Technology, Economics and Culture
I’ve been reading through ‘Bubble Generation’ (www.bubblegeneration.com) a bit of late. The general theme of the blog is to look at what’s happening technologically, then understand the subsequent cultural and economic effects .
This guy is good. He is a leading figure in discussions about many of the things he writes about so he knows what's going on. While the blog touches on sometimes complex issues, they’re always well explained. A caveat, he often uses jargon that he has created. The reason why he has to do this is because he is putting forward new concepts which require novel descriptions. There are some explanations on the site, but if you don't get anything let me know and I'll do my best to give you a summary.
Anyway, check it out.
I’ve picked up a sample article (linked to below) which is, and yet isn't, too economic in nature.
Makes interesting reading.
http://www.bubblegeneration.com/2006/03/banality-of-market-pt-4-jeff-n-thinks.cfm
This guy is good. He is a leading figure in discussions about many of the things he writes about so he knows what's going on. While the blog touches on sometimes complex issues, they’re always well explained. A caveat, he often uses jargon that he has created. The reason why he has to do this is because he is putting forward new concepts which require novel descriptions. There are some explanations on the site, but if you don't get anything let me know and I'll do my best to give you a summary.
Anyway, check it out.
I’ve picked up a sample article (linked to below) which is, and yet isn't, too economic in nature.
Makes interesting reading.
http://www.bubblegeneration.com/2006/03/banality-of-market-pt-4-jeff-n-thinks.cfm
posted by KH @ 12:02 PM
1 Comments:
At 2:45 PM, March 19, 2006,
Anonymous said…
The major point that stood out for me in this article was the idea that the language of economics dominates everyday life.
If you ask most people about their opinions and beliefs, I believe that it is more than likely that the reponse that you will get will come frome someone OTHER than the speaker.
The author mentioned that we misuse the language of economics and one of the ways in which it is misused is that the speaker simply has no idea what they are talking about.
I am reminded here of the Australian 'Boat People Crisis' when I read a newspaper interview with a group of people who when asked about their opinions on the issue, all (bar one) gave opinions that quite literally parroted the one-liner sound-bites of the government and media.
The most important point, I feel, is that if one is to have an opinion, then at least have the self-respect to understand one's relationship with that opinion.
If we are going to use the 'language of the market' then I think it is easy to see the link between the what I just wrote and the author's second point which was that we often "...fail to factor in the various kinds of capital into our understanding."
I'm not sure if I agree with him though, when he says that of the many kinds of captial, it is financial capital that is being devalued the fastest.
I only say this because, bearing in mind my second paragraph, I'm not sure in what context he is refering to this devaluation. This is more likely a result of my ignorance of economics as a speciality.
Is this 'fundamental' knowledge or is it a case of 'boys and their toys'?
This, I think, leads in nicely with the author's next point where he says that "...our decisions often have unintended consequences: right now, we are essentially trading financial capital (which is then being mortgaged to China) for social and cultural capital."
The important point being that our decisions have unintended consequences (the implication being that these consequences are negative).
Actually, as I am going through his post, I am finding that I am agreeing more and more with what he is saying.
One of the things that I have learned from the Dune series that I have just finished re-reading (you need to read it many times..) is that humans don't plan for the future. At most, we plan for a lifetime , maybe tow.
The author of the post hints at this lack of foresight when he writes, "But we pretend like those forms of capital don't exist. Of course, they do. The loss isn't just felt in terms of binding us together now; their present value is the sum of the innovations that flow from them, and that's lost, too."
I have to get going now so I'll leave this post as is for now.
Be good.
Sleiman
Post a Comment
<< Home