Slashdot Mirror


The Post-Idea World

An anonymous reader sends this quote from an opinion piece in the NY Times: "If our ideas seem smaller nowadays, it's not because we are dumber than our forebears but because we just don't care as much about ideas as they did. In effect, we are living in an increasingly post-idea world — a world in which big, thought-provoking ideas that can't instantly be monetized are of so little intrinsic value that fewer people are generating them and fewer outlets are disseminating them, the Internet notwithstanding. Bold ideas are almost passé. ... There is the eclipse of the public intellectual in the general media by the pundit who substitutes outrageousness for thoughtfulness, and the concomitant decline of the essay in general-interest magazines. And there is the rise of an increasingly visual culture, especially among the young — a form in which ideas are more difficult to express. But these factors, which began decades ago, were more likely harbingers of an approaching post-idea world than the chief causes of it."

26 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Ah yes by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because Graham Bell, Thomas Edison and others were interested in "thought-provoking ideas" and NEVER wanted to instantly monetize on them...

    1. Re:Ah yes by zoom-ping · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's because they were more into patenting others ideas rather than coming up with their own.

    2. Re:Ah yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Edison mostly monetized the ideas of his employees. (I see you got the same discount scratch-and-dent education I did.)

    3. Re:Ah yes by mcvos · · Score: 3, Informative

      We have people tinkering with Arduino, with 3D printers, changing the firmware on commercial products. We've got this "maker" thing (subculture?). We've got social networks fueling revolutions, we've got increasing conflict between governments and corporations stamping down on freedom, and people starting to resist it. We've got crowd-funded series and movies being made. We've got artists, musicians, TV-makers, writers and programmers making it big without requiring the blessing of record companies, big studios, or publishers.

      We've got plenty of interesting stuff going on that's going on right now. It's just that the big media always only notices this stuff when it's over, so to them it seems as if there's nothing new happening. But the '80s were no different in that regard. And I doubt Einstein made the front pages in 1905 either.

    4. Re:Ah yes by Anonymus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most people have not cared as much about massive quantities of cash throughout history.

      Money has always been a motivating factor certainly, but without the American get-rich-quick, your-life-is-meaningless-if-you're-poor culture, there were a lot more people who did things "just because", regardless of profitability.

  2. Actually... by moozey · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's because we've thought of everything.

    1. Re:Actually... by EnderDom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, this article's basically of the "Everything that can be invented has been invented." ilk.

      IMO this mentality is usually due to the fact that the authors are far abstracted from the realms of innovation within science, business and general subcultures of society. All sorts of amazing things are being thought of, written about, developed and researched, but are out of sight of the main stream New York Times journalism.

  3. Nah by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The difference is people expect instant feedback/results from their new ideas in the same way they get instant results from almost everything else these days. The bottom line is it takes a lot of hard work and convincing to get an even vaguely new idea into circulation - exactly the same as it always did. Also it depends on the field, in technology new ideas are constantly being tried out and adopted or discarded.

  4. Timeless BS by paiute · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My big idea is that I do not even have to RTFA to know that this is one of those pieces which is all about the world going to hell in a handbasket, no, this time for real. We are always less smart/less moral/less disciplined/less tough than our imaginary forefathers and apparently always will be.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Timeless BS by mooingyak · · Score: 4, Funny

      My favorite response to this is "Nostalgia isn't what it used to be."

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    2. Re:Timeless BS by Wovel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These articles are silly. They are nostalgic for a time that never was. They don't understand that history is a highlight reel. The big ideas happen once, maybe twice in a generation and few people actually contribute to them. "Public intellectuals" are no less or more important today then they were 100 years ago. What big ideas does the author think are being ignored?

      SETI is still operating, that is about as big as ideas get. Quantum Physic/Mechanicss is still widely researched and very well funded. Neither of these subjects has any immediate commercial value.

      My big idea is that TFA was written by a moron that fancies himself an intellectual. Oh shoot, does that make me a pundit?

  5. A counter-example by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think there are plenty of good ideas -- small, medium, and large -- today. For example, see TED.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:A counter-example by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I like TED speeches, but they are just murmuring popular memes using great sophistry skills at each other. Don't confused TED talks with actual new ideas. I suppose it is possible to be ignorant enough to learn something from a TED talk, but ... probably unlikely.

      Real new ideas are not a rehash of "lets try world peace", "lets all feel catholic style guilt at destroying the earth", "computers make pretty pictures".

      Real new ideas, historically, were the result of things like "what happens if I shine a UV light at a piece of metal in a vacuum, for no better reason than no one tried this before?" "what happens if I store a tank of double bonded fluorocarbons in a sorta catalytic environment for a long time, just because we can?" "what if we tried to simulate the orbit of an electron using discrete energy levels, just for the heck of it?"

      Not, "here's a popular fuzzy idea that no one politically correct or socially acceptable could possibly dislike, now let me sharpen my sophistry skills upon it for less than 18 minutes"

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:A counter-example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Don't confused TED talks with actual new ideas. I suppose it is possible to be ignorant enough to learn something from a TED talk, but ... probably unlikely."

      Not only are you kind of being a dick - but you're flat wrong. Many speakers come and speak about research they are actively doing (new ideas) and certainly not every speech is some kind of hollow Save the Planet/Children/etc. Go to Ted.com, and click ...Ingenious. Every single one of the talks that come up are about an idea and each of these is very likely to be a new idea to most people that watch them.

      "here's a popular fuzzy idea that no one politically correct or socially acceptable could possibly dislike, now let me sharpen my sophistry skills upon it for less than 18 minutes"

      What's politically correct or socially acceptable about this talk?: Sam Harris - Science and Moral Values
      This is basically as opposite of politically correct as I can imagine. There are many other controversial talks on TED as well, so it's just silly to say this.

  6. More like the post-idea media by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TFA to me says more about the media failing their role as societal and intellectual catalysts, than about a shortage of ideas as such. There are big ideas out there, you just don't hear about them from the media.

    At the risk of opening up a political flame war, even the political parties here in the U.S. have big ideas built into their platforms. What level of service and what level of taxation do we really want from our government? How do we distribute the costs of government? Why is illegal immigration a problem and how do we address it? What are the costs of dealing with global warming, and what are the costs of not dealing with it?

    It's just that no one is having an intelligent discussion about these topics. They prefer to stake out a position on blind faith and then denounce everyone who disagrees. Seems to me more like a lack of discussion than a shortage of societal challenges or of ideas to deal with those challenges.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  7. narrow minded nonsense by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Max Planck was told in 1874 when looking for a university course "it is hardly worth entering physics anymore because there is nothing important left to discover”

    This was long before the days of the atomic model, quantum mechanics, radiation, wave-particle duality etc. All that good stuff that brought us all our shiny electronics and the internet,.

    The same is still true - the more we know the more we realise that there's a lot more we still don;t know. Just in the last week I've read about gravity dipoles in qyuantum vacuum fluctuations, and discovery of very dark planets to name but two (ok the latter is a discovery rather than an idea, but we'll now need to work on explaining it, which may lead to new tech., or it may not). It just takes a very very long time for these esoteric ideas to turn into actual useful every day stuff.

    --
    And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
  8. Re:Wrong by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In way way does cheaper, smaller, faster not serve mankind? Efficiency is important for all of us - in fact it's what is keeping our bloated population alive. We're not going to get more resources through magic!

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  9. The nutcases of wayback are todays smart classics by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think the problem here is that good essays and insights get lost in the everyday noise and only show their value as they persist over time and more and more people get to see the ingenuity and foresight in them.

    I don't think Senecas letters were very famous back then or well know beyond a very small group of people (those he wrote them to). And I also am pretty sure that most citizens of the roman empire didn't care squat about a broad transcendent view on life beyond 'lets pray to jupiter as to win this racing bet'. It is only centuries latter that the quality stuff is still around whilst everyday drivel and non-sense go lost in time and replaced with todays everday drivel and non-sense. Thus we get the impression that back in Senecas time society was full of smart and witty politicians and philosophers making great speeches.

    When people in 200 years look at todays Inet Tech era and read Paul Grahams essays - which will still exist while every techcrunch feed will have gone the way of the dodo - people will get the same impression. Lot's of very smart and educated people back then, everything today is degenerated, grand old masters, blabla, jadajada ...

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  10. There are several factors at play here by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ideas are plentiful. With ~7,000,000,000 people in the world and a large & growing fraction of them having access to the internet, there are ideas everywhere. You're reading my ideas right now, along with those of hundreds of other people all on this one page.

    Ideas are easy. Any idiot can come up with ideas. World peace. Flying cars that run on dog poo. Cities on the moon. Ideas are substantially easier to come up with than they are to actually implement. People who come up with 'concepts' for residential towers with farms hanging off the sides; or city vehicles with odd numbers of wheels powered by unobtanium, or political systems where everyone just gets along and are happy are ten a penny, and the abundance of communication that the internet provides makes this painfully obvious.

    There are fewer 'good' big ideas left. With all the ideas that everyone has already had and are coming up with all the time, fewer new ideas are actually 'original'; and the originality of an idea can be quickly proved or disproved with 30 seconds on Google.

    Specialisation. With the bigger ideas aleady thought of and written about, the lions share of ideas these days is in specialised niches; the 'long tail' if you will. The problem is that such ideas cannot capture the imagination of people at large. There are people coming more ideas than ever, but it's hard to raise enthusiasm for big ideas in computer science or industrial management.

    "Good-old-fashioned nostalgia" History seems to be chock full of bold people with big ideas, but a lot of the time it's just dumb nostalgia. Sure, those Victorians wrote a lot of well-considered books and built a fair deal of physical and social infrastructure that persists to this day, but we're talking about 60-100 years here. The innovations and achievements of the past 60 years blow any other 60 year period in history into oblivion. Of course in the past everyone was more 'rational' (ignoring the bigger participation in and seriousness of religion then), was 'healthier' (ignoring the starvation), 'got on better' (ignoring the regular riots/wars/crime) blah blah blah. Probably back then concerned intellectuals railed against the talents of the world being wasted on arranging girders to support mechanical horses, or on the manufacture of cloth etc. No doubt in 100 years time people will be talking in hushed tones about those 'heroes' of the early 21st century, when there were big ideas, and people lived happily in peace without the nefarious influence of xx yy...

    --
    This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
    1. Re:There are several factors at play here by vlm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course in the past everyone was more 'rational' (ignoring the bigger participation in and seriousness of religion then)

      You're looking at the rewriting of history and thinking the rewrite is true. "The victorians" were much less constrained by religion than we currently are today. All of that "founded by christians" and "in god we trust" is a post WWII addition to the history books, mostly on a anti-commie trip.

      Your basic argument remains correct, that was just a bad example.

      One important point you missed is its too expensive to F around. For example, a large part of quantum mechanics was brought about by shining a UV light on a piece of metal and being surprised at the highly unexpected characteristics of the emitted electrons. Back then, a guy could F around in the lab and pretty much do what he wants without a PERT chart. Most time spent screwing around in the lab, was, of course, wasted, but some time developed into the field of quantum mechanics. Now a days, you're not going to be allowed to do blue sky experimentation at a billion dollar national lab, therefore, no progress will be made there. Whoops. The MBA manager points at the PERT chart and says, here is where you'll invent something on schedule and as planned. Or most likely not.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  11. Ideas. Not Inventions. by ThosLives · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Too many comments so far are missing the point: the article isn't about lack of new "things." The article is about a lack of critical thinking.

    It used to be that, in the past, magazines and newspapers and other "common-man" publications would have essays about heady topics. Now you just get articles about how to get rich quick, how some superstar or politician has done something, or some other essentially mundane topic.

    Even the "debates" on economics, social norms, climate change, or intellectual property are very sparse on respectful discourse and are instead filled with emotional responses. There's an interesting quote to which I cannot recall attribution, along the lines of "If you get angry when you're defending your topic, that's probably a sign that you don't feel it can stand on its own merits." The lack of temperance in such discussions - from all viewpoints - is fairly damning.

    Modern society seems to frown upon thought for thought's sake: if you can't monetize it, why bother? I'd say that "modern society" in this case has missed the point: earning wealth is not the only goal.

    --
    "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    1. Re:Ideas. Not Inventions. by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The debates didn't disappear, they just moved. Real debates now take place on forums like Slashdot (yes scary I know). These are much better suited to the critical exchange of ideas because they're structured as a conversation rather than an essay from just one person who may or may not have anything useful/worthwhile to say. I've encountered more new ideas on Slashdot than all the newspapers I've ever read, and I've seen plenty of ideas that initially sounded good be debunked as well.

      I have to say, I've always wondered why the Slashcode type format hasn't been more successful on other non-tech sites. I suspect the user interface, especially the partially hidden tree structure, isn't very easy to handle for many people. I also suspect the very wide and huge space devoted to comments wouldn't mesh well with many sites pre-existing designs. Sadly the result is that too often the comments are just a long list of unmoderated, artificially shortened blurbs with no reward system in place for producing something worth reading.

  12. We're not even having the same conversation by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People are just doing their own shit. There can't be era-defining ideas because all the different little conversations we're having don't even connect anymore. For an idea to make an impact on society, we first need a society that's more or less on the same page. That's what's missing. Sure, the internet makes everything easier, including the communication of ideas. Just look at fora.tv or bigthink or TED. You can fill every free minute listening to brilliant people talk about some pretty deep ideas. But what you can't expect is that these ideas will be a part of some larger social conversation. They happen off to the side somewhere. My academic friends and I give a fuck, but not many other people do. Or maybe they do, but they have no idea that I do too, because nobody can assume anymore that the people standing around the watercooler read the same "ideas" books, saw the same "ideas" discussion - or even the same news program. Only events are a part of our common culture, so you can talk to anyone about Breivik, or dumping Bin Laden's body in the sea, or the future of the Euro. But there are very few ideas in general social circulation, apart from maybe stuff about Keynsian interventions and other macroeconimic stuff. These are big ideas for sure, but nobody I know (myself included) feels like they have any solid understanding of what's involved. Macroeconomics looks like voodoo, so it's hard to talk about while feeling like you're having an informed conversation.

    It's not just nostalgia or some historical distortion that things were different between the two world wars. There was relativity, Communism, anarchism, feminism/sufferage, the uncertainty principle, Bauhaus functionalism and a dozen other art "schools" organized around ideas, the incompleteness theorem, Freud, social Darwinism, logical positivism... and I really could go on and on. And cafes were abuzz with conversation about this very stuff. Not everyone had an opinion about all of it, but everyone did have an opinion about some of it, and it was in your face, because people took it as obvious that these aren't just ideas. Each one you accept gives you an obligation to act, and these actions were impossible to miss for anyone who lived in a major European or North American city. Things really are quite different now. Big ideas are still being thought, but somewhere out of sight. Which means that they don't get a chance to get "big" in the same way they used to be.

  13. Same thing by bussdriver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The changes in culture and the rise of extreme consumerism are having very similar changes to ideas AND imagination. (they are not the same but are close enough to be equally harmed.) My mother was an art teacher, she's seen the huge plunge in imagination over the decades -- you don't get that many good ideas without imagination; in fact, all studies show that students with art education (the old kind) do better in other topics-- the well rounded mind does do better.

    However, we are now undermining that as well. Art is being turned into a standards testing gig and a cover for helping do the other subjects; they've taken art out of art. Soon, money and lack of peripheral benefits will eliminate art programs. People won't be clever enough to realize why it changed; even more likely, they'll just assume it has always been that way and never investigate if it was any different.

    We have increasing numbers of entering college students who do not even have the elementary skill of discriminating between fact and opinion! How is such a person going to even START to investigate anything further? Its like trying to get a Rush or Fox viewer to read...

    Customization technology is giving us the ability to live inside a bubble where all unpleasant thoughts are filtered out. Just the hint of some disruptive idea and it gets filtered out and the mind's defenses are deployed. The geometry problem that starts to look like it will undermine your belief in a FLAT earth is just a trick for some crazy liberal with their round earth conspiracy promoting their disturbing opinions so they can change your way of live (which is better than theirs.) Oh, and its politically incorrect to upset anybody...

    Good ideas should shake things up a bit; they require some imagination to even realize the possibilities involved-- which are often upsetting in many ways; the more touchy you are the sooner your ego will jump in to defend you with mindless rationalizations (and if you can't tell fact from opinion you'll have a hell of a time defeating your natural illogical defenses.)

    This is also why democracy does not work. The culture has to be healthy for its democracy to be healthy; essentially, the democratic government reflects the people and rather than see it as some removed mythical creation (as many do today) it should be seen as a manifestation of the social development of the society. A really complex survey/study in people's collective decision making. (yeah, today's system is broken; it is our collective fault... the reasons Americans are so big on responsibility and accountability is because they are over compensating for their lack of it. They are in denial.)

  14. "Post-Enlightenment age" by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article

    "It is no secret, especially here in America, that we live in a post-Enlightenment age in which rationality, science, evidence, logical argument and debate have lost the battle in many sectors, and perhaps even in society generally, to superstition, faith, opinion and orthodoxy."

    They have a point. And it's a real problem, because when some new problem comes along, society seems unable to deal with it.

    Consider the current messes. Nobody in public life expresses a good understanding of the current economic situation. The political consensus is "it's just a big recession". It might be a permanent situation. (Japan had a real estate crash in 1989, and neither real estate nor the stock market ever came back. To some extent, the current US model of capitalism is broken, yet nobody is proposing a better model. (Should we have a tax model that doesn't favor debt so much? The US taxes companies' dividends but not interest paid on debt, stock buybacks, or executive compensation. As a result, most companies don't pay dividends and borrow too much.)

    In the 1930s, it was very different. All sorts of big ideas were proposed to deal with the Great Depression. Some of them were nutty, like Technocracy. Some of them were implemented, like the Works Progress Administration. It was a tough time, but the problems were discussed and solutions tried.

    There's a fundamental assumption that economic growth will continue. That may be incorrect. Looking ahead, we have big issues. Some major natural resources run out in the next few decades. There's no cheap source of energy even being seriously talked about. No new source of energy has been developed in the last 50 years. (Nuclear reactors and solar cells are now more than 50 years old.) Demand is going up as China modernizes. Now what? We have no clue how to run a post-oil world with 6 billion people. World oil production peaked in 2005.

    At venture capital conferences, I'm not seeing new great ideas. More like endless me-too presentations. (Way too much "social networking". I've seen a pitch for a social network for cats.)

    We're seeing regression in developed countries. Israel used to be a modern country dominated by kibbutzim with a strong work ethic, the people who "made the desert bloom". Now, Israeli politics is dominated by the religious right (the "ultra-orthodox"), who are a welfare-supported dead weight on the country. The Islamic world's religious right is at least as bad. (It's amusing to observe how much the Jewish and Islamic right wings resemble each other. Oppress women, check. Anti-education, check. Anti-progress, check. Old Testament mindset, check. Old guys in black with beards in charge, check.)

  15. The Elites have Changed by catchblue22 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most people have not cared about new big ideas throughout history.

    Well, maybe, and maybe not. I think you might be surprised at how widespread Enlightenment ideas were in Europe. Faraday used to give public scientific demonstrations that were widely attended. However, what matters I think more is that the elites of our society, those who make the important decisions are increasingly seeing the world through dollar signs. The Public Interest is less important to them, and private interest is their dominant concern. They backhandedly acknowledge the Public Interest by saying that it is served by everyone acting in their own private interests. This is a profound shift from the Enlightenment approach, that led to the rise of our modern democratic systems. Enlightenment philosophes like Locke, Rousseau, and Voltaire tried to balance the Public and private interests; they believed in liberty and justice for all members of society. Today, politics seems to be an exercise in maximizing the gross national product.

    --
    This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)