist conflict with technological advancement. She makes the point that Hitler used sophisticated technologies to commit atrocities against Jews and control and manipulate the masses. She also discusses the intensification of surveillance that new technologies have allowed for. Yes the computer is excellent for all of its encyclopedic capabilities , but is this information really information that we always should have at the tips of our fingers?
I have to agree with the humanists that efficiency shouldn't always be the paramount concern in society. Industrialization has allowed us to completely poison the Earth which I think most of us would agree isn't too great. While I embrace change and improvement I think a lot can be lost in the so called civilization of groups and cultures. This is as we talked about why many Europeans nations have been historically more reluctant to embrace digital media. By embracing this digital world we are signifying our acceptance of a pace and value set that is contrary to say agrarian based societies. I wonder also how lon a disconnect between older and younger generations to completely annihilate traditions.
This brings me to an even more important question, what is the value of tradition? Yes it connects people with shared heritage and distinguishes individuals from each other making people feel more grounded in their sense of self, but really why do we need it? I can't come up with a great answer even though I feel like we just do. Do we need tradition to tell us the answer to my greater question, when the new deviates to dramatically from the old and familiar? If our sense of the way the world functions is being augmented can we even know how far is too far?