What will the post-technological world look like for humanity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Noisy Rhysling
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of a post-technological world and its implications for humanity. It questions whether technology can ever truly become obsolete, suggesting that as long as humans exist, some form of technology will persist. The conversation explores the idea that if technology is defined as the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, a future without it would require either addressing practical needs without scientific understanding or eliminating practical needs altogether. The notion of a pre-technology era is also challenged, highlighting that tool use is not exclusive to humans and raising doubts about the existence of a time without technology. The overall sentiment emphasizes that technology is likely to evolve rather than be entirely replaced.
Noisy Rhysling
Messages
999
Reaction score
345
I made a friend twitch by asking him what the post-technological world would be like. So, wide-open question: What comes after technology for the human race? Sociological implications? Psychological implications? Will we be Markovians? Angels? House plants?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a minimal wiki article on "Post Tech"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-tech

There is no reason to believe that technology itself will ever be entirely history - unless we are too.
Would there be wheels and fire in a post-technology era?
Since some apes have learned to use tools on their own, are we sure that humans ever existed in a pre-technology era?
 
So there's never going to be time when technology has been supplanted by a more advanced system?
 
Noisy Rhysling said:
So there's never going to be time when technology has been supplanted by a more advanced system?
What "more advanced system" would not be "more advanced technology"?
By definition, technology is "the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry". Given that definition, the only way "past" it would be to have all "practical purposes" addressed without scientific knowledge. How would that work? Or perhaps to eliminate all practical purposes (while still having humanity). How would that work?
 
This is not worldbuilding and is not appropriate for this sub forum.
 
I'm currently writing a novel in which my main character was a victim of experimentation (cliche, I know) but has no memory of it. In the experimentation, technology was implanted in the character's body, allowing an AI algorithm to run off of the character and fuse it's psychological aspects with an actual human's. I'm not super knowledgeable in science such as this, and I'm sure doing this would be incredibly hard, if not impossible, to do. So for the sake of keeping the peace, let's just...
This is a question for people who know about astrophysics. It's been said that the habitable zones around red dwarf stars are so close to those stars that any planets in the zones would be tidally locked to the stars in question. With one side roasting and another side freezing almost forever, those planets wouldn't be hospitable to life. a) Could there be forms of life--whole ecologies--that first evolve in the planet's twilight zone and then extend their habitat by burrowing...
I know this topic is extremely contraversial and debated, but I'm writing a book where an AI attempts to become as human as possible. Would it, eventually, especially in the far future, be possible for an AI to gain a conscious? To be clear, my definition of a consciousness being the ability to possess self-created morals, thoughts, and views, AKA a whole personality. And if this is possible (and let's just say it is for this question), about how long may it take for something to happen...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
2
Replies
74
Views
5K
Replies
28
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
87
Views
9K
Back
Top