Basic HTML Version
------------~--~---------------=--==~==~~
TheNext 25Years–
Crisis ·or Opportunity?
by
Roben Gonskey
"Never ln sil human 'history hallfJ so
meny peop/IJ teken such
11
serious look
IJt the future ofm11nkind.
And
never hlls
it
been so necessary, becluse never h1s
the human r11ce faced sucfr an over·
whelming crisis and such
a
stupendous
opportunity "
Edward S. Comosh
Presodent, World Future
Society
M
ankind hves in
a
world populated
by many larger, swofter. and
stronger species. Sut only man can
truly think about the luture Only rnan is
oquipped with the unique mental ability
to contemplate. anticipate. and prepare
for tomorrow - and ten years alter
tomorrow. Only man has the potentoal
for altering his culture and environment
in accord with his visjon of the future.
From the beginning .of recordad hos–
tory. man has looked to the futura Wlth
a mercurial mixture of cunos.ity. fear,
hope, and confidence. Today. man 's vi·
sion of tha 'luturé seems darkened by
the possibolity of thermonuclear war, en–
vtfonmental destrucuon. and the polen–
toe! collapse of the eoonomoc and socoal
systems
th&t
sustain our lives. Yet to
sorne, our luture is also brightened by
the knowledge that in many respects we
have withon our power the possibihty of
creating a
c•vllization
incomparabty su–
perior
to
any ever
known in
the
annals
of history.
Futuri.sts on the Future
Those who study the future olten
have widely differing scenerios of wha1
tomorrow will bring . lndeed, even the
8
most fundamental questions often re·
main unanswered or even unasked .
Why are we here? Where 're we going?
What should our goals be?
Assuming
we
could
control
the
future
· if we wented to, who will make the key
deciSions? Whose stendards woll be im–
posed? Who deterrñones whether tech–
nologocal, economic, and population
growth should be increased, reduoed or
even stopped?
At the second general assembly ofthe
Wortd Futuro Soctety in Washongton.
O.C.
an 1mpress1ve 1rray of ex_perts con-.
sidered some
of
the altemative futures
that may emerge in lhe next 25 yoars.
Lester Brown, president of the World–
watch lnstitute. was
not
opumistic.
" We
are about to enter a not·so-brave
new world that will require accom-
modation to e less affluent and simpler
way of lile," said Brown
··we deluda ourselves of
we
think the
years ahead will be easy. At best they
will be treumatic. and they could be
cetastrophic.• : . We are on the verga
of one of the great discontinuities in
human history "
By contraS!, Herman Kahn. foundong
director of the lemod Hudson lnstitute,
contended that we may be entering
a
period
of
transition from economic
growth to stable equihbroum.
" This
tren·
sit•on could be the most important mo–
ment in history. ·• declared Kahn.
Projections of ultimate catastrophe
(e.g .. the Oub of Rome"s " Limits to
Growth") are commonly and dos–
quietin¡¡ly presented as scenarios of the
future . But Kehn assened such projac·
'~ We
are on the verge of
one of tite great aiscontinuities
in
human history.
"
.:
Lesrer Brown
" We lwve no prophets,
we have no sacred books
to guitk us toward the future.
"
Jolrn Plau
tions may be meeningless. "lt's like
projecting the growth of a
1
7-yoar-old
- hewould be monstorat25. "
M .I.T. professor of management Jay
W. Forroster claimed lhat long-range
and detailed plannlng
for
future genera–
tions is being hampered by ""too much
emphasts
on
purely physical hmits and
by too much emphasos on intemational
action and cooperation .
· ·
Forrester
maintained that social and cultural limi–
taiions must also be seriously consid·
ered Too ohen. •nternational solutions
to energy. populatoon, economiC$, etc..
are simply "ways to avoid local respon–
sibility." according to Forrester.
While many futurists assen that wide–
spread planning
is
our only
hopa
of liv–
ing on
a
desirable l uture, Job Fowles,
chairman
of
the oommittee for studies
of the future at the University of Hous–
ton, contends that such planntng fllay
well nde roughshod ovar the attotudes
and woshes of {he people who w•ll popu·
late the futura.
"There is
something essentially sinls..
ter ábout the polotical means by which
futurists
would
have their intentions im..
plemented," says Fowles. "Rather than
estabhsh one smoolh path into the fu·
ture which may be free of surprise but
wh1ch
•s
cenainly
not
free of
~rcion.
it
is better to move forward as democracy
would have it - cumbersomoly, roskong
crisis, but without
a
loss of freedom. As
irksome and
antiquated as
this
ap.
proach may seem to
some.
it
i.s
to
man·s
long-term advantage, for it means that
flexibohty and resiliency will be pre·
served.
" Wa should keep hands off the fu·
tu
re.··
concludes Fowtes.
Needed: A Spiritual Oimension
Most people recognize the need for a
certain amounJ of future-oriented plan–
ning . But the rub come$ when we sense
that
someone
else
"s
undesirable goals
and purposes woll be achieved by thal
planning. George Orwell's foreboding
novel,
1984,
vividly ponrays
a
fright·
eningly possible "planned future" -a
iuture nightmanshly effieienl, whero
people's lives are planned. mon•tored.
and controlled in every detail. Thus th e·
question
is
not so much whether to plan
for the future. but who is really qualilied
todo that plannong7 And of thOM quali–
fied, whom can you trust?
"Every sociely hes a set of myths by
which ít views the luture." says Gregg
Edwards, program manager for Altema–
tives on Hogher Education for the Na–
tional
Science
Foundation . These
myths. according to Edwards, "provide
an essential backdrop for any proposed
changas in the socoety.'"
The danger comes when tt>OM who
control
the future have the wrong val–
ues or when the
~ociety
simply ceases to
· adhere to the values it once had
John Plan. associate director of the
Mental Health Research lnstitute at the
Univensi ty of Michogan, observad that in
our W ostern sociely, we have no un'ified
sense of any ultímate source for stan–
dards by wt-oich to evaluate possoble fu–
ture developments. "We have no
prophets; we have no sacred books to
guide us toward the futura, " assened
(Continued on page 1
J)
WEEK ENOINO AUOUST 23,
1975