Stability is the enemy of change.
How in a world of comfort will we ever change our behaviours? There is the saying - "Smooth seas never created good sailors" and that is true of societies and the people within them. To live in comfort is to encourage one to never explore beyond the realms they experience daily. It doesn't make it a certainty but it does reduce the opportunity. The story of Gautama Siddhartha is an excellent example of someone who went against the grain to help grow themselves – there are many like it in history and fiction. But it comes to societies, we wear boots on the way up and slippers on the way down because we do not want to be pushed into the realm of change.
External pressures are the elements that force adaption. If it gets cold, you seek heat. If you are in pain, you seek relief. You have to get sick to fight of the threat. This can be both good and bad, for seeking immediate relief can mean avoiding the solution to the longer term pain.
When I hear people talking about the future and the plans for society and the technology we use, the idea of there being anything but stability is practically a swear word. It is taboo to suggest anything but business as usual with a few minor technical details swapped around. If we do not suggest and talk about the difficult and the unwanted – we will have created a blind spot for which we will inevitable fall into save for the grace of luck. These blind spots are there right now and very few people are looking at them, even fewer are actually interacting with them.
If we cannot acknowledge even the possibility of a world remotely less stable, how are we to fair in a world that eventually does become unstable? Infinite growth and non-stop increase in pleasure is an impossibility. Many have tried to do it and all have failed. You cannot have yin without yang.
To have this happen will polarise, a split on which is entirely present and yet almost invisible to those who are not looking for it. To have the zeitgeist philosophically fictionalised into a cohesion less void. This is the attitude that arises when you see one a large group of people who are highly politicised, involved in the daily minutia of the higher levels of societal whims - the other side of the group have completely given up on the idea altogether. They have committed to work on their own terms regardless of how difficult it may be. It might be difficult but they have intentionally destabilised themselves and as such have the potential to be significantly more resilient to future changes, regardless of the shape they take.
Going into the void and embracing it will yield more desirable long term results even if it is painful on the ride there. As a collective this may be the way forward.
Back to Index