Can't Think, Won't Think...
Tony Fyler 19 comments
One of the most depressing things about human beings is our insatiable need to be taken care of, to resign our responsibility and put our feet up and let someone else do our thinking for us. We hand the responsibility of determining our moral codes over to some deity form or other, and then don't think any more about it, so whatever the 'deity' says BECOMES our morality, irrespective of whether its mysterious ways fly in the face of our instincts. We hand our children to celibate preachers, and don't stop to think "hmm...there's a guy who's supposed to never have sex with anything...wow, wonder if he's hard up..." We elect politicians once every four years and then hand the responsibility for Everything In Our Worlds to them. Even President Obama, who continually said "We'll all have to work together to get out of this," has been subject to this idea that nono, we've done our bit in electing you. Now you fix the world...
But this isn't a religious or political rant. No, really, it isn't.
This is a rant about surrendering our brains, not to a deity or an authority figure, but to a piece of electronic equipment.
There's a woman called Lauren Rosenberg from Los Angeles. She's suing Google. Take a guess why?
She's suing Google because she tried to cross a four-lane highway in Utah on foot, and got hit by a car. Now, call me old-fashioned, but if you're going to sue anyone, I'd say sue the driver of the car that hit you, but more than that, I'd have to ask - surely if you're crossing a four-lane highway on foot, you're practically asking to be hit by cars, so where the Hell do you get off acting surprised?
She's suing Google for more than $100,000 because she was 'advised' to try and cross a four-lane highway on foot by Google Maps as part of a walking route she downloaded to her BlackBerry. And so this idiot thought 'oh, well that must be alright then...' and wandered out into traffic. Personally, I think Google should counter-sue the State of Los Angeles for the cost of her education, but the point is this: we have become very quickly accustomed to trusting the information our GPS machines give us, at the expense of actually thinking about our situation.
This is by no means a US phenomenon. We've had plenty of cases in the UK of drivers 'following' their GPS into sticky situations. My favourite to date was the guy who, when faced with a level crossing and the instruction 'take the next left,' got out of his car, lifted a gate, drove his car onto the railway lines, TURNED LEFT, and drove up the railway track for about half an hour, imobilising the 8.42 to London. That's some fairly serious mental inhibition. But nobody would have taken him seriously if he'd wanted to sue his satnav-maker, because there's a fundamental principle involved. It's called 'not being a fuckwit.' Satnavs and Google Maps are supposed to be aids to navigation - they are NOT a replacement brain. Someone should tell Ms Rosenberg what my parents always told me when I was a kid and I'd run in saying I wanted to do something stupid, and Darren down the street was doing it. "If Darren told you to stick your hand in the fire, would you do it? No? Well sit down, play nice and shut the hell up then..."
Incidentally, I'm not targeting people who are led astray down roads that look genuinely likely to lead somewhere, and then don't. Nor am I targeting the truck drivers who have nearly plunged over cliffs after following their satnavs in strange locations, because they've been led onto unsafe roads. There are genuine issues with the speed at which satnav maps are updated. But when you're driving on a railway line or walking out onto a four-lane highway, I'm sorry, but you have only yourselves to blame!
It gets worse. There's some evidence that continuing reliance on GPS actually reduces your ability to form the kind of mental connections involved in ordinary navigation, and could even, over time, lead to early dementia. This is still speculative to some degree, though some research in England into the hippocampi of London cab drivers (who have to memorise a stunning amount of navigation data before they get permission to become cabbies) has shown that once they stop using their navigation knowledge and rely instead on GPS, they lose the ability they've previously acquired. It really is like Nature saying 'use it or lose it buddy!' - and we're not using it.
Thing is - and I really wasn't going to do this, but this far in, it's irresistible - if we lose the ability to navigate once we stop thinking about navigation, surely it's just possible that when we hand over political control entirely to those who govern us and stop thinking about politics once the polls close, that what we're really doing is walking out onto a four-lane highway and asking to be deceived and cheated? When we stop looking for answers about the universe and shove a deity into the cracks in our current understanding, aren't we walking out into a four-lane highway and asking to remain ignorant?
And no, I'm not suggesting we throw away our GPS, or tear down our governments, or even dispense with religions. All I'm asking is that we approach all of it - technology, power, the universe - with our eyes open and our brains still switched on. Otherwise, we lose the right to sue any damn body when we get hit by cars.
Joe Marco
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 02:55 AMOn a large enough graph the line between size and stupidity meet up, this is known as the idiotic singularity and it's coming soon to a Wal-mart, Mcdonalds, Baseball game, nascar event, Justin Bierber concert, Twilight Movie near you...
Gina
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 11:01 AMGreat article, Tony. One day, I hope you'll do your articles via video. I love the sound of a British accent. Though, to you, I'm sure, it's not exactly an accent, or as you might say, oxcint. haha. ;-)
gilly
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 12:53 PMSorry Tony if I am still on the christiophobe path with you, but please tell me
If we dont hand over our moral codes to a deity ,Jesus and his teachings in my case
Who do you recomend or alternatly how do we get our moral codes across to others and make them dominant
You like everyone else here bitch and moan and demand better but offer nothing to replace it
Christianity teaches people to follow a path based on love and forgivness
Christianity is the "Aid" . Nothing can stop people choosing their own path no matter how stupid it is
Tony Fyler
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 05:01 PMRodney - thanks man. Probably right, probably shouldn't have. (Shrugs) Oh well.
Joe - Too cool, man. Have some kudos.
lol thanks Gina - Have no problem doing 'em as videos...except I don't have a video recorder. There's a webcam...thing...here, but when you do 'em that way, they do come out a bit 'deer in the headlights' ;o) And you might be disappointed in my accent - it's more Welsh than English ;o)
Gilly - sorry, thought I'd made it clear that firstly, I wasn't suggesting we got rid of anything. And secondly, that what I was hoping was that we'd THINK about things - that's what I'd offer, though not to 'replace' anything.
Gina
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 10:44 PM...in response to this comment by Tony Fyler. I can't tell the difference between the Welsh and a British accent.
Gina
Tuesday 20th July 2010 | 10:57 PM...in response to this comment by gilly. Pardon the interjection, Gilly, but I noticed you used the word "dominant." A common mistake made by followers in most religions is that they're to be domineering. It helps to actually read the bible. But don't stop there! Try going so far as to then believe what it says. It's hard, it's very, very hard to believe it, I know, and without the spirit of God there is no hope:
Matthew 20:25-27 (New International Version)
25 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.
26 ***NOT SO WITH YOU.*** Instead, whoever wants to become great (dominant) among you must be your s-e-r-v-a-n-t,
27 and whoever wants to be first must be your slave
I hope that helps a little.
Gina
Henk V
Wednesday 21st July 2010 | 12:16 AMTony, with regard to the above comment.... I think you have a QED
...in response to this comment by Joe Marco. JFC Joe, that is such a right on comment...I wish I could have thought of that. You're right, its the same f-in' thing. Live better with Christ or Wal-Mart-whats the difference? Those who don't have their morality and values set by the church, have the T.V., and the Corpro-Facist ruling Right to fill the gap.
right on dude....
f~
...in response to this comment by Joe Marco. Have a plate o'kudos man. On the house.
f~
gilly
Wednesday 21st July 2010 | 05:11 PM...in response to this comment by Gina. Well you can read it that way Gina
I was talking moral codes
We in Australia have the Police and the Courts to keep them Laws/ Moral codes dominant. Yes the big stick. Do as your told or fall foul and be punished. Seems to work
The other thing Gina is I am not calling for an end to athiesm or ever have, like the athiests here do for Christianitys demise
My question was how do they plan to dominate me, or my children and the beliefs they hope to share to future generations.
Christianity is based on freewill. I read my bible most nights
Gina its true, its damn true. I dominate these plebs with my verbal intelect and cutting wit but I have no interest in changing their faiths to mine
Believe what you want
Cos you BELIEVE it
Tony Fyler
Wednesday 21st July 2010 | 05:43 PMPoint of order gilly - have said, time and again, that I'm not out to abolish anything. And not for nothing, but if you're going to claim superior intellect...it helps to be able to spell the word intellect. Just saying...
Gilly
Wednesday 21st July 2010 | 08:36 PMOHHH My bad
How will I ever show my face again
Suitably chastised
Gina
Wednesday 21st July 2010 | 08:51 PM...in response to this comment by gilly. I've been here long enough to have learned that they're desire is to be dominated by a man, especially a strong man, such as yourself. So, haha, go ahead. But you do realize that anything that can be dominated, can't also have "free" will; you do realize that's oxymoronic, don't you?
Thesaurus
DOMINATE
verb
1 control, influence, exercise control over, command, be in command of, be in charge of, rule, govern, direct, have ascendancy over, have mastery over; informal head up, be in the driver's seat, be at the helm of, rule the roost (in), wear the pants (in), have someone in one's hip pocket; literary sway.
FREE
adjective ( freer |ˈfrēər|, freest |ˈfrēəst|)
1 NOT under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes
See what I'm sayin?
T-Mac
Monday 26th July 2010 | 12:52 AMRidiculous, poor judgement can't be litigated away.
at what point will people realize they are responsible for their own behavoir?
...in response to this comment by T-Mac. T-Mac... "responsible for my own behavior?" No way...You gotta' be kiddin' me. Google made me do it.
f~
T-Mac
Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:33 AMFriendo-
why do you use JFC for emphasis?
makes me think you may have doubts about your own theology.
It wouldn't be dramatic to you otherwise. You're far too polite to use it only because it would be shocking to someone else. I'm pretty sure you don't use the N word casually.
good post about Palin... she is HOT!!!
...in response to this comment by T-Mac. "JFC" ??? To shock, piss off, and 'cause that's the way I talk. As you may know-for reasons that must be way to obvious on several levels-I do not use the "N" word, as it is naturally not in my vocabulary, while as you also know, JFC naturally IS.
f~
T-Mac
Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:46 AMoh ok
Rodney
Monday 19th July 2010 | 11:39 PMHere's hoping she loses that case - or better yet she never even gets it to court. However, it's America and we all now how their legal system works...
Btw - I am not sure if you should use the words "...wonder if he's hard up..." when describing a potentially molesting priest. :-P