INFORMATION TO USERS

This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to fight in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

University Microfilms

300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

A Xerox Education Company KARR, Carolyn Mae, 1933- 1HE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY FOR THE TEACHING OF SOCIAL STUDIES.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1972 Education, general

! University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan j

' © 1972

Carolyn Mae Karr

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN'MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY

FOR THE TEACHING OF SOCIAL STUDIES

DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By Carolyn Mae Karr, A.B., M.A.

*****

The Ohio State University 1972

Approved by PLEASE NOTE:

Some pages may have

indistinct print.

Filmed as received.

University Microfilms, A Xerox Education Company ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer wishes to acknowledge her appreciation to those who have assisted in this dissertation. The brevity of the comments, however, are in no way an adequate measure of the gratitude owed to the following people. To my major advisor, Dr. Raymond H. Muessig, I wish to express my appreciation for his unstinting encouragement and con­ structive criticisms of this manuscript. Its merits must be largely attributed to his suggestions and efforts; its defects are solely those of the author. Gratitude is like­ wise due to the other members of this writer's reading com­ mittee, Drs. Eugene Gilliom and James K. Duncan. In addition to the above, my special thanks must be expressed to my close and good friend, Joyce Norris, whose careful and critical reading of the initial draft aided immeasurably to its prose style. VITA

July 22, 1933 Born - Huntington, West Virginia

I960 A.B., Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia

1963 M.A., Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia 1963-1966 Instructor of Social Studies, Barboursville High School, Barboursville, West Vix-ginia

1966 Instructor in Political Science, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana

1966-1969 Assistant Professor of Social Studies, Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia

1969-1971 Graduate Assistant, Division of Humanities Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1972 Assistant Professor of Social Studies, Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Social Studies Education Social Studies Education. Professor Raymond H. Muessig Curriculum Theory. Professor Paul R. Klohr American Social Thought and Reform. Professor Robert H. Bremner iii I

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... ii VITA ...... iii LIST OF T A B L E S ...... vi

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION...... 1 Statement of the Problem Significance and Justification for the Study Limitations of the Study Methodology of the Study

. II. THE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY...... 24

Introduction Science and Technology in Contemporary Society The Impact of Science and Technology on Past and Future Trends The Increasing Tempo and Ramifications of Change The Role of Knowledge and its Impact on Society Widespread Cybernation, Leisure and Affluence Changes in the Economic Structure of Society Technology and Politics The Accumulation of Scientific and Technical Knowledge on Social Values III. AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED SOCIAL STUDIES MATERIALS AND PUBLICATIONS ...... 135

iv Publications of the National Council of Social Studies Dissertations, Research Studies and National Curriculum Projects Economic Textbooks History Textbooks Problems of Democracy Textbooks World History Textbooks

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ...... 187 Summary of Research Findings Suggested Methodology for Social Studies Teaching Illustrated Curriculum Material

APPENDIX ...... 265 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR TEACHERS ...... 276

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR STUDENTS...... 282

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 287

v LIST OF TABLES

Table Page 1. Pitirim A. Sorokin’s Systems of T r u t h ...... 44 2. Possible Intellectual Cycles in Society...... 47 3. Pitirim A. Sorokin's Scenario of Cyclical Change ...... 48

4. Average Work Week in the Year 2000 88 5. Possible Work Patterns in the Year 2000 88

v i CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

On April 15, 1755, Dr. Samuel Johnson published the first dictionary of the English language. In the preface to his dictionary, Dr. Johnson wrote:

It is the fate of those who toil at the lower employments of life to be . . . exposed to censure, without hope of praise; to be disgraced by miscar­ riage, or punished for neglect wrhere success would have been without applause, and diligence without reward. Among these unhappy mortals is the writer of dictionaries, whom mankind have considered not as the pupil, but the slave of science, the pioneer of literature, doomed only to remove rubbish and clear obstructions from the'paths through which Learning and Genius press forward to conquest and glory, without bestowing a smile on the humble drudge that facilitates their progress. Every other author may aspire to praise; the lexicog­ rapher can only hope to escape reproach, and even this negative recompense has been yet granted to very few.l

The same words may be applied with equal force to writers of dissertations. Such discouragement notwith­ standing, it would seem appropriate to begin this study with a statement of the author’s intentions, hoping "to escape reproach," but expecting "to be exposed to censure."

Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Lan­ guage, Manor British Writers, ed. G. 6. Harrison (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1954J, Vol. II, p. 86. 2' If in the course of this work, it removes some "rubbish"

and clears "obstructions from the paths" of those who seek to "press forward to conquest and glory," so much the bet­ ter. Its contribution more likely will amount to "dili­ gence without reward."

Statement of the Problem

During the past ten years a growing body of litera­ ture has stressed the importance of the technological so­ ciety. Even a cursory glance at this literature convinces one that its substance is important enough to command great

attention. Because of the serious nature of this litera­

ture, the question should be raised, "To what extent is the

field of social studies incorporating this information in

its literature and curricular materials?" According to Margaret Mead the acceleration of change which character­

izes our era demands that education encourage students to p think ahead by decades or even centuries.

Consequently, it would appear to be vital to convey

to students the tempo, multiplicity, and consequences of

technological change, change which promises to continue un­

abated. It is therefore necessary to examine the field of

social studies to see if it is accomplishing the above task.

2 Margaret Mead, "First Steps Toward a Common World Culture," Technology, Industry and Man: The Age of Accel­ eration, ed. Charles R. Walker (New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968), p. 338. Accordingly, this study will examine the writings, ideas, materials, and projects in the field of social studies for the purpose of (1) analyzing their comprehension of tech­ nological change, and (2) determining the extent to which they are designed to convey to students the nature of tech­ nological change.

Significance and Justifica­ tion for the Study

In the year 1755 when Dr. Johnson published his dictionary the full forces of industrialism were gaining momentum in his own country and, more slowly, throughout other parts of Europe. The economic system of capitalism, freed from the constraints of religious dogma, was chal­ lenging a society of prescriptive status and substituting in its place a society of social mobility, division of labor, and rational calculation. Technological inventions such as John Kay's "flying shuttle" and Nev/comen’s pump were coming into wide-spread usage while science was strik­ ing out on its own, first to supplement and later to sup­ plant the Bible as the key to understanding man and nature. Theology, which had reigned supreme in medieval times, was being subverted by philosophy as a means of validating hu­ man values; and universities such as Oxford and Cambridge had succeeded the monasteries as the source of information for the present and inspiration for the future. With the diffusion of the scientific world view, the spread of mov- able type, the increase in literacy, and the publication of books, it was an era of change.

Since that time equally momentous changes have oc­ curred in the world. The sweep of change in our own era was caught in the remarks of a scholar who, when asked why he became interested in history, replied, "I wanted to know 3 how much man could stand.Today, however, change has not

— -- only accelerated, it is moving at a cataclysmic speed. The

same person who as a youth considered Jules Verne's stories delightful fantasies can see in his old age men walking on the moon. With fiction becoming a reality those of us who will live in the twenty-first century approach it, para­ doxically, with both fright and exhilaration. A major rea­

son for this sense of awe about the future stems from the fact that science and technology have advanced more rapid­ ly in the past fifty years than in the previous five thou­

sand. A computer, for example, can accomplish the five hundred years' work of five hundred scientists in less than five minutes/1’ and the volume of scientific work accomplish­

ed within the past fifteen years alone is greater than that 5 of all previous years of recorded history. Moreover, we

3 ^Arnold J. Toynbee, "Sir Lewis Namier and History," Harpers, (May, 1967), p. 57.. 11. Barbara Ward, "Spaceship Earth," Technology, In­ dustry . and Man, op. cit., p. 289.

^Ibid., p. 1. can execute brilliant and overwhelming technological feats unparalleled in past times. For instance, it took cen­ turies to recuperate from the physical destruction that accompanied the collapse of the Roman Empire, but after World War II it took only twenty years to rebuild the shat­ tered and burned cities of modern Europe. In addition, our technology has allowed us to explore the heavens, pen­ etrate the depths of our oceans, ease the burden of human toil, and surround ourselves with abundance beyond the dreams of men in past ages. It has also permitted us to spawn ugly urban centers, pollute rivers and streams, cre­ ate sprawling bureaucracies, and develop diabolical weap­ ons beyond the nightmares of men in past ages. According­ ly, it can be stated with a degree of certainty unusual in today's world that science and technology are reshaping our lives and lives of the next generation in a fashion unprecedented in history. In fact, the velocity of change is so great that the human imagination bogs down and can rarely grasp what has already happened, much less project future societal trends. Although some future artist may look back on today's world and say as Dickens did of a past era: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,for most of us

the significance of what is happening today is increasingly ------" - - ■— /T Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities (New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1942), p. 1. 6 difficult to understand. Many of the new technological breakthroughs, like the development of the atomic bomb or the exploration of the moon, appear to be isolated events. It is not at once apparent what effect they have on man's social life and self-image. Most of us simply applaud new scientific discoveries and achievements, then go about our daily lives as if nothing distinctive had really happened. We are momentarily fascinated by heart transplants, kid­ ney transplants, and others; but, v/hile these things all strike us as novel, their impact is significant only to those with medical problems. For various reasons we never attempt to generalize on the basis of what has happened to what could possibly happen. Even the scientific break­ throughs in biology such as the discoveries in genetics and the creation of life in a test tube may temporarily spark a responsive chord, most likely— "God never intended it to be this way"— but usually all these things appear as mere background noise. Similarly, the word technology it­ self is never quite understood by the public and appears to the popular mind as something associated with machines, electronic inventions, space journeys, higher and bigger buildings, more goods and services, and other quaint sym­ bols .

Not only, then, is the word technology often mis­ interpreted, but there is only peripheral recognition of the impact of technology on our lives. Yet, considering 7 these multiple manifestations, one might agree with the political scientist, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who maintains that "we are entering a novel metamorphic phase in human 7 history." His remarks, while long, are worth stating in their entirety. The world is on the eve of a transformation more dramatic in its historic and human conse­ quences than that wrought either by the French or the Bolshevik revolutions. Viewed from a long perspective, these famous revolutions merely scratched the surface of the human condition. The changes they precipitated involved alterations in the distribution of power and property within society; they did not affect the essence of indi­ vidual and social existence. Life— personal and organized— continued much as before, even though some of its external forms (primarily political) were substantially altered. Shocking though it may sound to their acolytes, by the year 2000 it will be accepted that Robespierre and Lenin were mild reformers. Unlike the revolutions of the past, the developing metamorphosis will have no charismatic leaders with strident doctrines, but its impact will be far more profound. Most of the change that has so far taken place in human history has been gradual— with the "great revolu­ tions" being mere punctuation marks to a slow, eludible process. In contrast, the approaching transformation will come more rapidly and will have deeper consequences for the way and even perhaps for the meaning of human life than anything experienced by the generations that preceded us.8

Consequently, it may not be an over-statement to say that we are approaching a radical disjuncture in his­ tory. Brzezinski, for example, refers to our period in

7 Zbigniew Brzezinski, "America in the Technectronic Age," Encounter, January, 1968, p. 16.

8Ibid. q history as a "technetronic age" while Daniel Bell speaks of a "post-industrial society.Theologians such as Harvey Cox'*''*' and Teilhard de Chardin allude to the "post- 12 Christian age" to describe what is transpiring. Less Christian, but more caustic, John Kenneth Galbraith an- nounces the advent of a "technostructure" 13 while Lynton K. 14 Caldwell calls our society a "scientific super culture." Marshall McLuhan sees the new electronic media bringing about a totally new environment which will alter everything from politics to sexual behavior. 15 Nor are these writers the only ones to comment on future societal trends. The Frenchman, Jacques Ellul, sees in technology an autonomous

1 f i force which will subjugate man and devour society. His

9Ibid.

"^Daniel Bell, "Notes on the Post-Industrial Soci­ ety," The Public Interest, Vol. VII, Spring, 1967, p. 102.

■^Harvey Cox, The Secular City (New York: Macmillan, 1965), passism. 12 Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, The Future of Man (London: Foutana Books, 1964), passism. 13«Tohn Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State (New York: The New American Library, Inc., 1968), passismT ^"Lynton K. Caldwell, "Managing the New Scientific Super-Culture," Public Administration Review, Vol. XXIIII, No. 2 (June, 1967), p. 128. 19Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is the Message (New York: Bantam Book, 1967), passism. ^Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1967), passism. colleague, Bernard de Jounval, speaks of the necessity of

establishing a "Principate" 17 to control science, technol­ ogy, and politics. Accordingly, some future artist may not be as generous as was Dickens toward his era, but find him­ self more in agreement with Yeats: Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world . . . The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.18

Whatever the judgment of our era, it logically fol­ lows that the impact of science and technology in the con­

temporary world is so pervasive and influential as to de­ mand urgent attention. Furthermore, an examination of sci­

ence and technology and their impact on social institutions ought to be a significant part of the curriculum in the field of social studies. Although the word curriculum can

be defined in many ways, a social studies curriculum is at the very least a response as to how the young ought to be 19 educated. And even though social studies is not the only field which educates a student, nor the school the only in-

17Bernard de Jounval, "Political Science and Pre­ vision," American Political Science Review, Vol. 59, 1965, p. 30. . ■^William Butler Yeats, "The Second Coming," Major British Writers, on. cit., p. 635.

19James P. Shaver and Harold Berlack, Democracy, Pluralism and the Social Studies (New York: Houghton Mif- flin Company, 1968), p. 1. 10 stitution, both have a responsibility to convey to a stu­ dent some understanding and comprehension of the society in which he will grow up. Without knowledge and under­ standing of the technological society, a student will neither understand his era nor comprehend it. Consider­ ing the fact that it requires years to initiate and imple­ ment curricular change and considering the fact that the technological society is already a reality, social studies materials are long over-due for a searching, critical ex­ amination for the purpose of ascertaining their relevance to a technological society.

If the mere fact of the reality and present impor­ tance of technology and its impact on all aspects of con­ temporary life were not enough to insure its inclusion in social studies curricular material, more urgent reasons are evident. Many scholars, scientists, and others feel that the technological society poses a potentially grave threat to the most basic human values. It has been asserted by many social scientists (an assertion to be explored fully in the second chapter) that technological forces unchecked and uncontrolled threaten to dominate the individual in society and to forge a society that might more properly be called totalitarian technocra- 11 20 cy. While the charge is forceful and subject to proof, it does call attention to the fact that science and its

applications have profoundly altered the relationship of human institutions to the physical environment. The fol­ lowing item from the Milwaukee Journal illustrates this relationship. A reporter asked a physicist whether he would continue with his experiment if he were aware that its successful completion would destroy the world. Mild- 21 ly, the physicist replied, "Yes, of course." The story

is a short, shocking way of emphasizing the point that science and technology are in one v/ay or another major

determinants of modern civilization. Although some students of the technological phe­

nomenon maintain that it represents only what it has al­ ways represented— a means to an end, others are struck by the growing autonomy of technology and believe that tech­ nology has become an end in itself defining both man and

his society. While neither of these extremes may be valid,

technology as used in our society today has consequences that entitle it to a full-scale review, if for no other.-. reason than that each new technological invention contains

20 Theodore Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1969), pp. 9, 23; see also Brzezinski, op. cit., p. 21. 21 Milwaukee Journal as cited in The Center Diary, No. 10, January, 196F] 12 within it the potential for radically transforming the so­ ciety that has produced it. From the invention of writing to the landing on the moon, from the discovery of narcotics to the development of the atomic bomb, each new technologi­ cal breakthrough has had multiple ramifications for man’s way of life— his culture, his social organizations, his political behavior, his morality, and his beliefs. For this reason the role of science and technology in today's society can no longer be ignored. This contention is sup­ ported by Barbara Ward:

In a world that is being driven onward at apocalyptic speed by science and technology, we cannot, we must not, give up the idea that human beings can control their political and economic policies. They must have some sense of where they are trying to go, of what they are trying to do, of what the world may look like twenty years from now. It is surely inconceivable that we should turn the whole human experiment over to forces of change which we can n,either master nor even fully understand. If one thing is true about the world we live in, it is that these forces are now in such spate that the physical background of our world tv/enty years hence will be almost completely different from what we see today. Unless as a human society, we have some sense of direction, blind chance v/ill take over. '. . .22

It is in the nature of the American experience to

consider change, especially technological change, in opti­ mistic terms; for we as a nation have made an ideology out

2? Barbara Ward, loc. cit., p. 288. 13 of the cult of progress and an ethos out of science.^ Most of us rarely pause to question where we are heading or the forces that are taking us there. The consequences of such inveterate optimism were vividly captured, it will be remembered, in the ancient Greek legend of Daedalus and Icarus. We Americans are not unlike Icarus in our atti­ tudes toward technology. We are arrogant about it, exhil­

arated by it, and optimistic toward it. It has produced for most of us the affluent society and promises to free man from the ageless burdens of human toil. Inasmuch as we are the first civilization in human history to accom­ plish such an epic task, our attitudes toward technology are only natural.

Senator Fulbright, it might be recalled, is fond of reminding Americans of "the arrogance of power." But

there is another arrogance equally as dangerous— the arro­ gance of our ignorance. We are not only arrogant about

having created the technological society; we suffer from

the ignorance of believing that the mere act of creation assures us that we can manage it. Too few among us have sensed the true enormity of the impending task. The Greeks

had a term for this type of arrogance; they called it "hubris." John Milton in Paradise Lost captures the es-

^Raymond Callahan, Education and the Cult of Ef­ ficiency (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962), passism. 14 sence of modern man's hubris in the figure of the fallen angel, Moloch. . . . Moloch, sceptered king, stood up, the strongest and fiercest spirit That fought in Heaven, now fiercer by despair. His trust was with the Eternal to be deemed equal in strength, and rather than be less Cared not to be at all, with that care lost Went all his fear: of God, or Hell or w o r s e . 24

In our "hubris" over our technological accomplish­ ments and our dedication to the scientific world view, we often forget the archetypal wisdom of the Greek myths, the validity of poetic insight, and the relevancy of the legend of Dr. Faustus. It is the moral of this latter legend that is worth recalling: Scientific knowledge, and by extension technology, contain within it the dual promise of triumph and death. What man has wrought in creating the technolog­ ical society may indeed liberate him from the various trag­ edies of the human condition— poverty, disease, hunger and famine. It may also annilihate man: short of this, it may only dwarf him spiritually, intellectually, and morally.

These, then, are some of the problems and value dilemmas of the technological society. It would appear self-evident that future generations should have the oppor­ tunity to reflect on both the dangers and opportunities of a technological society. But reflection cannot take place

P4 John Milton, Pa.radise Lost, Ma.jor British Writers, Vol. I, loc. cit., p. 454™ 15 unless there is some understanding of the forces that are shaping our society and those that promise to shape the next century. "The aim of the social sciences," Auguste Comte once remarked, "was to know in order to predict, to 25 predict in order to control." Although the social sci­ ences are not yet in a position to make accurate predic­ tions about the future, we can at least glean from them issues that ought to be of concern as we move into the twenty-first century. Otherwise, the future will be left to chance, blind fate, or accident, none of which gives any assurance of future stability. "I doubt very much," writes Barbara Ward, "whether we shall be able to survive the enormous forces of change that sweep down upon u s . Let us hope that Miss Ward is wrong and that the possi­ bility of understanding and controlling these forces does exist.

Accordingly, this study takes the position that it is imperative for a student to understand the technologi­

cal forces of his society; and, furthermore, that such a study is critically needed to inquire whether the field of

social studies is conveying to students an adequate knowl­ edge of the technological society.

25 Francis Marvin, Comte, The Founder of Sociology (New York: Russell & Russell, 1937), p. 35. Ward, loc. cit., p. 289. 16 In addition to the arguments advanced above that it is the responsibility of society in general and educa­ tion in particular to convey this knowledge to the young, there is growing evidence to support the contention that the young themselves are demanding it. Consequently, those who teach must, in asking themselves the question, "What knowledge is of most worth?" be alert to students' feel­ ings about their society and their insistence on relevance. Although each of us has his own interpretation of what con­ stitutes relevance, student slogans about the "system," the "bureaucracy," the "military-industrial complex," the

"power elite," and finally "to tell it like it is," should not go unnoticed. Indeed, it would be impossible for any­ one to ignore the pristine vigor of the young. Many of the deeper meanings behind the student slogans and their demands for relevance may be closely tied to helping them understand the technological society. That "something" is happening in their society they have intuitively grasped; the full understanding of it they' have yet to perceive. Peter Drucker, an astute observer of the contemporary scene, speaking of the complex organizations forged by technology writes as follows: Where the liberal and the conservative still single out this or that institution as either the "vil­ lain" or the "hero," the hippies have seen clearly that all society is.one of organizations. While very few young are hippies, the perception of our society as one of organizations is shared by the 17 entire generation that is now reaching adulthood. It is the most visible characteristic of the "generation gap." The young are as alienated from the university as they are from the armed services or the government agency.27

This elusive "something" that the young feel so keenly is captured admirably in Margaret Mead’s new book, Culture and Commitment. Several quotations from that book describe this feeling. No generation lias ever known, experienced, and incorporated such rapid changes. . . . the defi­ nition of humanity . . . the fundamental impera­ tives of lifg and death . . . all change before their eyes. °

. . . I believe this crisis in faith can be at­ tributed, at least in part, to the fact that there are no elders who know more than the young themselves about what they are experiencing.29

This same attitude of the young is poignantly ex­ pressed in a letter written by a fifteen-year old boy and quoted in its entirety in Mead’s book. The following are excerpts from that letter: There is a mass confusion in the minds of my generation in trying to find a solution for our­ selves and the world around us. My generation is being used almost like a machine. We are to learn set standards, strive for better education so we can follow in our elders' foot-

P7 Peter Drucker, The Age of Discontinuity (New York: Harpers, 1969), p. 178. OQ Margaret’Mead, Culture and Commitment: A Study of the Generation Gap (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1970), p. 78.

29Ibid., p. 82. 18

steps. But why? If we are to be a generation of repetition, the situation will be worse.

Sometimes I walk down a deserted beach listening to the waves and birds and I hear them forever calling and forever crying and sometimes we feel that way but everyone goes on with his own little routine, afraid to stop and listen. . . . The answer is out there somewhere. We need to search for it.30

As Margaret Mead remarks, "the young do not know what must 31 be done, but they feel there must be a better way." It

is the responsibility of education today to explore with this generation some tentative answers to what can be done. It is particularly the task of social studies to aid stu­

dents in examining the technological forces which have giv­ en rise to this uncertainty and uneasiness in the young. Perhaps in doing so those who teach social studies can more

adequately answer the question, "What knowledge is of most worth?" As a former high school social studies teacher, and

a supervisor of student teachers, this author has stepped into many social studies classrooms. Even in the "best" of

such classrooms the doubt has often arisen as to whether the issues being raised and the discussions taking place

were not in many ways more relevant to a past era. One par­ ticular example comes to mind. Not long ago in an advanced

class in social studies the entire period was devoted to

30Ibid., pp. 76-77. •^Ibid., p . 76. 19 exploring the differences between capitalism and social­ ism. The discussion was lively, sparkling, and intelli­ gent. Consider, however, the following remarks of A. M. F.

Palmer as he writes about the changes brought by technol­ ogy: If an intelligent observer from Mars or Venus would come and examine all large contemporary industrial concerns— public or private— as work­ ing enterprises, he would notice, I suspect, only their overwhelming sa m e n e s s . 32

When the above classroom example and the quotation are tak­ en together, it ought to at least convey the possibility that many of the issues we discuss in our classrooms may be obsolete. This same point is the subject of Daniel Cohn-

Bendit’s book, Obsolete Communism, in which he argues that the distinctions between systems— capitalism (or some version thereof) and communism— are totally irrelevant in view of the changes brought by technology.

In addition to the above example, other issues seem equally obsolete. Recently, a new project in the field of social studies was developed at Harvard by Oliver and New- mann. This project focused on a study of the fundamental issues of a society. Although there is much to commend in this project in terms of its methodology, one pamphlet in

^^A. M. F. Palmer, "On Public Accountability," Socialist Commentary, Vol. XL, No. 4, January, I960), p. 13.

•^Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969), passism. 20 this series was entitled, "Free Enterprise and Social Plan- 34 nmg."^ While the conflict between free enterprise and social planning may have been relevant during the New Deal (many historians will argue otherwise)-^ this issue is ob­ viously not of fundamental importance in understanding to­ day's society. On the contrary, it serves to illustrate the point that continuation of such obsolete issues pro­ grams students to leave their classrooms with myths and false assumptions about the way their society operates. Even the language employed (free enterprise) builds on im­ age not in accordance with reality. Technology has so al­ tered our environment that v/hat were once considered "fun­ damental issues" are no longer so. This fact should urge us, therefore, to look carefully at social studies mate­ rial and ask ourselves whether the things we talk about in classrooms are fundamental issues in today's world or whether many of them belong to a past era. Perhaps Archi­ bald MacLeish caught the obsolence of many "fundamental issues" when he wrote: "We have learned the answers, all

34 Donald W. Oliver and Fred N. Newmann, "The New Deal: Free Enterprise and Public Planning," Harvard Social Studies Project (Columbus: American Education Publishers, 1968). ^That it may not have been an issue during the New Deal let alone an issue of "persistent historical or con­ temporary interest" see Paul Conkin, The New Deal (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1967). 21 ■Zg the answers. It is the questions we do not know."

Accordingly, it is a concern with the relevance of the questions and issues raised in social studies class­ rooms that prompts this dissertation. Inasmuch as the ad­ vent of a technological society and its prolific altera­ tions in our environment necessitate its teaching, this study will undertake to review the field of social studies to ascertain if it is conveying to students the nature of the technological society.

Limitations of the Study

The scope of social studies herein examined is limited to those courses taught at the secondary level, grades ten through twelve. It is at this level that mate­ rials, projects, and content will he examined v/ith particu­ lar emphasis on political science, economics, and history. Not only should these fields lend themselves to conveying the outlines of the technological society, but they are the most frequent courses taught at the senior high school level.

Methodology of the Study It is the plan of this study to examine the litera­ ture which bears on a technological society. The purpose

^Archibald MacLeish, "The Hamlet of Archibald MacLeish," Collected Poems (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1 9 6 2 ), p. 1 0 . 22 in doing this is three-fold: (l) Such material is necessary and pertinent in order to judge the logic of conclusions and judgments rendered in the course of this study. (2 ) Such material is necessary to establish a rationale for judging the literature, projects, and other artifacts ex­ amined in the field of social studies. (3) Such material will also serve as "in-put" for any teacher who might wish to incorporate into his or her curriculum knowledge, under­ standings, and concepts about the technological society.

Following the chapter in which the literature of the technological society is reviewed, the specific litera­ ture of the social studies field will be examined. It will serve to ascertain the awareness, comprehension, and atten­ tion given by the field of social studies to the techno­ logical society. While criteria for judging the literature will be established, the appropriate place to reveal the criteria would appear to be in the chapter dealing with the literature. Therefore, it is only necessary to cite here the type of literature that will come under scrutiny since it helps to clarify the procedure and plan of the disserta­ tion.

Accordingly, this dissertation will review past is­ sues of Social Education, past Yearbooks of the National

Council of Social Studies, and the bulletins and curriculum series issued by that organization. The assumption is here made that if teaching about the technological society is of 23 concern to social studies educators, such concern would be reflected in the major publications of the field. More­ over, examination will be given to another significant pub­ lication in the field, The Social Studies, to see if it re­ flects the concerns stated above. Finally, an examination will also be made of recent dissertations and other re­ search in social studies with the same view in mind.

Having looked at the journals and articles which should reflect the thinking of social studies educators, classroom materials will likewise be scrutinized to see if they show any cognizance of the issues of a technological society. In this regard five economic textbooks, five problems of democracy textbooks, and fifteen history text­ books will be selected for intensive examination. Addi­ tionally, new curricular projects in the field of social studies will also receive review to see if they are convey­ ing to students the issues and information about the tech­ nological society. By looking, then, at a variety of pub­ lications in the field of social studies and the materials used in the classrooms, some conclusions would seem to be justified concerning social studies awareness and compre­ hension of the technological society. CHAPTER II

THE TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY

Introduction In order to establish a rationale for judging the relevance of social studies materials to the changes and challenges that technology has caused, and will continue

to cause, it is necessary to review the writings of those scholars who have addressed themselves to the technologi­ cal society.^ Not only will a review of this literature serve to establish a rationale, but it will also serve to

identify issues and ideas which merit inclusion in future

social studies materials. The present chapter is not in­ tended to be a definitive treatise on the technological society, however, since the accumulated material is volu­ minous and vast. Instead, it seeks to identify only those

There are many terms which could be used to convey the emergence of a new era. Alan Toffler uses the term "super-industrial society," Kenneth Boulding uses the term "postcivilization," Brzezinski uses the term "the techno- tronic society," and Daniel Bell uses the term "post­ industrial society." Likewise, one finds repeated refer­ ences to "high information level culture," "scientific super-culture," the "electronic age," and a host of others. While none of the above is totally descriptive or without its critics, the term technological society has been chosen because it seems to convey a more catholic stance.

24 25 issues which would appear pertinent to the field of social studies. A few words are here in order concerning the meth­ odology used to select those issues dealt with. When con­ fronted with the question, "What issues engage scholars who are concerned with the technological society?" a pre­ liminary step was to review the professional journals of the past ten years in the fields of political science, economics, and sociology. It was assumed that these dis­ ciplines by their very nature would reflect an awareness of issues relevant to a technological age. This proved to be a correct assumption, inasmuch as certain issues recur­ red time and again. A second step was to check the Book

Review Digest for the past ten years in order to ascertain major books written about the technological society. An inspection of these books also aided in identifying major issues. In addition, various books of readings and stand­ ard journals such as Daedalus, The American Scholar, The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, to mention only a few, were examined with a similar objective. A list, then, was made of those issues which repeatedly appeared in the scholarly literature. In this way not only was a comprehensive bib­ liography obtained for further research, but a comprehen­ sive identification of issues was achieved.

Aside from identifying issues on the technological society, the framework for organizing the issues likewise deserves comment. It was immediately evident that many organizational schemes could be employed. The material, for example, could be organized along lines which corre­ sponded to the traditional scholarly disciplines; on the other hand, some interdisciplinary framework could have been utilized. Still further, a thematic or issue-oriented presentation also seemed in order. Because it simplified the writing and the flow of ideas, a thematic approach was used. In this regard, the long-term projections used by the Hudson Institute in their studies about the future proved particularly helpful in establishing the particular themes chosen. Even though broad categories were chosen for discussion, technology, as it will be shown, has pro­ duced two principal kinds of change: structural change and theoretical change. Accordingly, these two major cate­ gories can serve as a megaframework for organizing most of the material in this chapter. Additionally, in order to keep this chapter within manageable proportions only do­ mestic issues relevant to American society were included. Even within this limitation it was necessary to exclude certain topics which no doubt one could argue should have been included. For example, many argue that science and technology have had considerable affect on religious think­ ing. But since the major purpose of this chapter was to develop a rationale for judging social studies material, it seemed somewhat fairer to present only those issues which 27 one might reasonably expect to find in social studies mate­ rials. This is not to argue that questions of a religious significance ought not to be discussed in social studies classrooms, but merely to state that it seems unreasonable to judge social studies materials by this standard. A third introductory comment is likewise in order.

As previously mentioned there is voluminous material on the technological society. By any standards of scholar­ ship, some of it is extremely poor. Technological issues by their very nature lend themselves to sensationalism.

Many writers, whether they be technophobes or technophiles, eager to produce bestsellers have written about the tech­ nological society in this fashion. While such treatment may shock the public into an awareness of the undesirable consequences of technology or convince the public of its desirability, it adds little to a dispassionate, reasonable examination of technological change. Many other works, while avoiding sensationalism, are no more than polemics about the technological society and bear a strong resem­ blance to Luddite tracts of a previous era. Writing in a vatic tone, and reading like a sociological apocalypse, the authors of this type of literature have been deliberately excluded since it is difficult to discern where advocacy leaves off and explication begins. Therefore, as the lit­ erature was examined, criteria were established which served to exclude or include certain authors and to regard 28

or disregard others. One rather rigorous rule of thumb was to rely only on those who are considered authorities in their particular disciplines. Assuming such authors are honest and void of any special interests, their testi­ mony and statements deserve thoughtful consideration. Daniel Bell, for example, when he speaks of the sociologi­ cal implications of technology, is a person not to be ignored. Moreover, it was demanded that an author in a given field be held in high esteem by his colleagues and that he command the respect of the scholarly world. John

Kenneth Galbraith and Robert Heilbrover writing in the field of economics are examples of this particular cri­ terion. Although these two stringent rules of scholarship (which v/ere followed with only a few exceptions) negate the utilization of many writers and books on the technolog­ ical society, they may lend more weight to the statements quoted. Such rules also result in a very conservative assessment of the consequences of technological change.

Scholars with reputations to maintain forego more specula­ tive and flamboyant statements since judgment by one's peers is no doubt an inhibiting factor. As an appendage to this, it should be added that the more "daring" authors ought not to be totally disregarded; for, indeed, their predictions about the consequences of technological change may eventually prove more accurate than those of the au­ thorities in the respective disciplines. 29 A fourth introductory comment about the subject of

"futurology" is also in order. In analyzing the material on the technological society, it was necessary to ask not only what impact science and technology have already had

on existing institutions and theories, but also what im­ pact they would have in the foreseeable future.. "Futur­ ology" as it is called, is a dangerous business; and, con­

sequently, predictions about the future have been held in disrepute as scholarly enterprises. That "futurology" is

becoming a business, and a very serious business, is sub­ stantiated by the fact that many institutions both in this

country and abroad are devoting themselves to projections about the future. The Hudson Institute, The Rand Corpora­ tion, the Stanford Research Institute, The Ford Foundation,

and the Carnegie Commission are examples of such institu­ tions here in America. In France the Futuribles is an appropriately entitled group of scholars who are engaged

in similar activity, and in England the Committee on the Next Thirty Years of the English Social Science Research

Council complements the work of their Parisian colleagues. The publications emanating from these groups are only part

of the reflection of a much more widespread intellectual climate in which scholarly interest in the future is flour­

ishing. The reason for this was expressed by Daniel Bell, chairman of the Commission on the Year 2000. 30

. . . the premise [of the Commission] . . . is . . . to indicate now the future consequences of present policy decisions, to anticipate future problems, and to begin the design of alternative solutions so that our society has more options and can make a moral choice, rather than be con­ strained, as is so often the case when problems descend upon us unnoticed and demand an imme­ diate response.2

It is easy to see why this enterprise is particu­ larly relevent today. As previously pointed out we are changing our environment with extraordinary rapidity and are likely to do so faster and faster in the future. Apart from cataclysms there has never been environmental change at this pace before. That the amount of change per year is likely to increase and go on increasing is a consequence of the exponential rate of science and technology. It seems likely that this multiple increment of the pace of

change will dent our environment and our psychic stability in ways yet unforeseen. Consequently, those who engage in projecting the future recognize the tentativeness of their conclusions but realize that the alternative is to leave the future to' blind accident.

Long range studies of the future, however, are not new. Business has utilized them for years. But it is only of late that governments have entered the field, perhaps because they have not confronted the need to respond to

such rapid change before; perhaps also because the idea of

^Daniel Bell, "The Year 2000: The Trajectory of an Idea," Daedalus, Vol. 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), p. 639. 31 long term planning has met, at least in this country, with opprobrium. In recent years this attitude has undergone a change as public leaders begin to understand more and more the interaction of technology and environment. Michael Young's plea in his recent book, Forecasting and the Social Sciences, for a group of scholars to engage in long-range studies of the future is very much to the point. Consequently, it would seem appropriate to subject curricu­ lar materials to analyses based on the projections of these scholarly studies and to ascertain their relevance for the twenty-first century. This has not been done in the past. It should be done in the future.

Thus, futurology should be as much of a concern to education as it is to business and government. In this regard, it is instructive to quote again Margaret Mead's injunction to education: "... students must be taught to think ahead by decades, even centuries" if we are to con- trol the forces of the next century. As with Margaret

Mead, so also has David Reisman commented that education needs inquiry on two levels— the here and now and on the level of utopian thinking about the possibilities of the

■^Michael Young (ed.), Forecasting and the Social Sciences (London: Heinemann, 1968), pp. 1-5. ^Mead, Technology, Industry, and Man: The Age of Acceleration, op. cit., p. 338. 32 5 future. For this reason and those noted above, this present chapter will be directed toward these two levels. Accordingly, it will review not only present changes in institutional structures and theories caused by technology, but take note also of anticipated future changes.

Science and Technology in Contemporary Society

Despite the fact that Erasmus once commented that "every definition is dangerous,"^ clarity demands some attempt to arrive at a definition of science and technol­ ogy. Because science has become the burning idea of the late twentieth century, comparable in its impact on men’s minds to the flush of democratic enthusiasm of the late eighteenth century, the word merits special and primary consideration. Webster defines science as a body of knowledge con­ cerning the physical and natural world. Although this definition is perfectly acceptable, there are additional ones. Thorstein Veblen, for example, defined science as

5 David Reisman, Individualism Reconsidered and. Other Essays (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1954)', pp. 70-98. £ Desiderius Erasmus, "Adagia," Margaret Mann (ed.), The Adages of Erasmus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,. 19b4j, p. 304. 33 7 "idle curiosity," a meaning which in no way aids clarifi­ cation, but like his other memorable definitions, added to his reputation as a wit. Pragmatists such as Peirce, James, O and Dewey offer still other meanings. Charles Peirce, a man of intense faith in science, described it as a "quest for the unknown," while William James, a man of consider- q able skepticism about science, defined it as a "method." In agreement with James’ definition of science, but in dis­ agreement with his skepticism toward it, John Dewey wrote that science was an "attitude of mind" and a "method of thinking."^® From the foregoing definitions it is patent­ ly evident that science can be defined both as method and as a systematic body of knowledge. If it is defined as the former, such a definition's contribution to clarity is somewhat questionable. According to Robert Hutchins, a professor of education wrote several eminent scientists and asked them not only what characterized the scientific atti­ tude but also made their particular discipline unique. They

7 Thorstein Veblen, "The Place of Science in Modem Civilization," Perry Miller (ed.), American Thought: Civil War to World War I (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968;, p. 310.

^Charles Peirce, "The Fixation of Belief," Ibid., p. 137. Q William James, "What Pragmatism Means," Ibid., p. 173. ^John Dewey, "Science as Subject-Matter and a Method," Reginald D. Archambault (ed.;, John Dewey on Edu­ cation (New York: The Modern Library, 1964), pp. 188-189. 34 replied accordingly:

Chemist: Openmindedness . . . Physiologist: In­ tellectual Honesty . . . Botanist: Openminded­ ness . . . Zoologist: Observation, inquisitive­ ness, perseverence and industry, objectivity and critical independent reflection . . . Physicist: Objectivity . . . Sociologist: Objectivity . . . Microbiologist: Respectful observation . . . Mathematician: Openmindedness . . . Chemist: Practiced willingness to label conclusions ten­ tative until supported by reproducible or con­ firmed data . . . Physicist: A will to know the truth . . . Psychologist: An inquiring mind.11

Obviously, notes Hutchins, this study shows conclusively that science has a corner on all the rational processes of thought! Since there is not a distinguishing characteris­ tic of the discipline of science that would not character­ ize the disciplinary pursuits of any honest scholar, it might avoid some problems to simply define science as a body of tested knowledge.

However, there are other aspects of science that need to be explored if its full impact and meaning are not to be misunderstood. Whether adhering to a definition of science as method or as a body of knowledge, many profes­ sional scientists appear to view science more as an end than as a means. Before the atomic bomb, for example, a

scientist generally saw his discipline as an end-in-itself, like art. There were, no doubt, engineers and inventors who took scientific discoveries and made things for profit

Robert Hutchins, "Science, Scientists, and Poli­ tics," An Occasional Paper (Santa Barbara, Calif.: The Center for Democratic Studies, 1963), p. 3. 35 or for the government; hut the true scientist was one who stayed close to his laboratory with little or no interest in the affairs of state. At least this is the picture portrayed by the late Robert J. Oppenheimer about his ear­ ly life as a scientist. I had never read a newspaper or a current maga­ zine like Time or Harper's; I had no radio, no telephone; I learned of the stockmarket crash in the fall of 1929 only long after the event; the first time I voted was in the presidential elec­ tion of 1936. . . . I was deeply interested in my science; but I had no understanding of the relations of man and his society.12

Although scientists' concern with the world changed— as did everybody else’s— after the explosion of the atomic bomb, the view of science as an end-in-itself remained pretty much the same. Politicians on the other hand, see science more as a means, if we are to believe their state­ ments and actions. After the launching of Sputnik the national goal was to put an American on the moon first as a matter of national pride and prestige. Thus, millions of dollars were channeled to the scientists with the ex­ pectations that science held the means of achieving na­ tional goals. Both of these interpretations of science— as means and as end— are misleading, for there appears to be a reciprocal relationship between means and ends that

IP As quoted in Robert C. Wood, "The Rise of an Apolitical Elite," Gilpin and Wright (eds.), Scientists and National Policy-making (New York: Columbia University, 1964), p. 4l. 36 needs to be included for an understanding of science. That means and ends are continuous, related, and reciprocal in science was stated by John Dewey:

In all the physical sciences . . . it is now taken for granted that all "effects" are also "causes," or, stated more accurately, that noth­ ing happens which is final in the sense that it is not part of an ongoing stream of events. If this principle . . . is employed in dealing with distinctive human phenomena, it necessarily fol­ lows that the distinction between ends and means is temporal and relational. Every condition that has to be brought into existence in order to serve as means is, in that connection, an ob­ ject of desire, and an end-in-view, while the end actually reached, is a means to future ends.

Because of the increasing effectiveness of science which makes it possible to entertain ends that could not be envisaged in a less scientific age, there is a close and inevitable connection between science and its effects. Science is not only an instrument for achieving ends, but is also a vehicle for modifying and redefining the ends themselves. To turn to science as a means is the first step toward changing one's ends. For example, during World War I the ends of military planning and of theory were concerned with such things as the size of armies, in­ dustrial mobilization, and the gaining and holding of ter­ ritory. Through scientific discoveries and their applica­ tion military ends in any future large-scale war are rapid

^John Dewey, "Theory of Valuation," International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Vol. II, No. 4 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939), p. 4-3. 37 communication and strategic deterrence. Science began by giving the military a new set of ends. The atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb unquestionably changed the ends of warfare. Indeed, in any future large-scale war victory— the goal of war in former times— is an absurdity. Thus,

science in this particular case was a means of achieving victory, but it ended by redefining the ends of warfare. Consequently, a fuller understanding of the term "science" suggests that it be viewed as both ends and means and ade­ quate recognition be given to the interaction between the two, particularly when science is defined as a systematic body of knowledge rather than method. Another term which needs elaboration is the word technology. "Technology," Ernst Junger once wrote, "is

the real metaphysics of the twentieth century."^ And, indeed, technology has played a special and magnified role in American society. Whether we are envied for our

refrigerators, despised for our transistor radios, or feared because of- our atomic bombs, a definition of tech­ nology, as the above phrases imply, ought to include both machines and inventions as v/ell as innovation and method. Although the word eludes precise definition, technology

can at least be defined as a body of knowledge, processes,

instruments, and skill at the command of participants in

14 As quoted in Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society, op. cit., p. 9. 38 15 a given economy. Writing on this subject, Daniel Bell has said that technology is more than just the applica­

tion of scientific knowledge and machines. It is, notes Bell, a "systematic, disciplined approach to objectives using a calculus of precision and measurement. ..." Also demanding that the scope of technology be extended to include method is the French sociologist, Jacques

Ellul. Ellul, preferring the words "la technique" in­ stead of technology, defines the latter as "an ensemble 1 7 of standardized means for attaining predetermined end." Consequently, it would appear that a definition of the word technology can and should include both method and

application of scientific knowledge. Unless otherwise stipulated, it is the latter usage which will be followed

in this study. Like science, technology is valued today because it is seen as a means to an end; also, like science, tech­

nology is sought as an end because of its value as a means. Accordingly, there is an ends-means relationship with tech­ nology as well as with science. In addition, there is a reciprocal relationship between science and technology.

"^Julius Gould and William L. Kolb (eds.), A Dic­ tionary of the Social Sciences (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1964}, p. 717. Daniel Bell, Daedalus, op. cit., p. 643. 17 Jacques Ellul, op. cit., p. 26. While science directly affects technology, the latter also affects science. For example, scientific principles make possible the electron microscope which is now so vital in the experiments in DNA. In doing so technology became the means to further scientific ends. Consequently, the ends- means relationship in science, and the ends-means relation­ ship between science and technology are all necessary in­ gredients in understanding the full meaning of the terms "science and technology."

The Impact of Science and Technology on Past and Future Intellectual Trends

"The twentieth century," remarks Kenneth Boulding, "marks the middle period of a great transition in the state of the human race." Indeed, continues this imaginative social thinker, our century may properly be called the 1 ft "second great transition in the history of mankind." According to Boulding, the first great cultural transi­ tion, which began some five or ten thousand years ago, was the passage from precivilization to civilization. Now as the transition is approaching completion, we are on the threshold of another and equally momentous change— the

*1 O Kenneth Boulding, The Meaning of the Twentieth Century: The Great Transition (New York: Harper and Row, 1964), p. 1. 40 1 Q passage from civilization to post-civilization.

Although full knowledge about the origin of the first great cultural upheaval is lost in the mists of history, the origin of the second great cultural upheaval is not difficult to discern. Throughout human history one can trace a slow, continuous accumulation of knowledge, discovery, and invention. For example, the water wheel makes its appearance in the sixth century, the stirrup in the eighth, the horse collar and the rudder in the ninth, and the windmill in the twelfth. But the invention of printing in the fifteenth century represents an irrevers­ ible acceleration which within two hundred short years was aided and abetted by the beginnings of modern science.

Thereafter, future centuries saw a fusion of science and knowledge so stupendous, so momentous, and so rapid that not a single facet of society has been left untouched.

With the rising impact of science and technology on everyday life and its rapid diffusion into all crevices

of social organization, scholars are devoting increasing attention to the impact of long-range cultural, ideologi­

cal, and intellectual changes that modem science has pro­

voked. Accordingly, it is extremely important to begin this section of the study— a.section which attempts to re­

19 Boulding*s use of the term "postcivilization" is not intended to convey any sense of regression to a barbar­ ic state. In fact, he states that the term "technological society" would also be acceptable. 41 view the impact of science and technology on our social institutions and theories— with an investigation of chang­ ing intellectual trends. Inasmuch as it is widely and ritually repeated these days that science and technology produce change, the questions, "What specific changes have science and technology produced in the past in our intel­ lectual thought?" and "What kinds of intellectual changes can we anticipate in the future?" are relevant and appro­ priate .

As we face both new issues and new forms for which experience may or may not be a guide, we often take refuge in history; not because it offers any secure haven— for indeed it does not— but because it offers some clarifica­ tion of where we stand as we confront the present and con­ template the future. History is valuable in charting intellectual and cultural changes and trends; it is also valuable in conveying the magnitude of these changes. In the year 1543 Galileo, at work in his labora­ tory, looked through his telescope and discovered four moons around Jupiter. His excitement prompted him to in­ vite his colleagues, some of the most learned men in Europe, to share his discovery. They adamantly refused to do so. Although their attitude seems incredible to us today, these scholars, being consistent and true to their times, were upholding a universal tradition, not to mention their Christian faith and the salvation of their 42 souls. As thoughtful and devout ihen, they did not ask, "What are the facts?" On the contrary, they asked a much more profound question, "What is the Truth?" Indeed, there was hardly a need to look into Galileo's telescope since they knew all the essential Truths about God, man, and the universe; and they knew all of these Truths on the best of authority— Aristotle, the church, and Thomas Ac- quinas.

With Galileo's insistence that the earth was not the center of the universe, and despite his colleagues' persistent refusal to inquire into the nature of the uni­ verse, the scientific revolution was born. Its birth and the corresponding diffusion of an empirical world view mark a turning point in history. Since that time in 1543, and likewise during the seventeenth century, men discovered that the physical world was not at all as Aristotle had thought or Acquinas had taught. Thus, the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries inherited a new world view which brushed aside the eternal verities. Accordingly, devotion gave way to doubt, and the spiritual and the eternal were replaced by the scientific and the experimental.

With the break-up of the medieval world view, the erosion of ecclesiastical authority, the decline of faith, and the rise of a secular, scientific intellectuality, the

foundations of the modern temper were laid. Writing about

this contrast between the medieval mind and the modern in- 43 tellectual motif, Emmanuel G. Mesthene, director of the

Harvard Program on Technology and Society, states: Often in history there have been metaphysical barriers to the pursuit of inquiry: the realm of God was not open to it; the human soul was not a proper scientific object; the position of the earth at the center of the universe was not subject to question; or the mysteries of life could not be probed in the laboratory. In the twentieth century we are largely free of such constraints. All the world is open to i n q u i r y . 20

That "all the world is open to inquiry" not only marks a significant intellectual change, but also symbolizes a watershed which divides one age from another and explains the difference between twentieth century man and his counterpart in the fifteenth century. In attempting to delineate more fully this past intellectual transition as well as to chart possible future trends, the analysis of Pitirim A. Sorokin is helpful. (See Table I, page 44.) Like Sorokin, many others also maintain that the scientific revolution originated a new and different intel­ lectual style. It requires no great feat of imagination or documentation to realize that our- contemporary culture is marked by most, if not all, the characteristics belonging to a sensate world-view. It is evident in scholarship, in religion, and in most aspects of our daily lives. The question, therefore, is not v/hether a sensate world-view

20 Emmanuel G. Mesthene, "The Impact of Science on Public Policy," Public Administration Review, Vol. 27, No. 2 (June, 1967), pp. 98-99. 44 exists— for obviously it does— but whether one can expect an indefinite continuation of this trend, and if so, for how long?

TABLE I*

SYSTEMS OF TRUTH

Ideational Sensate Late Sensate (Medieval View) (Modem View)

Revealed Empirical Cynical Charismatic Pragmatic Disillusioned Certain Operational Nihilistic Dogmatic Practical Chaotic Mystic Worldly Blase Intuitive Scientific Transient Infallible Skeptical Superficial Religious Tentative Weary Supersensory Fallible Sophistic Unworldly Sensory Formalistic- Salvational Materialistic Atheistic Spiritual Mechanistic Trivial Absolute Relativistic Changeable Supernatural Agnostic ' Meaningless Moral Instrumental Alienated Emotional Empirical, or Expedient Mythic Logically Veri­ Absolutely fiable Relativistic

*From Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dyna­ mics, Vol. I, pp. 84-91 as cited in Herman Kahn and Anthony J. Wiener, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years (New York: The Macmillan Com­ pany, 1967), pp. 43-44.

Within the past five years, several books and a

considerable number of articles have appeared which may shed some light on these questions. The purpose and thrust

of these books and articles are to call attention to what 45 many feel is a new and serious intellectual change occur­ ring in American society, particularly among the young.

The message of these authors cannot be ignored. It is the thesis of at least one of the books, for example, that the present day use of science and technology has produced in 21 the young a movement that is termed a "counter culture."

This counter culture, with new life styles, a new way of viewing reality, and new value orientations, calls for a massive "defection from the long-standing tradition of 22 skeptical, secular intellectuality" — a defection from three hundred years of tradition forged by the scientific revolution. If it continues to grow as some maintain, the counter culture could quite possibly transform the domi­ nant cultural and intellectual values of our age and pro­

duce a radical disjuncture in history. Although it would not be difficult to piece to­ gether contemporary evidence to support the above conten­ tion and to substantiate the shift from a sensate world­

view, a judicious sense of intellectual caution persuades one to avoid such a risky venture., Measuring, interpret­

ing, and charting future intellectual and cultural trends are extremely difficult tasks. In spite of these diffi­

culties, however, the Hudson Institute in its projections

21 Theodore Roszak, o£. cit., passism.

22Ibid., p. 141. 46 about the future addressed itself to some possible long­ term intellectual changes occurring in society. Their conclusions are of interest.

According to the studies of the Institute, contem­ porary American culture is clearly sensate. However, con­ tinue these studies, "there are some visible social changes in our society today" which "may indicate that our culture 27) is veering toward an excessively late sensate stage." Noting that the taste for late sensate culture is present­ ly restricted to only a small minority, the Institute added this note of caution: "If an appreciable proportion of a society becomes late sensate in many aspects of life, the 24 society is likely to become almost ungovernable." Since the analysis of long-term trends made by the Institute covered only the next thirty-three years, it hesitated to venture any hypothesis as to whether the tastes of the minority might become the tradition of the majority. Ac­

cordingly, the Institute confined itself to the conserva­ tive statement that for the next thirty-three years our society can expect a trend toward "increasingly sensate" 25

cultural styles which should be recognizable in art, moral-

2'z) Herman Kahn and Anthony J. Wiener, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), p. 44. ^ I b i d ., p. 41. ^ Ibid., p. 44. 47 ity, family life, literature, and systems of truth.

Recognizing the limitations of its projections and accepting the statements of most macro-historians that cul­ tures do not remain static over long periods of time, the Hudson Institute entertained some possible scenarios which could serve as interesting working hypotheses if American culture turns toward a late sensate form. The first sce­ nario attempts to sketch a cycle of basic intellectual at­ titudes to which such a society might be susceptible. The table below illustrates possible cycles.

TABLE II* INTELLECTUAL CYCLES

1 . 2 . 3. 4. Faith and Theology Deism, Relativism Revealed and Empiricism and Truth Rationality and Science Skepticism

8 . 7. 6 . 5. Messianic Charismatic Opportunistic Cynicism or or Messianic Fractions or Alienation Charismatic Elites or Warlords Anarchy or Truths Leaders Nihilism

*From Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p. 44.

By using Sorokin's systems of truth our present contempor­ ary culture corresponds to models three and four with a minority of society veering toward model five. It should be emphasized, however, that the above scenario, or any other scenario, is not an infallible guide to truth. Seen- 48 arios must be viewed cautiously. They merely advance con­ cepts which serve as conjectures on possible futures. The above scenario, as the Hudson Institute readily notes, is not intended to imply any notion of sequential determin­ ism or inevitability. Many macro-historians, of course, do seem to feel that societies have a kind of biological span like the ages of man himself, from rebellious youth, through caution, to decay; consequently, predictions of inevitability are not uncommon. However, these theories run counter to the beliefs held by many other historians that events in history are often without pattern and are due to accident. Nevertheless, concludes the Institute, "such positions do not prevent many events . . . from fall- ing into typical or theoretical patterns." A second possible scenario was likewise considered as a working conjecture by the Hudson Institute. It is presented below in outline form.

TABLE III* SOROKIN'S SCENARIO

1 . Late Sensate Chaos 5. Catharsis 2 . Increasing Polarization 6 . Charisma 3. Crisis 7. A New Religiosity 4. Ordeal

*From Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p . 46.

26Ibid., p. 32. 49 Sorokin, it might be recalled, specifically re­ jects the idea that cultures necessarily die or that they go through any sequence of cycles. He also advances the contention— in contrast to the Hudson studies— that West­ ern culture is already in a late sensate stage and that something bordering on an Ideational or Integrated stage would most likely follow the late sensate stage. 27 In this regard the conjectures of the Hudson In­ stitute are interesting. If American culture does become totally sensate, noted the studies, such a period could po conceivably be followed by a burst of religious fervor. Also interesting are the comments of the historian, Theo­ dore Roszak, who, as it has been pointed out, finds a counter culture developing among the young. The distin­ guishing feature about the post-war youth, says Roszak, is not only the fact that they have'opted out of the scien­ tific-technical tradition, but also the fact that they have a distinct taste for the mystic, the occult, the magi­

cal phenomena. In fact, continues Roszak, "if one scans the pages of the underground weeklies, one is apt to find the pages swarming with Christ and the prophets, Zen, Sufism, Hinduism, primitive shamanism. . . ." 29 Whether

2 ^Ibid., p. 40. 28 Ibid.. p. 48.

’ 29 Theodore Roszak, 0£. cit., p. 140. , there is truth in Roszak's suggestion that a new hurst of religion will make itself felt, and. whether or not this trend will lend support to Sorokin's findings, are open questions. However, most macro-historians do seem to hold that civilizations, ours included, do not continue along their particular paths for long, but either are terminated or have a painful rebirth following a time of chaos, an­ archy, nihilism, and irrationality. "During this period of decline there will be a tendency for some individuals to polarize around ethical and altruistic values while "50 others will focus on materialistic or epicurean values." Sorokin uses the term "ordeal and catharsis" in describ­ ing this process. Eventually, according to Sorokin, a new charismatic idea or leader will arise, and society will produce a new culture, one marked by the characteristics "51 of Ideational or Integrated culture.

It should again be repeated that the scholars at the Hudson Institute are not suggesting that this will nec­

essarily happen. Whether the sensate trend will continue for the next thirty-three years or whether American society will move to a late sensate stage are open questions. How­

ever, if one examines the late sensate stage, concludes

*30 Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p. 48.

3 1 Ibid. 51 the Institute, "it seems plausible that if the implica­ tions of this description are valid, any long-term tend­ encies toward late sensate must stabilize, top-out, or 32 even reverse."

The Increasing Tempo and Ramification of Change

"In an important sense," wrote the late J. Robert Oppenheimer, "this world of ours is a new world. . . . One thing that is new is . . . the changing scale and scope of change, so that the world alters as we walk into it."^ Op- penheimer's remarks call attention to one of the most im­ portant and pervasive aspects of contemporary life— the vastly accelerated scope and pace of change. A few ex- • amples illustrate its magnitude. In 1835 it took Andrew Jackson three days to travel from his home in Tennessee to Washington; today man can make th'is same journey in twenty- three minutes; indeed an astronaut can travel to the moon in less time than it took Jackson to reach the Capitol. Im­ pressive though the example may be, the rate of accelera­ tion is even more dramatic when applied to all of history. Six thousand years ago the fastest transportation avail­ able to man was the camel caravan which attained speeds of eight miles per hour. With the invention of the chariot

^Ibid., p. 44. ^J. Robert Oppenheimer, The Open Mind (New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1955), p. 140. 52 the maximum speed was increased to approximately twenty miles an hour. Thousands of years later with the invention of the steam locomotive man v/as able to muster one hundred miles an hour. With the passage of some fifty-eight short years man in 1939 achieved an airborne speed of four hun­ dred miles an hour; in the early 1 9 6 0 's airborne speed was pushed beyond the four thousand miles per hour mark, while during the middle of the I9 6 0 1s man was circling the earth at eighteen thousand miles per hour. As an appendage to this it might also be added that we are not only reaching our shrinking geographical distances in shorter time, but we are doing it in airplanes which are longer from nose to tail than the entire distance flown by the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, in 1923* Perhaps another way of grasping the acceleration of change that is occurring around us is to consider what has been happening to the gross national product in the past few years. In the industrialized countries of the world the gross national product has increased anywhere from 4.5 per cent to 5.0 per cent annually. While this rate of economic growth is considerable when compared to past eras, its implications are truly revolutionary. Con­ tinued growth rates of this magnitude imply that in the future the total number of goods and services will double

Alvin Toffler, Future Shock (New York: Bantam Books, 1970), p. 26. 53 every fifteen years. When this is translated into con­ crete terms, it means that a child born today will be sur­ rounded before he is a teenager by twice the number of things his parents experienced. By the time the same per­ son reaches age thirty a second doubling in goods and serv­ ices will have occurred. Within the lifetime of this per­ son five such increases will have occurred so that in old age he will live in a society churning out thirty-two times 35 as many goods and services as when he was born. Finally, if further evidence is needed to convey the unique scope and scale of change around us, the fol­ lowing illustration vividly captures it. In the past fif­ ty thousand years of man's existence on this planet were divided into average lifetimes of sixty-two years, there have been about eight hundred such lifetimes. Of these past eight hundred lifetimes, at least six hundred and fifty were spent in caves. Only during the past seventy lifetimes has man seen a printed word; only during the past four lifetimes has man been able to measure time with any precision; only in the last two lifetimes has man uti­ lized electricity. In fact, the vast majority of the mate­ rial goods and inventions we use today were produced with- 36 in the last eight hundredth lifetime. It is this eight

^ Ibid., p. 24.

^Ibid., p. 14. 54 hundredth lifetime, argues Alvin Toffler, that "marks a sharp break with all past human experience,and has led

Kenneth Boulding to make the startling statement that "al­ most as much has happened since I was born as happened be­ fore .

However, the change which man is experiencing is not just on a physical level. The quickening tempo of change, so obvious in our physical environment, also al­ ters our scale on the social level.

An even more powerfully significant way to grasp the pace of change is to consider its impact on human re­ lationships. Before the advent of a technological society and its accompanying urbanization and mobility, the numbers of people each of us knew were confined to relatively few.

Because of the small number of relationships forged, the intensity of these relationships was very great. Rela­ tionships, in past eras, were nearly total, holistic, and of long duration, perhaps lasting throughout an entire lifetime. Today, however, such relationships are infre­ quent, if they exist at all. On the contrary, the quick­

ening tempo of change has introduced new patterns of inter­ action into' human relationships characterized by fragmen­ tation and superficiality. That our relationships are

37Ibid. 7Q D Boulding, op. cit., p . 23. 55 becoming fragmented, partial, and superficial can be gleaned from the prodigious amounts of sociological lit­ erature devoted to the topics of alienation and anomie, as well as from the proliferation of student complaints about the impersonality of the "system," the bureaucracy, and the university. The charge frequently made by the young is that our society negates total involvements with human beings and necessitates nomadic relationships. Thus one writer has said, "we are all people in rooming houses

. . . desperately and savagely trying to effect soul- 7Q satisfying connections with our neighbors." The by-now famous student placard which read: "I am a human being: please do not fold, spindle, or mutilate," likewise epito­ mizes the impersonality that marks contemporary society.

Students, however, are not the only ones to comment on the new types of relationships indigenous to a techno­ logical society. Writes Charles Reich: America is one vast, terrifying anti-community. The great organizations to which most people give their working day, and the apartments and suburbs to which they return at night, are equally places of loneliness and alienation. Modern living has obliterated place, locality, and neighbor, and given us the anonymous separateness of our exist­ ence. . . . Friendship has been coated over with a layer of impenetrable artificiality as men strive to live roles designed for them.^O

Harold Clurman, The New York Times, November 13, 1966. ^Charles Reich, The Greening of America (New York: Bantam Books, 1971), p. 7. Alan Toffler, in a recent bestseller has also spoken of the transitory and temporal aspects of human interaction.

The increasing pace of our daily lives, the geographical mobility required in a technological society, and the sheer

numbers of people we are forced to interact with, says

Toffler, not only decrease the intensity of each relation­ ship, but causes us to form "modular" relationships in 41 v/hich we know only a fraction of a total personality. Accordingly, modern man in his urban and technological society finds himself relating to the personality modules of many people as opposed to the whole personality of a

few people. Such relationships, it is anticipated, will continue and increase in the future. While it will place a painful burden on people from rural areas who must adjust

to a technological society and will demand of them an extraordinary transition, it also creates problems of ad­ justment for other human beings. In addition to the changes illustrated on the physical and social level, a technological society with

its increasing tempo causes change on the cultural level,

particularly in terms of information, ideas, habits, be- . liefs, and values. According to Margaret Mead no genera­ tion in history has ever been called upon to incorporate

or experience such rapid cultural changes as the present

41 Toxfler, op. cit., p. 99. 57 one is being forced to do. The chasm in values between parent and child is so great today, writes Mead, that the young are like the "first generation born into a new cen- 42 tury," and consequently have no living connection with the past. Indeed, the changes that have taken place in the past few decades have been so revolutionary, writes one historian, that we are impressed most not with the links which connect us to the past, but with our distance and remoteness from the past. "Stress on continuity as the most important feature of the historical process no 45 longer has much appeal." To continue to emphasize such continuity, concludes this historian, is to refuse to acknowledge reality.

The absence of historical continuity, the break in all links with the past, the sharp and unbridgeable

» dichotomy in values present within one generation, have produced a crisis in faith, in political ideology, in sci­

ence, and in our equilibrium. Acutely aware of this crisis in confidence, Arthur Schlesinger', Jr., has written: The industrial order is undergoing vast and funda­ mental changes as the mechanical society created by the first industrial revolution is evolving in­ to the new electronic society. America is in crisis because Americans have reached the point

42 Mead, Culture and Commitment, op. cit., p. 75. 45 Felix Gilbert, The Norton History of Modern Europe (New York: ¥. W. Norton & Company, 1971), p. xxix. 58 in social transformation where they are raising and debating fundamental questions long buried in tradition and dogma.4-4

Schlesinger, however, is not the only one to call attention to the crisis in values. The following state­ ment likewise documents the clash between past values and emergent ones. The young, Margaret Mead argues, . . . live in a world in which events are pre­ sented to them in all of their complex immediacy; they are no longer bound by the simplified linear sequences dictated by the printed word. In their eyes the killing of an enemy is not qualitatively different from the murder of a neighbor. They can­ not reconcile our efforts to save our own children by every known means with our readiness to destroy the children of others with napalm. Old distinc­ tions between peace-time and wartime, friend and foe, "my" group and "their" group— the outsiders, the aliens— have lost their meaning. They know that the people of one nation alone cannot save their own children; each holds the responsibility for the other' s children. 4-5

As the tempo of change increases and as the young consider the beliefs of their parents vieux ,jeu and inapplicable to the future, cultural disequalibrium intensifies. The trauma of adjusting, assimilating, and accepting a world of rapidly changing values holds out the prospect of cul­ tural shock on a grand scale. Value changes at this pace, concluded the Hudson studies, may contribute to "feelings of disorientation and a common spiritual and political

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., The Crisis of Confi­ dence : Ideas, Power, and Violence in America (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1969), p. 192. 45 Mead, Culture and Commitment, op. cit., p. 75. 59 46 rootlessness" in society at large. Indeed, to ask human beings to alter the way they relate to the universe and to drastically modify their world views, not just once but perhaps several times during the course of a lifetime, is to ask of this generation what no other has been re­ quired to do. The pace of change which we are experienc­ ing is unique and unprecedented in human evolution, states Julian Huxley. "The tempo of human evolution during re­ corded history is at least 100,000 times as rapid as that 47 of pre-human evolution." During early Paleolithic times, comments Huxley, the unit of change was approximately 50,000 years; at the close of the Paleolithic era change occurred within a mere millennium; with the emergence of settled civilization change was accomplished v/ithin a century. With the passage of the next five thousand years the unit of change has been reduced to a decade. In the past social change was so slow that it could pass un­ noticed within one’s lifetime, but today as the social psychologist Warren Bennis informs us, "No exaggeration, no hyperbole, no outrage can realistically describe the 48 extent and pace of change. ..." The biochemist Philip

Siekevitz states, for example, that "what has been learned

Z j . f i Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p. 211. 47 As quoted in Toffler, op. cit., p. 22.

48Ibid. 60 in the last three decades about the nature of living be­ ings dwarfs . . . any comparable period of scientific dis­ covery in the history of mankind."^

The astonishing and brutal acceleration of ideas, information, and innovation that man is now required to assimilate and accept on the cultural level is vividly illustrated in studies conducted by the Stanford Research

Institute. According to their studies the rate of time between the application of a new idea and its dissemation prior to 1920 was thirty-four years; from 1940 to 1959 the time span was eight years. The resulting seventy-six per cent increase demonstrates the hurricane-like speed of 50 m o d e m life. "Even if the process of innovation should suddenly stop," states Lynton K. Caldwell, "the momentum' of ideas already b o m would carry on to the end of the 51 century." There is, of course, no reason to assume that this tempo will decrease. On the contrary, there is every reason to assume that it will continue. The acceleration of change, then, on the cultural level, not only alters the balance between the new and the

49 As quoted in Buckminister R. Fuller and John McHale, World Design Science Decade, 1965-1975 (Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1963), p. 21. 50 As quoted in Toffler, 0£. cit., p. 28. 51 Lynton K. Caldwell, Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 128. old, between the novel and the familiar; the acceleration of change not only compels us to cope with a faster flow of change; it forces us more and more into situations in which previous personal experience does not apply and into an environment so ephemeral, unfamiliar, and complex as to threaten man's adaptive capacities. Indeed, it does even more. A society in v/hich information is proliferating and communications are instantaneous, in which ideas dissemi­ nate with increased rapidity and transient relationships are more frequent, in which values change quickly and al­ terations in the physical environment are massive, has all the ingredients to produce what has been described in a recent bestseller as "future shock."

Although not originating the term "future shock," Alan Toffler fully describes the ramifications of a pos­ sible trauma of acculturation caused by the apocalyptic velocity of change. Future shock Toffler defines as the stress and disorientation which individuals suffer when they are subjected to too much change in too short a time.

Future shock, continues this author, can make us ill, physically and mentally:

It arises from the superimposition of a new cul­ ture on an old one. It is culture shock in one's own society. But its impact is far worse. . . . Most travelers have the comforting knowledge that the culture they left behind will be there to re­ turn to. The victim of future shock does not.52

•^Toffler, on. cit., p. 11. The continued and constant change to which individuals must be prepared to adjust is described in the following manner. If you strip an individual of the securities and familiarities of his own culture— as we are presently do­ ing by our induced and rapid change— and subject him to a cultural setting vastly different from his own or from any­ thing he is familiar with, ask him to respond to a differ­ ent set of cues, different concepts of time, different work, religion and values, then cut him off without any hope of retreat to familiar surroundings, the dislocations and disorientations he will suffer are severe. Moreover, continues Toffler,

if this new culture is itself in constant turmoil, and if worse yet, its values are incessantly chang­ ing, the sense of disorientation will be still fur- ' ther intensified. . , . Now imagine not merely an individual but an entire society, an entire genera­ tion . . . suddenly transported into this new world. The result is mass disorientation, future shock on a grand scale.53

This is the prospect that man now faces, concludes Toffler, because "change is avalanching upon our heads and most peo- 54 pie are grotesquely unprepared to cope with it."

Continued examples of the psychological pressures caused by the accelerating rate of change are pervasive. Any comparison of scale between contemporary man with his successor would produce evidence of the most rapid psycho-

5 3 Ibid., p. 1 2 .

5 4 Ibid. 63 logical revolution in human history. The total effect of this acculturation trauma on the physical, social, cul­ tural, and psychological level is to submit the human race to a transformation more startling and complete than any­ thing that has happened to it before. For any process com­ parable in scope and scale, says the British physicist and

Nobel prizewinner, Sir George Thompson, we would have to go back nine or ten millennia to the invention of settled 55 agriculture. Although there may be merit in such a com­ parison, the situations are not really comparable at all as Barbara Ward contends:

today . . . the experience of the human race is much more like that of being put in a barrel and sent over Niagara Falls. It is not simply that change is infinitely more drastic and affects everything we do. It is also occurring at a speed which is geared to none of the old speeds— of years, seasons, lifetimes, generations. . . . It is hardly even geared to the flash of human intelligence. . . .56

The result of this change— physical, social, intellectual, and psychological— has led Daniel Bell to comment that "the real change in scale has to do with the . . . way in which 57 we experience the world." Science, and its lusty off­ spring, technology, have given our age more of its unique

■^Sir George Thompson, The Foreseeable Future (New York: Viking Press, I960), p. 1.

VJard, Technology, Industry, and Man, op. cit., p. 289. 57 Daniel Bell, "Toward a Communal Society," Life, May 12, 1967, p. 23. 64 characteristics and coloring than they have any other age. They have done so by altering nearly all the basic compon­ ents of life— things, people, places, organizations, ideas, and values. When change becomes this pervasive it quite obviously transforms the way we understand, organize, and evaluate the world. It undermines and destroys many of the carefully devised structures that gave order and direc­ tion to our lives and defined for us the boundaries of reality and personal being. It reduces the reliability of practical and previous experience as a guide to action; it diminishes the usefulness of conventional judgment in dealing with problems.

There have been many statements, analyses, and exclamations written on the increasing tempo of change, but the appraisal of the late J. Robert Oppenheimer quoted at the beginning of this section still remains a classic. In an important sense this world of ours is a new world, in which the unity of knowledge, the nature of human communities, the order of so­ ciety, the order of ideas, the very notion of society and culture have changed and will not re­ turn to what they have been in the past. What is new is new not because it has never been there before, but because it has changed in quality. One thing that is new is the prevalence of new­ ness, the changing scale and scope of change it­ self— so that the world alters as we move into it, so that the years of man's life measure not some small growth or rearrangement . . . of what he learned in childhood, but a great upheaval.

What is new is that in one generation our knowl­ edge of the natural world engulfs, upsets, all i

65 knowledge of the natural world before. The tech­ niques, among which we live and by which we live, multiply and ramify, so that the whole world is bound together by communication. . . . What is new in the world is the massive character of the dissolution and corruption of authority, in be­ lief, in ritual, and in temporal order. . . . To assail the changes that have unmoored us from the past is futile, and in a deep sense, I think it is wicked. We need to recognize the change and learn what resources we have.58

The Role of Knowledge and its Impact on Society

The culture of a post-industrial society has been described as a "learning society," "a scientific super-

culture," and a "high information-level culture." Which­ ever phrase is chosen to describe our society, all convey

the fact that technical and teleological knowledge are being fused at an unprecedent rate. The nature of this

knowledge is significant: it has liberated energies of a magnitude never before available to man; it has made pos­ sible the almost instantaneous exchange of information with every part of the inhabitable earth— and even beyond; it has enlarged and expanded the options available to

human beings; it has changed and will continue to change the anstitutions in our society as well as the personnel

demanded by these institutions. And, finally, it will raise important, significant, and serious problems of

management. "Knowledge," as Francis Bacon once wrote,

58 Oppenheimer, 0£. cit., pp. 140-141. 66 59 "is power." However, it was not always the central and controlling force in past eras. It is today.

The key to understanding the implications of con­ temporary knowledge is to perceive its true nature. In past ages knowledge was often the barrier to its own ad­ vancement. Obsolete or authoritative knowledge imposed a barrier, while inadequate technologies for the discovery and dissemination of information were other components of this barrier. Added to these restrictions were metaphysi­ cal beliefs which prohibited inquiry and retarded the development of knowledge. The twentieth century, however, is largely free of such constraints. "All the world is open to inquiry. As Daniel Bell has said, "today we feel that there are no inherent secrets in the universe . . . and this is one of the significant changes in the modern moral temper." For the first time since the Greeks man is convinced of the essential intelligibility of his universe and that there is nothing in it that is, in fact, not knowable. Another significant change in the

59 Francis Bacon, "Sacred Meditations," Richard F. Jones (ed.), Selected Essays of Francis Bacon (New York: Odyssey Press, 1937), p. 227. fin Emmanuel G. Mesthene, Public Administration Re­ view, op. cit., p. 9 9 . Daniel Bell, "Twelve Modes of Prediction: A Pre­ liminary Sorting of Approaches in the Social Sciences," Daedalus, Vol. 93. No. 3 (Summer, 1964), p. 845. "modern moral temper" is the fact that we are a society deliberately devoted to the fostering of knowledge. The kind of society we have emphasized— education, research, innovation, the advancement of knowledge— is not only the foe of stability, but the fulcrum for additional knowledge and change. Neil W. Chamberlain e:xpressed the knowledge syndrome when he wrote: "... the more people we educate, the more knowledge we create; the more knowledge we create, the more rapid and certain will be the changes. . . .

As knowledge has become liberated from the restrictions which impeded its growth, particularly convention, tradi­ tion, and religion, it has launched itself into a command­ ing position in society. "The knowledge that our scienti­ fic and technical revolution has unleashed," writes Don K.

Price, "seems certain to have a more radical effect on our 6 * public institutions than did the industrial revolution." ^ Knowledge provokes change and innovation; public institutions therefore cannot escape repercussions. In­ deed, as some authors maintain, the birth of a knowledge society will lead to a restructuring of our major institu­ tions. Daniel Bell says, for example, that

fiP Neil ¥. Chamberlain, "Unions and the Managerial Process," Technology. Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 269. 6^5 ^Don K. Price, "Science, The New Technologies and Government," Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 276. 68 The key institutions of the nineteenth and twen­ tieth centuries have been, primarily, industrial institutions or organizations for the production of goods. The key values have derived from the business firm. . . . The major social problems derived from the primacy of the business firm in society. I would assume that in a post-industrial society, v/here many of the problems of production tend to be fairly routinized, the major new in­ stitutions of society will be primarily intellec­ tual institutions.

This shift from the primacy of the business institutions to intellectual institutions is supported by the Hudson studies in their long-term projections. As this transi­ tion occurs, report the Hudson studies, the nature of employment will likewise change and primary and secondary occupations will no longer command the monopoly they did 65 in former times. That such a shift has already occurred can be ascertained by the fact that the United States some­ time during the late 1 9 6 0 's became the first service econ­ omy— an economy in which more than half of the employed population was not involved in the production of food, clothing, houses, automobiles, or other tangible goods. In any technically advanced society, writes Peter Drucker, society . . . will employ predominately knowledge workers rather than manual workers. . . . The foundation of the job . . . will be knowledge. The preparation for it will be a course of study rather than an apprenticeship. The productivity

f\U Daniel Bell, "Alternative Futures," Daedalus, Vol. 96. No. 3 (Summer, 1967), p. 667. & ^ Kahn and Wiener, 0£. cit., p. 187. 69 of the worker will depend upon his ability to pu't to work concepts, ideas, theories— that is— things learned in school— rather than skills acquired through experience .66

When attention is called to the fact that computers can nov/ perform the tasks of any high school graduate more ef-

f r y fectively and efficiently, Drucker's remarks acquire a

special potency. Despite the strains and tensions it may cause, employment of manual laborers and the less educated groups is economically prohibitive in a technically ad­ vanced knowledge society.

With the decline of the business firm as the key innovator in society, the shift from primary and secondary occupations to service oriented professions, and the de­ mand for mental expertise required by a knowledge society, the university and other educational institutions assume a new role. Commenting on this unique role for the univer­ sity, Daniel Bell has stated, Perhaps it is not too much to say that if the busi­ ness firm was the key institution of the past hun­ dred years, because of its role in organizing pro­ duction for mass creation of products, the univer­ sity will become the central institution of the next hundred years because of its role as the new source of innovation and k n o w l e d g e . 68

66 Drucker, 0£. cit., p. 40.

f r y 'Milliard Wirtz, Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 2 3 2 . 6ft Daniel Bell, The Public Interest, No. 6 (Winter, 1967), p. 30. 70 The demand for talent and the diffusion of both education and intellectual institutions will become of even greater concern for society. Not only the best talents, but even­ tually the entire complex of social status will be rooted fiQ in the intellectual and scientific communities. Although pitifully weak in political power in recent years and sys­ tematically villified by parts of society, intellectuals who possess the expertise valued by a technological society will find themselves gravitating to positions advocated by the ancient Greeks. Socrates, it will be remembered, had a preference for the intellectual as critic of society. Aristotle preferred him as tutor to society, while Plato insisted he rule society. However, there is a danger that, placing a premium on skills and techniques, the technolog­ ical society prefers the intellectual as a technician.

This danger and its possible consequences for the univer­ sity has been pointed out by Brzezinski. Today, the university is the creative source of the massive communications complex, the source of much strategic planning, domestic and inter­ national. Its engagement in the world is encourag­ ing the appearance of a new breed of politician— intellectuals, men who make it a point to mobilize and draw on the most expert, scientific and aca­ demic advice in the development of their political programs.. . . A profound change in the intellectual community itself is inherent in this development. The large­ ly humanist-oriented . . . intellectual dissenter who saw his role largely in terms of proffering

^Bell, Daedalus (Summer, 1967), op. cit., p. 640. 71 social critiques, is rapidly being displaced either by experts and specialists, who become involved in special governmental undertakings. . . . There is a danger in all of this that ought not to be neglected. Intense involvement in applied knowledge could gradually prompt a waning of the tradition of learning for the sake of learning. The intellectual community, includ­ ing the university, could become another "indus­ try" meeting social needs as the market dictates, with the intellectuals reaching for the highest material and political rewards. Concern with power and prestige . . . could mean an end to the . . . ideal of intellectual detachment and the disinterested search for truth.70

Don K. Price has written that many universities are finan­ cially dependent upon government grants and already deeply involved in the political process; and, science, which once helped to disestablish the churches and thereby free most universities from ecclesiastical control, has made the university dependent upon a new form of establishment— 71 the scientific-technical establishment. Despite the fact that physicists may become more important than industrial­ ists, and biologists more important than generals, and universities greater assets than factories, many may not applaud the new role for the university. But the rapid pace of change, the explosion of knowledge, the collosal complexity of demands in a technological society, and the sheer burden of correlating knowledge in such a society

70' Zbigniew Brzezinski, Encounter, op. cit., p. 22. 71 Don K. Price, "The Endless Frontier," Edward Quinn and Paul J. Dolan, The Sense of the Sixties (New York: The Free Press, 1968), p. 397. 72 negate the concept's of the ivory tower. In a scientific

superculture the universities, the government, and the knowledge society are interrelated elements of the same system. It cannot be otherwise.

As society moves into areas of experience in which experience itself offers little guidance and as it employs new powers for which there are no precedents, the managers of this new knov/ledge play a critical role. As a group managers of knov/ledge are hard to define. The closest cate­

gorical approximation would be managers of science and tech­ nical development. But as science expands and as its ap­

plications multiply, it becomes more difficult to separate science from technology. In a scientific superculture all knowledge has become "scientized" writes Lynton K. Caldwell.

"Today the fine arts, languages, communications, domestic relations and a host of other things are subject not only 72 in theory, but in practice, to scientific methodology." A knowledge manager is thus identified more by how he re­ lates to the utilization of knov/ledge than by the profes- 7'3 sional label he wears. Although the term "knowledge man­ ager" may have less emotive impact and for this reason is

preferred, the foregoing persons are usually referred to

72 Lynton Caldwell, Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 1 3 0 . -

73Ibid., p. 131. 73 in the technological literature as "scientific-technical elites."

Even a cursory review of the literature written on the technological society makes it evident that many scholars are deeply concerned with the potential power and control open to those who command decision-making posi­ tions in the knov/ledge society. In contrast to former times, at least from the sixteenth century on, the power that decision-makers exercised, while considerable, was usually checked. Social functions were dispersed through­ out many institutions, thereby negating a concentration of power as well as allowing for a large degree of de­ centralization. Within our own time, however, gigantic consolidations of social and political functions have evolved. Peter Drucker in his studies of the organiza­ tional complexes in modern society v/rites as follows: . . . All our major social functions are today being discharged in and through large organiza­ tions. Every single social task— defense, edu­ cation, government, the production and distribu­ tion of goods, health care, and search for knowl­ edge— is increasingly entrusted to institutions which are organized for perpetuity and which are managed by professionals v/hether they be called managers, administrators or executives.74

It is this reason that has prompted concern and consider­ able writing about the knowledge administrators. In a knowledge society with its complexity of research and

74 Drucker, op. cit., p. 175. 74 development, its need for mental skills, and professional expertise, power, writes Zbigniew v/ill gravitate into the hands of those who con­ trol information, and who can correlate it most rapidly. Our existing post-crisis management in­ stitutions will probably be increasingly supplanted by pre-crisis management institutions, the task of which will be-to identify in advance likely social crises and to develop programs to cope with them. This could encourage tendencies during the next several decades toward a technocratic dictator­ ship, leaving less and less room for political pro­ cedures as we know them.75

It is to the knowledge administrator that power gravitates. The ideas of Zbigniew are supported by Theodore Roszak who notes that in a technological society activities are no longer small or simple and subject to control by non-tech- nical persons. The scale of activities, continues Roszak, whether they be political, economic or cultural "transcend the competence of the amateur and inexorably demand the attention of specially trained experts." Thus, concludes this author, a technocracy is essentially a regime of ex­ perts and should be considered a political phenomenon with an ideology of its own. In fact, states Roszak, both the technocracy and the reliance upon experts have become in our society a cultural imperative which are beyond ques­ tion. In even stronger v/ords, the author asserts the fol­ lowing:

75 Brzezinski, Encounter, op. cit., p. 21.

Roszak, o£. cit., p. 6. 75 We are bitterly familiar with totalitarian poli­ tics in the form of brutal regimes which achieve their integration by bludgeon and bayonet. But in the case of technocracy, totalitarianism is perfected because its techniques become progres­ sively more subliminal. The distinctive feature of the regime of experts lies in the fact that, while possessing ample power to coerce, it pre­ fers to charm conformity from us by exploiting our deep-seated commitment to the scientific world view and by manipulating the securities and creature comforts of the industrial affluence which science has given us.77

Although few authors would contend that society has reached the point in which all decisions are in the hands of knov/ledge experts or technical decision-makers, some authors do contend that if the trend toward scien­ tific-technical administrators continues unabated, the potential for exercising enormous control over peoples v/ill exist. Consequently, if these assertions are cor­ rect, we may be approaching a century in v/hich, to parody the words of Winston Chuhchill, never have so many been so completely at the mercy of so few.

In a society in which knowledge is becoming the most valuable commodity, it is only natural that the lit­

erature on the technological society would reflect a con­

cern with the value-orientations of the managers of knowl­ edge. It is stressed by those who have studied the field

that a major value of scientific-technical administrators

is the search for the most efficient method to achieve an

77 Ibid., p. 9. See also Herbert Marcuse, One Dim­ ensional Man (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964), passism. 76 objective. There are several factors which promote this cult of efficiency. First, economic pressures argue for greater efficiency. A principle example of this is the continuing process of capital modernization in industry. Second, there are political pressures that seek the great­ er absolute effectiveness of a new technology as in weap­ ons development. Third, wre are forced to turn toward more efficient methods in technology to solve our prolif- *70 erating social problems. When these forces are combined with the spur to action inherent in the mere availability of technology, there is relentless pressure for continual­ ly improved means for carelessly examined ends. In addition to the pursuit of efficiency, a second principle value of scientific-technical administrators is the belief that something should be done because it is technically possible to d’o. The following example of this philosophy is illustrated by Erich Fromm.

If it is possible to build nuclear weapons, they must be built, even if they destroy us all. If it is possible to travel to the moon or to the planets, it must be done, even if at the expense of many unfulfilled needs here on earth.79

Charles Reich in a similar vein refers to the same tech­ nological bias when he states:

<70 Emmanuel G. Mesthene, "How Technology Will Shape the Future," Science, Vol. 161, No. 5. July 12, 1968, pp. 137-138. 79Erich Fromm, The Revolution of Hope: Toward a Humanized Technology (New York: Bantam Books, 1968), p.' 33. 77 . . . if computers have been developed, they must be put to use; if faster planes can be produced, they must be put into service; if there is a more efficient way of organizing an office staff, it must be done.80

Hasan Ozbekham, a specialist in the field of management science, supports the ideas expressed by Fromm and Reich when he remarks that feasibility, which was once a strate­ gic concept, has been elevated into a normative concept with the result that whatever technological reality indi- OT cates we can do is taken to imply that we must do. The danger of such a view, notes Fromm, is that it negates all aspects of the humanist tradition. "Once the principle is accepted that something ought to be done because it is technically possible to do it," writes this author, "all other values are dethroned and technological development pp becomes the foundation of ethics." Reich expresses this same concern when he writes:

No other value is allowed to intervene with this one (/technological development], not amenity, not beauty, not community, not even- the supreme value of life itself.83

These writers, however, are not the only ones to express a deep concern with the value orientation of decision-makers in a society that is technically oriented. A distinguished

80 Reich, oj). cit., p. 94. 81 'As quoted in Fromm, op. cit., p. 34. 8p Fromm, op. cit., p. 34. p-2 Reich, op. cit., p. 95. 78 journal in the profession of political science has warned

that "the technological bias of our social attitudes . . . makes it easy for technical judgments to become social de­

cisions without adequate appraisal of their implied conse- .,84 quences." Perhaps the most realistic and contemporary judg­ ment of the technological imperatives which guide the men who make key decisions in a scientific super-culture are those rendered by George Ball on the recent publication of the Pentagon Papers. In attempting to account for American involvement in Vietnam, Ball captured the essence and con­

sequences of the application of both the quest for the best method and the "can do" philosophy which permeate a society dedicated to technological expertise.

. . . the techniques and jargon developed at MIT, Harvard, and Rand— game theory, model building, in-put— out-put, kill ratios, cost-effectiveness, flexible response, and controlled escalation— led to an obsession with the purely operational as­ pects of the Vietnam struggle and a preoccupation with one single question: By what new ingenious application can we now achieve our purpose? Mean­ while, the more fundamental question, Are we not trying to do something impossible? was necessarily rejected as denying the basic assumptions that were guiding our efforts.85

Obsession with the best technique or the most efficient

method, concludes Ball, was v/hat misled a group of talented

84 Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 129.

George Ball, "The Trap of Rationality," News­ week, July 26, 1971, p . .43* and able men to "depersonalize the war and treat it as an 86 exercise in deployment of resources." Some maintain that our entire society is being used by scientific-tech­ nical administrators as an arena for the "deployment of resources;" others maintain that a scientific superculture in which knowledge is pre-eminent and carries a power and dynamism of its own, is in dire need of wise and effective management. There is ample evidence in the literature that society needs to grapple with this management of knowledge and equal evidence that risks will grow in direct ratio to our delay in bringing about an understanding of the role which knowledge plays in contemporary society.

The decline of the business firm, the changing patterns of occupations, and the key role into which the university will be propelled are only partial listings of the changes that a knowledge society brings about. The ways in which this knowledge will be managed and the uses to which it will be put are other ramifications inherent

in the birth of a knowledge society. They require our

serious attention: what may be technically feasible may not be socially desirable. The same devastating power that makes the hydrogen bomb so effective as a deterrent

to war, far overshadowing any of its predecessors, also makes it a dire menace to the safety and security of human-

86Ibid. 80 ity. The same impressive qualities that make the computer a prospective boon to the operation of the organization, also render it a potential threat to the privacy of the individual. The same revolutionary breakthrough in biology which allows genetic engineering for the eradication of mental retardation, also permits unprecedented intrusions into self-identity. Accordingly, the canons of science as well as those of common-sense demand that we understand the full implications and consequences of living in a knowl­ edge society. With the major barriers to knov/ledge removed, there is little to restrain man in his application of this new knowledge except his own individual judgments. Without adequate knowledge of consequences, the prospect is fright­ ening .

Widespread Cybernation. Leisure and Affluence

When the emperor Augustus came to power, the citi­ zens of Rome were granted seventy-six holidays a year.

Several centuries later when the emperor Nero died, Roman citizens enjoyed 176 holidays a year. Even though the cause for this extended leisure did not derive from cybernation, the illustration in part calls attention to some critical problems facing the American society in the twenty-first century— cybernation, leisure, and affluence. In his ear­ lier writing John Maynard Keynes addressed himself to this triple revolution. 81

. . . the struggle for subsistence, always has been hitherto the primary, most pressing prob­ lem of the human race. If the economic problem is solved, mankind will be deprived of its tra­ ditional purpose . . . thus for the first time since his creation man will be faced with a real, permanent problem— how to occupy his leisure, which science and compound interest will have won for him.87

The remarks of this distinguished economist, although pass­ ing unnoticed at the time, acquire a sense of urgency today.

The universal solution to mankind's most plebeian and press­ ing problem— the struggle for subsistence— is both possible and probable at this moment in history. Not only is the problem of subsistence capable of solution; wide-spread af­ fluence and leisure loom over the horizon as distinct real­ ities. Because cybernation and its off-spring— leisure and affluence— threaten revolutionary consequences to a work- oriented society, several major conferences have devoted themselves to these topics. Moreover, the triple issues of cybernation, leisure, and affluence have sparked dozens of articles in scholarly magazines, heated debate, and endless dialogue. Yet in spite of the considerable attention fo­ cused on these topics, the term cybernation is often mis­ understood by the lay public, while the consequences of cy­ bernation and leisure for society elicit only marginal con­ cern. Consequently, both a definition of cybernation and

PT7 John Maynard Keynes, Essays in Persuasion (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1932), pp. 366-367. 82 a consideration of its impact on society beg explication and elaboration.

Although the words automation and cybernation are often used interchangeably, there is a difference. Cyber­ nation, a word coined by Norbert Wiener and popularized by

Donald Michael in his monograph, Cybernation: The Silent Conquest, involves the substitution of electronic circuits for mental skills, while automation involves the substitu­ tion of mechanical processes for human muscle or dexter- 88 ity. According to Michael, then, a definition of cyber­ nation should include both the use of computers and auto­ matic machinery. The meshing of these two processes into a single production has been described by John Diebold.

"Cybernation and automation are more than a series of new machines. ..." They are, continues Diebold "a way of * QQ thinking as much as a way of doing." 7 Through the prin­ ciple of feedback, continues this economist, machines can control their own operations, and, thus, cybernation should more properly be viewed as an "integrated systems approach." Seeing cybernation in these terms, argues

g o Donald Michael. Cybernation: The Silent Con­ quest (Santa Barbara, Calif.: Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1962), p. 11. 89 John Diebold, "The Nature of Automation," John Burke (ed.) The New Technology and Human Values (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1966), p. 110. 83 Diebold., its full impact should become evident— "a break­ through more revolutionary than Henry Ford's assembly 90 line." A definition of cybernation, however, is one thing; its impact on society is something else. Daniel Bell, who chaired the Conference on the

Year 2000 held by the American Academy of Arts and Sci­ ences, states that there is no doubt that "the social and economic consequences of cybernation will be huge. ..." But its ultimate effect on the "structure of intellectual life and the character of organizations" will be even great- er." 91 The Conference itself urged that people cease think­ ing of cybernation in terms of machines and realize that

the introduction of cybernation into society marks a new way of thinking, acting, and achieving objectives which are "quite at variance with traditional and customary . . . 92 modes" of doing things. Perhaps a statement of Henry

Winthrop dramatizes the impact of this new force. "Cyber­ nation," asserts Winthrop, "represents one of the most im-

portant phenomena of our times." 93

91Daniel Bell, Daedalus (Summer, 1967), ojd. cit., p . 642. 92Ibid., p.. 643. 93Henry Winthrop, "The Sociological and Ideological Assumptions Underlying Cybernation," The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 25. ' No.' 2"(April, 1966), p. 120. 84 That a cybernated culture will require both so­ cial and economic changes in our institutional structures and in our theories is obvious from the position papers re­ leased by two major conferences devoted exclusively to this topic. • Not only were the conclusions of these con­ ferences insightful; their points of agreement were suffi­ ciently similar to warrant listing. Cybernation, noted the Triple Revolution Ad Hoc Committee 94 and the Confer- ence on the Cybercultural Revolution, 95 demands that we begin immediately to devise new institutions and methods for the distribution of currency, goods, and services, in­ asmuch as present institutions and methods are inadequate for the unlimited output of goods and services which a cy­ bernated society can achieve. Because of this unlimited output of goods and services, the conferences concluded that poverty is unnecessary and inexcusable in any advanced industrialized economy. Moreover, continued these confer­ ences, a cybernated culture will require serious re-think­ ing of the traditional correlation hitherto made between work and consumption. Man can satisfy his material needs

94Dave Dellinger and Paul Goodman, "The Manifesto of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution," Libera­ tion, April, 1964, pp. 9-15. 95 Conference on the Cybercultural Revolution— Cybernetics and Automation (mimeographed paper, New York City, 1964). without labor; therefore, there is no longer any need to impose on human beings meaningless, repetitive work rou­ tines. In fact, unlimited output can be achieved solely by machines which require little cooperation from human beings. Finally, the conferences noted, the full use of such machines will introduce a leisured society for all. Several consequences flow from this last point, however.

A leisured society implies drastic revision in education; it also implies that traditional criteria for status, prestige, and influence will be revised and modified. Accordingly, the conference urged that immediate atten­ tion be given to educating citizens for the enormous con­ sequences and ramifications that a cybercultural revolu­ tion portends. The statements and the conclusions of these two conferences are supported by other authorities. Herbert Simon of the Carnegie Institute of Technology has stated that automation, and by extension cybernation, already threatens the jobs of the coal miner and the unskilled worker, and promises in the future to threaten the jobs of white collar workers, middle management, and top ex­ ecutives.^ Donald Michael sees this silent revolution

replacing everyone but the most technically qualified

^Herbert Simon, The Shape of Automation (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), p. 25. 86 97 personnel. Both authorities advance grave warnings that cybernation spells not only a quantitative change, but more importantly it spells a massive qualitative change for society.

While all who write on the subject agree that a cybernated culture will provoke stupendous changes in society, not all agree as to whether these consequences will be disastrous or desirable. Lewis Munford, for ex­ ample, sees cybernation as a menace to man's humanity. The "machines that we are introducing into society," writes this historian of technology, are becoming "self- operating, self-regulating, and self-directing." And man, continues Munford, is "adapting himself with pathetic 98 docility to this machine." Even worse, argues Munford, cybernation rather than freeing man and increasing his autonomy, enslaves man and decreases his autonomy. . . . as our system of automation becomes more perfect, the less possible it is to intervene in the process, to alter its pace, to change its direction, to limit its further extension, or to reorient its goals. Automation . . . increases probability and decreases possibility .99

Although there are many who would agree with Mun­ ford 's warnings and his interpretation of the cybernetic

O f f Michael, op. cit., p. 37. "Lewis Munford, "The Automation of Knowledge," Vital Speeches, Vol. 30 (May 1, 1964), p. 441.

"ibid. 87 revolution, there are others who, while warning of the un­ preparedness that society faces, sees it as potentially a beneficial development. Norbert Wiener argues that a cy­ bernated society will produce a more egalitarian class structure, abolish repetitive and meaningless human toil, and open the way for the "human use of human beings.""^® David Reisman likewise agrees that a cybernated culture can create unique opportunities for man, but warns that few Americans are prepared for the extensive leisure cyber­ nation implies. In fact, says Reisman, the situation con­ fronting Americans— . . and the rest of the advanced in­ dustrialized countries— is historically unprecedented, Because we are the first modern society to face the prospect of widespread cybernation, leisure, and affluence,

and also because it is an historically unprecedented situa­ tion, the Hudson Institute has devoted extensive analysis and detailed study to these topics. According to the Hud­

son Institute, cybernation will have several ramifications for society. It will drastically alter work patterns, in­

crease per capita income, produce shorter work weeks, and provide ample leisure time. In attempting to project the

^^Norbert Wiener, The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1950), passism. ■^"4)avid Reisman, "Leisure and Work in Post- Industrial Society," The New Technology and Human Values, op. cit., p. 193. 88 impact of cybernation on work patterns for the next thirty- three years, the Institute posited two scenarios.

TABLE IV*

1 02 Scenario #1 Average Work Week in the Year 2000

40 per cent of time on a vocation 40 per cent of time on an avocation 20 per cent on neither

*Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p. 195.

The second possible scenario for work patterns is illus­ trated in the following chart and assumes also forty per cent of the population employed, but constructs a plaus­ ible alternative as to how the forty per cent might choose to spend their time.

TABLE V*

Scenario #2 Possible Work Pattern in the Year 2000

50 per cent of people work normal year 20 per cent moonlight 10 per cent half-time hobbyists 5 per cent frictional unemployment 5 per cent semi-frictional unemployment 5 per cent revolutionary or passive dropout 5 per cent voluntarily unemployed

*Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., p. 196.

102The estimate below assumes a population of 318 million of which forty per cent are normally employed. 89 In the above chart only one-half the people (the usual forty per cent of the labor force) would work in normal fashion, one-fifth of the people would work longer than normal hours either for needed income or compulsive reasons, while the remaining twenty to thirty per cent would contribute little or no labor. The above pattern suggests that in the place of the current twenty per cent poor, assuming no major changes are made in present means of distributing goods, we may have a similar number of poor but situated differently, simply because through pref­ erence or principle they do not choose to participate in the vocational patterns of the nation. The Institute's studies also showed that given either of the two possible work patterns, the projections for the gross national prod­ uct for the year 2000 still provide for an increase of about one hundred per cent in per capita GNP relative to

1965. Whichever scenario is adopted— or even if other scenarios are adopted— the year 2000 will allow individuals to pursue an avocation as intensely as a vocation and still 103 have time for "third-order" pursuits. Assuming an increased abundance in goods and serv­ ices, a decrease in work habits, and an increase in leisure time, what are the effects of such changes upon the indi­ vidual— his psychological orientation and attitudes? More­

1(^Kahn and Wiener, 0 0 . cit., pp. 196-198. 90 over, what do these changes spell for society as a whole? In attempting to project the impact of widespread cyberna­ tion on the individual in particular and society in gener­ al, the studies conducted by the Hudson Institute advanced tv/o possible scenarios.

The first scenario hinges on the theories of Sig­ mund Freud. According to Freud work and its associated traits provide a means of binding the individual to real­ ity. By forcing the individual to face reality through work induced techniques, a mature character structure is moulded. While it may be possible to find substitutes for the reality-focusing influence that work presently pro­ vides, noted the Institute, its absence coupled with wide­ spread leisure may produce an outburst of childish individ­ ualism, anti-social frustrations, and increasing narcis­ sism.'1'^ In addition to ’the impact of cybernation on the individual (assuming a degree of accuracy in the Freudian scenario), the Institute also hypothesized the impact of such behavior on the society as a whole. The increase in self-centeredness would likely produce a society in which there was a decreased interest in government, politics, 105 and the pursuit of the common good. There were several reasons given for this attitude. A by-product of the

104Ibid., p. 199.

105Ibid. 91 absence of a reality-focusing influence such as work, as­ suming there were no substitutes provided and society was unprepared for leisure, would cause masses of people to be disoriented about life-goals and alienated from society. Work, however distasteful it may appear to be, does provide a goal-orientation for the vast majority of people. Con­ sequently, technology while it may decrease economic frus­ trations for the individual, increases his personal frus­ trations to the great detriment of society. In the words of the Hudson Institute,

The enhancement of private values combined with the increased sense of futility about public values would entail a despair about the long run future of the whole society. . . .106

If there is accuracy, then, in the Freudian scenario we may

see the day when the politics of plenty becomes the cyni­ cism of the many. Still working within the framework of the Freudian scenario the Hudson studies postulated general trends con­ cerning the impact of widespread cybernation, affluence,

and leisure on particular social classes. In a culture of affluence not only would the lower classes be amply sub­

sidized, but the benefits of the welfare state would be extended to include other socio-economic classes. Thus,

welfare which has been frowned upon in an achievement-

106Ibid., p. 200. 92 oriented society, would gain considerable group approval. Accordingly, "the assimilation of the impoverished ghetto

dweller into the larger society would pose less difficult 107 problems ..." as the culture of poverty with its em­ phasis on immediate survival and instant pleasure would to some degree become the culture of the affluent middle

class. Indeed, noted the Institute, "the indolent specta­ tor, the 'hipster' and the 'swinging cat' would have be­ come in large degree the norm for very wide sectors of the population.»1<“>8

The lower middle class, which it is estimated will be making between ten and twenty thousand dollars a year,

most likely will elect to work assuming jobs are available; however, their work will be on a greatly reduced scale.

Some, nevertheless, may elect extra increments of leisure, pursue expensive hobbies, and emulate aspects of the upper middle class style of life. The lower middle class in­ stead of being achievement oriented could possibly become

amusement oriented, and, thus, provide a tremendous market for all kinds of sports, fads, and other kinds of mass 109 entertainment.

107Ibid., p. 203. 108Ibid.

109Ibid., pp. 206-207. 93 The upper middle class, which will have an income between twenty and sixty thousand dollars, would most like­ ly emulate the life style of the landed gentry of previous centuries. Education, travel, expensive real estate, lav­ ish entertainment, and a cultivated style of life appear

as prospects for this group. Such self-indulgent patterns of life, noted the Institute, may result in 'unstable mar­ riages, alienated children and increasing interest in ex­

otic political ideologies Finally, the Institute studies projected the im­ pact of cybernation and affluence on youth. With self- indulgence becoming a trend for parts of society, it will become a virtual tradition with youth. "Bumming around,"

hip patterns of life, indifference to ethical values, and irresponsibility in personal behavior could become increas­ ingly common among youth. Many would see fit to live off

the resources of friends and relatives and other sources of income without doing any sustained work. Marked by alienation and anomie, this youthful group would be subject

to extremes of behavior and to political, religious, and ethical fads. Although this latter type of behavior may be

restricted to a minority, it will be an important minority

since it will include the articulate and literate whose

110Ibid., p. 207. 94 appeal to other adolescents and intellectuals is consider­ able.111

Having noted the impact of leisure, affluence, and cybernation on the various social classes, the studies con­ ducted by the Hudson Institute concluded by noting that a society nurtured on the Protestant ethic will undergo seri­ ous and sustained alterations in its values— particularly

the classical American middle class values of work, advance­ ment, and achievement. With the decline and ultimate dis­

appearance of bourgeoisie values such as diligence, punc­ tuality, delayed gratification, and a host of others, so­ ciety will see substituted modern epicurean values such as pleasure, hedonism, and sensualism.

The second major scenario that the Hudson Insti­ tute projected was termed the Dollard scenario. Briefly

stated the Dollard thesis postulates that aggressiveness and anti-social behavior will be greatly tranquilized in a

society that provides fewer external frustrations and ob­ stacles for an individual. Thus, an affluent and leisure society by demanding less of the individual and forcing him

to assume fewer challenging roles decreases tendencies to- 112 ward aggression and frustration. If this scenario be an

111Ibid., pp. 207-208. 11? Ibid., pp. 198-199; see also John Dollard, Frus­ tration and Aggression (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1939. 95 accurate one, then a cybernated culture would be a human- istic-oriented culture. It was this type of humanistic oriented society that Norbert Wiener had in mind when he wrote his book, The Human Use of Human Beings.I t s major characteristics would be the absence of manual labor, devotion to learning, development of avocations, and indi­ vidual self-fulfillment within the framework of concern for the community and the common good. Keynes perhaps touched on such a society when he wrote:

We shall once more value ends above means and prefer the good to the useful. We shall honor those who can teach us to pluck the hour and the day virtuously and well, the delightful people who are capable of taking direct enjoyment in things .114-

Although the Hudson Institute refused to state def­ initely which scenario may prove accurate, it did seem to have a preference for the Freudian scenario. Accordingly, the study noted: The year 2000 . . . could produce a situation in which illusion, wishful thinking, even obvious­ ly irrational behavior could exist to a degree unheard of today. Such irrational and self-in­ dulgent behavior is quite likely in a situation in which an individual is overprotected and has no systematic or objective contact with reality. For example, there are probably many people for whom work is the primary touch with reality. If work is removed, or if other important functions

11^5 Wiener, oj). cit.

*1 *1 / John Maynard Keynes, "Economic Possibilities of Our Grandchildren," Essays in Persuasion, op. cit., p. 371* 96 are taken from work, the contact these people have with reality will be to some degree im­ paired. The results— minor or widespread— may become apparent in forms such as political dis­ ruption. . .

While the Institute did not state categorically that these things would occur, it did state with clarity and precision that the next thirty-three years would see an increasingly cybernated, affluent and leisure-oriented society. Such a trend quite obviously will have major im­ pact on our values and character structures. They require thoughtful consideration by society. Just as society has learned to handle economic problems sufficiently, it must now prepare itself to handle social and psychological prob­ lems which will emerge as economic problems recede. Enor­ mous efforts will be required to invent and implement new ways of coping with new and unfamiliar problems unique to a cybercultural revolution. An awareness of the problems which the next generation will face was expressed by Frank­ lin Patterson. "Technology," writes Patterson, "has final­ ly brought us to the place where we are forced to ask, v/hat

-i *1 £ are human beings for?"

115 Kahn and Wiener, op. cit., pp. 215-216.

^■^Franklin Patterson, "Human Issues in the Post- Industrial Society: The Context of Education Tomorrow," William Alexander (ed.), The High School of the Future: A Memorial to Kimball Wiles (Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Company, 1970), p. 71. 97 Always before when men were less free from the constraints laid upon them by scarcity . . . the answer to that question was given to chil­ dren . . . by the circumstances of their lives. Nov/ we are faced with the privilege and awesome responsibility of trying to cope with that ques tion under conditions of nearly complete free­ dom. . . .117

Changes in Economic Struc­ tures in Society "If one could divine the nature of economic forces in the world," writes Robert L. Heilbroner, "one could 11 R foretell the future." His remark directs attention to the fact that technology, while it has many ramifications in society, affects initially and immediately the economy. Consequently, predicting the impact of technology on the economy is in a sense predicting the future; furthermore, if one hopes to control the accelerating forces of change in society, an understanding of the interaction between technology and economics becomes mandatory. Otherwise, we will find our age as Louis Kronenberger noted "all sign­ posts and no destination. Accordingly, the question ought to be raised, "how has technology affected economic institutions?" Similarly, "how will technology affect our

economic institutions in the future?"

117Ibid.

■I -I Q Robert L. Heilbroner, "The Future of American Capitalism," Commentary, April, 1966, p. 30.

^■^Louis Kronenberger, "The Spirit of the Age," Company Manners (Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill, 1954), p. 27. 98 The major concerns which seem to be shared by those who write on the above topics include a number of issues. In general, scholars assert that technology has permanently invalidated classical economic assumptions, changed the organizational structures of economic institu­ tions, and necessitated the continuance of a "military- industrial complex." Moreover, it is likewise held that technology has eroded the traditional distinctions between the public and private spheres of economic activity. Each of these issues deserves thoughtful elaboration; for the impact of these changes, according to Heilbroner, will re­ sult in technology "leading" ultimately to the demise of capitalism.'*'^

One of the significant effects of technology on the economic life of man has been to change drastically many of his cherished assumptions about the market, the "invisible hand," and the dogma of competition— all pillars of econom­ ic thought since the eighteenth century. In this regard the most penetrating recent book to be published on the in­ teraction of technology and economics is John Kenneth Gal- 121 braith's The New Industrial State. Not only does this book provide a panoramic overview of economic behavior in

120 Heilbroner, oj). cit., p. 32. 121 John Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1968). 99 the seventh decade of the twentieth century; it also serves admirably well to highlight the impact of technology on modern economic life. Consequently, considerable atten­ tion will be given to this book with reference to other appropriate authorities as evidence dictates.

Galbraith contends that technology determines the modern economic edifice. Technology has had two principle effects according to this economist. It has created, first of all, the "mature corporation"— a phrase which is useful in describing large corporate complexes as opposed to the traditional economic firms of an industrial economy.

These corporate complexes, which account for most of the American industrial production and distribution, come into

% existence because they are the only structures capable of supplying the massive amounts of capital required for ad­ vanced technology. The second principal effect of tech­ nology has been to create a "technostructure"— a new rul­ ing group in society. Because technology is so intricate a process that it can be practiced only by highly special­ ized professionals operating in groups, the mature corpora­ tion is managed by groups of men over which government or society has little control. Speaking of the reasons for the formation of this technostructure, Galbraith states:

The need for such a group personality begins with the circumstances that in modern industry a large number of decisions, and all that are important, draw on information possessed by 100 more than one man. Typically they draw on the specialized scientific and technical knowledge . . . of many persons. And this is guided by information which is assembled, analyzed and interpreted by professionals using highly tech­ nical equipment.122

These same ideas are supported by Jacques Ellul in his study of the global aspects of technology. Both control of capital as well as decision-making have passed to other hands.

Large amounts of capital can no longer be owned by a single person and economic activity is beyond the range of individual possibilities. But technical progress can no longer do without the concentration of capital. An economy based on individual enterprise is not conceivable. . . . The necessary concentration of capital thus gives rise either to an economy of corpora­ tions or to a state economy.

What is the motive force behind this concentra­ tion? Technique alone. . / . Technical progress thus entails concentration.123

Ellul writing on global economic -policies in advanced in­ dustrial countries and Galbraith writing on the American economy confirm one another's contention that technology forces consolidation of economic firms into huge corporate 124 complexes and also calls into existence a new breed of

122Ibid., p. 72.

123Ellul, o£. cit., pp. 154-155. 'L2Z,'It would be a serious omission not to point out that consolidation of economic enterprises is a process that has been taking place for many years in this country. The point is, however, that what economic firms once found desirable and profitable, has now become necessary and man­ datory because of the forces of technology. 101 decision-makers. Moreover, the existence of a "technostructure" and the commitment of enormous outlays of capital for technical research and development make market planning an absolute requirement for survival. Stakes are too high and the vagaries of a free market too chaotic. Con­ sequently, the mature corporation governed by men whose instincts for survival are considerable, administers prices, controls its suppliers, and plans its course of

action for years ahead. In short, mature corporations usurp the alleged competitive market. "Whatever else its ideological billing," comments Galbraith, the American economy "is in substantial•part a planned economy." Con­

tinues Galbraith,

The imperatives of technology and organization not the images of ideology are what determine the shape of the economic society.125

Contrary to popular myth, then, the enemy of the market is

not ideologies as some would have it, but "social engi­ neers." This latter point calls to mind the remark of the French playwright, Marcel Pagnol who said, "One has to

look out for engineers— they begin with sewing machines and end up with atomic bombs. »-^6

^^Galbraith, op. cit., p. 1 8 . 1 Pfi Marcel Pagnol, Critique des Critiques (Mew York: The Macmillan Company, 1949), p. 3. 102 In the process of destroying the traditional pil­ lars of economic thought and the theories of Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, and David Ricardo, Galbraith sweeps aside another cherished belief— pecuniary motivation. Un­

like the entrepreneurial giants of old— Ford, Rockefeller, and Mellon— the "technostructure" eschews profits for mar­ ket stability and growth. Given the fact that the techno­ structure does not include the owners of the corporations

and given the necessary supply of capital, the managers of the corporations are free from the need to maximize profits and to pursue other goals. There is, states Gal­ braith, ". . .no other social goal more strongly avowed 127 than economic growth." Others have commented on this point. For example Charles Reich in a less scholarly but more polemic book than Galbraith's has stated:

As for organizations,' their imperative is to grow. . . . The essence of the Corporate State is that it is relentlessly single-minded, it has only one value, the value of technology-organiza- tion-efficiency-growth-progress.128

Although his litany would seem to include more than one value, Reich, like Galbraith, sees continual growth as the

supreme goal of today's corporate enterprises. Given this situation, a significant question that arises is, "to what

■^^Galbraith, 0£. cit. t p. 183.

■^^Reich, ££. cit., pp. 94-95. 103 degree does this technically imposed growth reflect real physical and social needs?" Galbraith comments as follows: This question cannot be answered categorically. No doubt the emphasis upon economic growth is partly grounded in man’s ancient and seemingly always inadequate supply of goods. And in mod­ ern times growth has been a principal therapy for unemployment. Also economic growth eases many problems of allocation in the economy— it is much easier to find resources for education or the poor by taking these from increased out­ put than by subtracting them from existing stand­ ards of living.129

In spite of this, however, Galbraith states:

The acceptance of economic growth as a social goal coincides closely with the rise to power of the mature corporation and the technostruc­ ture . 130

Jettisoning ideas of profit maximization, consumer sovereignty, free markets, competitive firms, corporate accountability, and a host of other beliefs, Galbraith concludes that most of the conventional economic explana­ tions are simply not in accordance with reality. Indeed, technology has turned traditional economic explanations into myths. Inasmuch as technology has corroded and con­ vincingly destroyed both the theories and structures of classical capitalism, it may well give birth to a new sub­ structure in society; and, herein may lie a paradox of technology. During the medieval world the forces of tech­ nology made classical capitalism possible. In the modern

^^Galbraith, 0£. cit., p. 184. 104 world the forces of technology make classical capitalism impossible.

A second significant impact of technology on the economy has been the permanent establishment of what is referred to both in the scholarly literature and in student slogans as the military-industrial complex. It is not the

purpose here to reiterate the literature on this topic which is well known to any alert and diligent reader. It

is, however, the purpose to show a connection between the

demands of technology and the continuance of defense spend­ ing.

"American capitalism," as Heilbroner maintains, "is a semi-militarized economy and will become even more so 1^1 during the next decade." ^ Defense spending accounts for

three-fourths of the spending in the public sector; it also serves to regulate aggregate demand. The regulation of aggregate demand is the most appropriate way of stabi­ lizing the economy. Consequently, Galbraith and others

maintain that defense expenditures, or the regulation of aggregate demand in this fashion, coincide admirably with

the goals of the "technostructure." The technostructure, as was pointed out, demands an orderly, rational, predict­ able, stable economic system. It also demands enormous

outlays of capital for underwriting research, planning, and

1*1 Heilbroner, 0£. cit., p. 30. 105 development xvhich are necessary for advanced technology.

Government, regardless of which party happens to be in power, must maintain high employment, avoidanceof reces­ sions, and an increased gross national product. The means

of accomplishing all of these goals resides in controlling the public sector through defense spending. Thus, the

goals of government and the goals of the technostructure— to minimize damage to its security and to maximize the 152 growth of the firm— converge. It was this convergence of interests that prompted Galbraith to remark: "Our present method of underwriting advanced technology is ex- 155 ceedingly dangerous." Indeed, that may turn out to be the understatement of the century.

If a moment’s digression can be permitted, it is worth recalling that in the introductory chapter a sugges­

tion was offered that there was some correlation between student unrest and the functioning of the technological

society. In this regard, the arguments of the New Left and others ought to be thoughtfully considered. It is one of the contentions of the New Left that "the system" negates

solutions to poverty, additional expenditures for educa­ tion, and a host of other social needs. Galbraith shares

this view when he writes: "There is no need to measure

■^^Galbraith, op. cit., pp. 229-242; pp. 316-324.

1 3 3 Ibid., p. 2 0 . 106 the advantages of space achievements against help for the 134 poor." If technology, the "technostructure," and gov­ ernment share common goals and deem these goals indispen­ sable for survival, then parks, playgrounds, and the poor become secondary social priorities. Here, then, may be another paradox of technology. On one hand, technology provides the tools for solving social problems; on the other hand, it creates a structure which subordinates these social problems to goals of growth and expansion. Science and technology produce still a third prin­ cipal effect on the economy. In most of the economic lit­ erature and theory an important distinction is made be­ tween the private and public spheres of economic activity. Rapid technological changes, research demands, defense spending, enormous outlays of capital, and the development of the mature corporation have eroded this distinction. The merger of the private and public sphere was recognized by the Bureau of the Budget when it asked the cogent ques­ tion, "in what sense is a business corporation doing 100 per cent of its business with the government engaged in free 135 enterprise?"

A partial explanation for the blurring of distinc­ tion between business and government and the private and

1 3 ZfIbid., p. 175. 1 35 As quoted in Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 283. 107 public sectors is given by Don Price. The very uncertainty of the research and devel­ opment requires the government and business to • work out a joint arrangement for the planning and conduct of programs; the relationship is more like the administrative relationship be­ tween an industrial corporation and its subsid­ iary. . . .136

Thus, the conventional model of the economy that separates what is private from what is public and what is profit from what is not for profit, is no longer an easy distinction. Indeed, it may be unrealistic. One writer who maintains this idea is Charles Reich who, because of this institutional blurring of lines, feels justified in speaking of government and corporations as one in the same: In the Corporate State, most of the "public" functions of government are actually performed by the "private" sectors of the economy. And most "government" functions are services per­ formed by the private sector.137

For example, the government spends large amounts for re­ search and development with private companies receiving the benefits of this knowledge. Airports are built at pub­ lic expense for the private profit of airlines. Or, per contra, airline companies when they build bombers for na­ tional defense perform "public services." The amalgama-

1*6 Don K. Price, Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 281. 1^Reich, o]o. cit., p. 96; see also Galbraith, op. cit., p. 3 0 5 . 108 tion of public and private functions merge so that no sharp demarcation exists between the private sphere and government. As Galbraith informs us: . . . the mature corporation is an arm of the state. And the state in important matters is an instrument of the industrial system. This runs strongly counter to the accepted doctrine. That (doctrine) assumes and affirms a clear line between government and private business.13°

Aside from the fact that such a distinction is a pertinent criterion for establishing a socialist state from a non-socialist one, it also has implications for the con­ cept of pluralism in democratic theory.

Once the line between public and private is mean­ ingless and is erased, the various units of the Corporate State no longer appear to be parts of a diverse and pluralistic system in which one kind of power limits another kind of power; the various centers of power do not limit each other; they all weigh in on the same side of the scale, with only the individual on the other side. With public and private merged, we can discern the real monolith of power and realize there is noth­ ing at all within the system to impose checks and balances, to offer competition, to raise even a voice of caution or doubt.139

When one considers the impact of technology on the economic structure culminating in the merger of the private and public spheres, one is inclined to agree with the statement of Barbara Ward: "... there is a remarkable resemblance of organizations and practices even in socie­ ties which think of themselves as widely or totally diver-

"^^Galbraith, ojd. cit., p. 305. 159 Reich, op. cit., p. 100. 109 gent."^^ A consideration of these factors also allows one to understand the logic in the remarks of Heilbroner who maintains that technology will abolish capitalism. In all likelihood, barring the advent of a cat­ astrophic war, capitalism will continue as the dominant system during the remainder of this century. . . . Although it will inevitably change and will likely suffer considerable du­ ress over the next decades, in the long run it will gradually give way to a very different kind of social order, for our lives and for those of our children. . .

There is, continues Heilbroner,

a profound incompatibility between the new idea of an active use of science within society and the idea of capitalism. . . . The world of sci­ ence as it is applied to society is committed to the idea of man as a being who shapes his col­ lective destiny; the world of capitalism to an idea of man as one who permits his common social destination to take care of itself. The essen­ tial idea of a society built on scientific en­ gineering is to impose human will on the social universe; that of capitalism to allow the social universe to unfold as if it were beyond human interference.1^2

Perhaps a concise way to summarize the interaction of technology and economics as well as to lend additional support to the ideas of Galbraith, Heilbroner, and Reich 143 is to synthesize a chapter in Jacques Ellul's book.

140 Barbara Ward, Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 295. ”1 / n Heilbroner, 0£. cit., p. 23.

l4 2 Ibid., p. 35.

^■^Ellul, 0£. cit., pp. 148-227. 110 Modern technology, maintains Ellul, presupposes centralization and planning. Centralization, planning, and consolidation are the major realities of our times since each productive unit must be put in its proper place with respect to the other productive units in society; otherwise the economic system operates irrationally. The state, continues Ellul, is the only agency which is in a position to supervise the whole complex and coordinate the various activities. Acting in such a fashion, the state brings about an even greater centralization. Technology, thus, establishes a bond between the state and the economy whereby technical progress is not feasible or possible without the support and intervention of the state. "The fact that the two are reciprocally joined by technology makes them aspects of the same phenomena." However, argues Ellul, "it is a phenomenon which is not the result of a simple accretion of previous phenomena."'1'44 The fusion of the state and the economy and of politics and economics 145 produce "a new organism— the technical state." Forced by technology to merge, it is no longer possible to say, 146 notes Ellul, "It could be otherwise." The relationship forged by technology is neither chance nor fleeting, for

,l4 4 Ibid., p. 1 9 6 .

l4 5 Ibid., p. 1 9 7 .

l4 6 Ibid. Ill there is no possibility of reversing this trend.

This merger of power in the state becomes stronger as technology increases. A state tied to technology and devoted to technological goals does not consider humani­ tarian aims. Socialism, as Galbraith also argues, con­ sidered as an economic humanitarian system is no longer a possibility. Consequently, the ownership of the means of production, whether it is in a capitalist or communist system, ceases to be a central problem. The crux of the economic problem, according to Ellul, has moved from owner­ ship of the means of production to technical decision­ making. "The real debate concerns who will be in a posi­ tion to absorb, support and integrate technological 147 progress. ..." Mien milieu and action become technical, order and organization are .imposed. The state itself projected into the technical movement, becomes its agent. Technique is, therefore, the most important factor in the destruction of capital­ ism, much more so than the revolt of the masses.1 ^ 8

In contrast to Heilbroner and Galbraith, but in agreement with Reich and Roszak, Ellul sees technology producing an authoritarian economy. Technology, states this author, demands organization and centralization which are the opposites of the classical liberal state. Without any countervailing powers to check the power of the techni-

l47Ibid., p. 198.

l48Ibid. 112 cal state or the corporate state, it becomes an agency de­ voted to efficiency, rationality, and order. La technique 149 becomes a "cold impersonal mechanism."

Technology and Politics

Throughout human history technology has affected political values, institutions, and assumptions. For the most part, however, the effect of technology on political life has been indirect, circuitous, and oblique. Tech­ nological backwardness and its accompanying poverty, for example, may result in the creation of oligarchic socie­ ties, while technological breakthroughs with their accom­ panying affluence may lead to the forging of mass democ­ racy as in the Industrial Revolution. The development of the atomic bomb unquestionably changed the conduct of in­ ternational affairs, and future technological research and development may alter the size and relationship of insti­ tutions in a society. Similarly, technology changes the economy and the class structure; this change in turn causes modifications in political institutions. Important scien­ tific discoveries and their application to technology have always brought profound social changes, and political in­ stitutions cannot escape repercussions. As long as dis­ coveries and innovations occurred infrequently and without conscious anticipation, much less design, society rarely

l49Ibid., p. 201. 113 concerned itself with the political implications of sci­ ence and technology. Now, however, with the maturing of the sciences and the refinement of technology coupled with their copious application to every facet of society, man must concern himself with the political impact and consequences of a technological society. As Don K. Price has expressed it, . . . we have reached the point when both scientists and politicians begin to worry not merely about specific issues, but about the theoretical status of science and technology on our political and constitutional system, and no longer rely on the assumption . . . that science and democracy are natural allies.150

The first great scientific revolution arose from the discovery that the natural world was not as it was be­ lieved to be; what we now call the technological revolu­ tion is the result of the further realization that the natural world need not be as it is. We can change it at will— massively, immediately, and completely. Because an advancing science and technology present us with radical alternatives never before possible and therefore never entertained, many of man's generic social problems have passed from the realm of the impossible to the region of , the probable. This broadening of social and political choices, comments Edward T. Chase, "is calling into ques-

150 Price, The Sense of the Sixties, op. cit., p. 403. 114 tion the viability of our political institutions to a de- 151 gree unknown at least since the Civil War." The ex­ ponential rate of change, uniquely challenging our politi­ cal superstructure, has led the German physicist and Nobel prize winner, Dr. Eugene Rabinowitch to assert that "the capacity of the representative systems of government to

cope with the problems raised by the scientific and tech- 152 nological revolution is in question." Because we confront a situation in which society acting through its political institutions can legislate the future or as some have expressed it "invent the fu- ture" 155 through planned deliberate choice, it is inevi­ table that many of the dogmas, assumptions, and precepts

of political life are open to challenge and re-examina­

tion. In this regard it is interesting to note that in the last half of the seventeenth century the full brunt of

science was borne by the institution of religion; the proc­

ess of adjusting to science and its discoveries was in some

respects shattering for the dogmas of the church. Having based its assumptions on an unchanging view of reality,

1 51 Edward T. Chase, "Politics and Technology," The New Technology and Human Values, op. cit., p. 587. 152Eugene Rabinowitch as quoted by Don K. Price, Sense of the Sixties, op. cit., p. 405.

155 Taken from Dennis Gabor's book Inventing the Future (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1964). 115 religion was hesitant to re-examine its basic postulates about man and the universe. However, the re-examination was undertaken. As with religion in the past, so also does the present application of science and technology require us to re-examine our present political structures, theories, and values. Accordingly, the question ought to be raised, "To what extent has technology already altered our political institutions, values, and theories, and what kinds of political changes can we anticipate in the future?" John Stuart Mill began his masterpiece, On Liberty, by commenting on the relationship between the citizen and the various organizations within the state. Any discus­

sion of the interaction of politics and technology must in­ clude the immense organizational structures that have de­ veloped in modern society. That technology forces institu­ tional consolidation has been stated and explained else­ where. However, it might be recalled that social scien­ tists have affirmed the fact that the vast majority of so­ cial functions today are being discharged through large

institutions. Education, health care, welfare, the produc­ tion and distribution of goods as well as a host of other functions are centered in complex institutional structures. Many feel that these structures are inflexible and not re­

sponsive to human concerns. In fact, there is an uneasy

feeling that these institutions are so complex, pervasive, 116 and intricate in design that they have an autonomy which defies human control and understanding. Institutional accountability and control, or their opposite, are central to democratic theory for quite obvious reasons. Conse­ quently, the degree to which these complex institutions are responsive and responsible to elected officials is a pertinent issue. Peter Drucker addresses himself to this question. . . . legislative bodies are baffled and deeply disturbed by the symbiotic relationship of the society of organizations. These relationships defy any control by the purse. They elude con­ trol by the legislature, whether the legislature be a parliament, a congress, or even the rubber- stamp of a Communist assembly. As a result, legislatures feel that they no longer understand, let alone control. The more intimately the vari­ ous large organizations work together, the more irked and perturbed will legislatures b e c o m e . 154

Although the Industrial Revolution brought complex­ ity to institutions it did not usurp government control.

According to Drucker, the technological revolution with its institutional complexity defies government control. Sup­ porting the position of Drucker is Don K. Price who has said that "the scientific revolution seems certain to have a more radical effect on our public institutions than did the industrial revolution." 1 5 5 The control over individuals

154 < Drucker, op. cit., p. 184. 155 Price, Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 276. 117 that institutions exercise raises a host of problems con­ cerning authority, legitimacy, and morality. And for none of these does tradition offer much guidance; for the theo­ ries of Rousseau, Adam Smith, and the French philosophies appear meaningless and over-simplified in a society con­ fronted by a web of pervasive, powerful, and prolific or­ ganizations. "The great issues . . . many people fear," writes Price, are now so technically abstruse that they must be decided in secret by the few who have the ability to understand their scientific complex­ ity. We were already worrying about the alleged predominance of the executive over the legisla­ ture; now we worry lest even our elected repre­ sentatives cannot really understand what they are doing. . . . The scientific revolution has upset our popular ideas about the way in which policies are initiated and adopted, and in which politicians can control them and be held respon­ sible for them.156

Perhaps it is in the nature of scientific innova­ tion that, the more universal its potential application, the more difficult it becomes to foresee the extended ef­ fects of it. Commenting on this point Harvey Wheeler has remarked:

The scientific revolution . . . is posing prob­ lems too technical for laymen to fathom. It is making it impossible for legislatures to lay the foundations for the future.157

156Ibid., p. 277. 157 Harvey Wheeler, "Bringing Science Under Law," The Center Magazine, Vol. II, No. 2 (March, 1969), p. 60. 118

Consequently, Charles Reich has written that the modern state is subject neither to democratic controls, nor to constitutional limitations. 158 Although the same posi­ tions are held by Galbraith and Roszak, it ought to at least be mentioned that the degree of legislative or popu­ lar control over the state is a subject of debate in polit­ ical circles. What is not debatable, however, is that the increasing spread of technology will inevitably have an effect on political institutions. To believe otherwise is to suffer from naivete. Edward Chase forcefully maintains:

There is a growing awareness that tomorrow's political convulsion will be different from what doctrinaires, obsessed with dated rhetoric about socialism vs. capitalism, have led us to expect, because it derives from the cumulative impact of technology, an impact that is impersonal, non- ideologicai, relentless, and possibly overwhelm­ ing. Above all else our political adaptability and inventiveness are being challenged by tech­ nology. 159

The need to adapt political institutions to an age of tech­ nology "poses major problems for political organizations and decision-making," comments the political scientist

Zbigniew Brzezinski. "It will fundamentally change the relationship between the political system and society," and such a change, continues Brzezinski, "might lead to the collapse of the democratic ideal. ..."

158 Reich, op. cit., p. 91. 159 Chase, oj>. cit., p. 387. “| £Tr\ Brzezinski, Daedalus, ojd. cit., p. 670. 119 Others, likewise, see an incompatability between a technological society and traditional democratic ideals and institutions. Bertrand de Jouvenal states that it may be reasonable to assume that within the near future a

"Principate" will be established to control science, poli­ tics, and economics. The most important consequence of technology, maintains de Jouvenal, is the passing of effec­ tive power in all political systems from parliamentary bodies to the executive. The transfer of this power and decision-making to the executive is becoming an institu­ tionalized fact of life. As technology expands, as organi­

zations grow more powerful, the only possible response will be to create a Principate with powers not unlike those

of Augustus.'^'*' ’’Democracy," as Huxley has written, "can hardly be expected to flourish in societies where political and economic power are being progressively concentrated and centralized.

Not only do political writers see structural

changes; they seriously challenge the notion that organi­ zations are held to public accountability. It is also pre­

dicted that technology will change the value structure on which the political system rests. Todd R. La Porte of the

■^^Bertrand de Jouvenal, The Public Interest, No. 7 (Spring, 1967), p. 108. "^^Aldous Huxley, "Over-Organization," The New Technology and Human Values, op. cit., p. 401. 120 University of California at Berkeley cautions his fellow political scientists to understand the implications of technology for democratic political values. "While noting that this impact has not been fully charted, La Porte sees a strong prospect that traditional values will undergo serious modification. La Porte cites as an example the value of a full-day's work, a belief of considerable worth not only to the economic system, but also to the harmony of the political system. This value, according to La Porte is being subjected to erosion by people who suffer unemploy­ ment due to technical obsolescence. Moreover, maintains La Porte, deprived portions of a population, who see that an economy can provide them with more than existing insti­ tutions distribute to them, lose confidence in those insti­ tutions and in the political structure as a whole. Enlarg­ ing on this point, La Porte writes: Should the frame of reference of science (that all truths are liable to future disproof and are expected to be displaced) become generalized to social and political values, there is likely to be further disagreement about the priorities and values of our traditional hierarchy of political precepts. In the future a rather different hier­ archy of political values is quite possible which could bring severe pressure to bear on our famil­ iar patterns of political and economic institu­ tions. 163

In this regard it is worth mentioning that many of

Ifiz Todd R. La Porte, "Politics and Inventing the Future: Perspectives in Science and Government," Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 121. 121 our political institutions and values were fashioned dur­ ing an age of scarcity when the spectrum of choices was limited and radical solutions were unavailable. To the extent that technology expands and alters the spectrum of what man can do, it not only multiplies his choices but reacts on the value structure of a society. Now that scar­ city is a fantasy for most and abundance a reality for many, it is questionable whether certain political values in par­ ticular and certain social values in general are any longer viable. The point is, however, that continued and rapid technological change will transform the political system.

The idea that political values will remain the same in a Heraclitean age is neither theoretically nor empirically justifiable.

The last issue which requires elaboration in this attempt to ascertain the impact of technology on political life concerns citizen participation in decision-making. A basic assumption in democratic theory is the belief that men of common prudence and rationality will know the is­ sues of a society, see the alternatives before them, weigh the myriad of options, and make decisions for the common good. This basic assumption of democratic theory, while it has had its critics in the past, is coming under direct and sustained, attack as the technological era becomes more ex­ tensive and prolific. 122 As previously stated and reiterated the intrusion of science and technology into the political arena in­ creases the complexity of issues and demands more sophisti­ cated judgments. Concern over the inability of even the most intelligent citizen to handle these judgments is per­ vasive. Jacques Ellul and Herman Kahn sound a note of despair. Kahn, reflecting the belief in the emergence of a politically powerful technical elite, thinks that citi­ zens will regard political decisions in a technological society as too complicated to understand and will lapse 1 fk into political apathy. ‘ Ellul maintains that technolo­ gy and technicians will set all social goals and provide answers to social problems, while the role of the politi- 165 cian and the citizen will progressively be eliminated. Many who venture statements about the impact of science and technology be'gin with the assumption that tech­ nology if not understood and controlled will result in not only a poorly informed and passive electorate, but like­ wise in the demise of democracy. • Brzezinski who has writ­ ten widely on this subject alleges that society may be headed toward a "technocratic dictatorship." Commenting on this forceful charge, Brzezinski states:

■'■^Herman Kah, Daedalus, op. cit., p. 674-. See also Robert E. Lane, "The Decline of Politics and Ideology in a Knowledgeable Society," American Sociological Review, Vol. 31 (1966), pp. 649-662.

l65Ellul, Oja. cit., p. 318. 123 In the technetronic age, the question increasing­ ly is one of ensuring real participation in de­ cisions that seem too complex and far removed from the average citizen.166

Martin Shubik who participated in the Conference of the

Commission on the Year 2000 says that if our system is based on the idea of a citizen who knows the issues and has knowledge about these issues, then the twenty-first century will pose unprecedented problems. The growth of knowledge and speed of change in technology work against the individual being in a position to exercise free, reasonably well- informed, rational individual choice. . . .167

Like Kahn, Ellul, Brzezinski, and Shubik, Emmanual G. Mesthene, director of the Harvard Program on Technology and Society, also questions the feasibility of citizen- participation in a technological age: There is here the problem of what happens to traditional relationships between citizens and government, to such prerogatives of the individ­ ual as personal privacy, electoral consent and to the ethics of public control over a new elite of information keepers, when economic, military and social policies become increasingly technical, long-range, machine-processed, information-based, and expert-dominated.168

Not all scholars agree that a technological society will subjugate man and destroy his ability to make rational choices, however. It is the contention of others that

■^^Brzezinski, Encounter, op. cit., p. 19.

^Martin Shubik, "Information, Rationality, and Free Choice," Daedalus, op. cit., p. 773. *1 Aft Mesthene, Science, op. cit., p. 142. technological developments such as automation can help create a more egalitarian society devoid of roles, pres­ tige, and status. Similarly, they see in a leisured so­ ciety ample time for man to educate himself so that he will be able to understand fully the political issues of the day. A leading exponent of this view is Marshall

McLuhan who feels the revolution in communications will lead to a more informed electorate and, consequently, a 169 more democratic society. ^ Democracy, asserts McLuhan, will be strengthened because mass communications allow peoples to relate to one another in a total involvement which creates possibilities for dialogue and discovery on an enormous scale. Daniel Bell, while feeling that technical considerations in policy decisions place tower­ ing burdens on the individual, states that the impact of technology on politics most likely will lead to sharper political conflicts, and, thus, greater political involve­ ment. Planning which is so necessary in a technological society, asserts Bell, rationalizes and sharpens the available choices for all to see. For example, scientific planning allows one to determine precisely what propor­ tion of a school budget benefits white middle class chil­ dren as compared to poor black children. This very pre­ cision, maintains Bell, flushes out one's value choices

"'■^Marshall McLuhan, "Address at Vision '65," American Scholar. Vol. 35 (1966), p. 204. 125 and displays them for all to see. Thus, concludes this social scientist, political issues take on more and more the quality of basic value dilemmas, whereas now the po­ litical value dilemmas are often submerged, confused, and unstated.

While not all scholars agree as to what the impact of a technological society will be on citizen participa­ tion or the consequences of it to our political structures and values, they have, nevertheless, raised some fundamen­ tal issues for reflection. It does appear accurate to state that continuous application of science and technology will modify, perhaps even drastically change, many of our present political assumptions and theories. For this rea­ son Lawrence K. Frank has stated that "we need a new po­ litical theory to replace that which was formulated during the late eighteenth century." Our present theories, notes Frank, "have become cumulatively inadequate and frustrating for the present and an impediment for the future." 171

The Accumulation of Scientific and Technical Knowledge on Social Values

One of the most obvious characteristics of the new technology, repeatedly noted throughout this paper, is

^^Bell, The Public Interest (Spring, 1967), op. cit., p. 103. 171 Lawrence K. Frank, "The Need for a New Political Theory," Daedalus, op. cit., p. 809. 126 that it brings about physical and structural change. Too briefly considered is the fact that technology creates a wholly new range of options which did not exist before. Insofar as these new options are chosen, older options are quite obviously displaced. Consequently, technology, while it adds to the options available to man, ends by altering the spectrum of his choices and the hierarchy of his values. Because of this multiplication of choices, technology has profound effects on the values of a society. Although it may be possible to cite instances in history where technology did not change societal values, there is a strong presumption that it generally does. The classical case is, of course, the Industrial Revolution whose social norms still continue to proliferate. Therefore, it seems

reasonable to advance the contention that technology by making available new options will lead to a restructuring of value hierarchies, either by providing the means for bringing previously unattainable ends within the realm of

choice or by altering the relative ease with which differ­ ent values can be implemented. When the drive to develop ever new technology is combined with the very high prob­

ability that the new technology will.be used, we have a society in which value changes and disruptions occur with increasing frequency. That we are moving into an era in

which profound questions of values will arise can be evi­

denced from biological, medical, and chemical experiments 127 in recent years. Accordingly, a number of conferences both here and abroad have been devoted to the topic of

"biological engineering." Regrettably, there has been a strong tendency on the part of many writers to sensational­ ize such issues or to brush them aside as issues more prop­ erly belonging to an Orwellian universe. They deserve serious attention.

Perhaps the seriousness of these issues was re­ flected in the remarks of a noted scientific journalist:

We are in the opening stages of a biological revolution which will affect human life more profoundly than the great Mechanical Revolu­ tion of the nineteenth century of the Techno­ logical Revolution through which we are now passing.172

A quick perusal of scientific and scholarly jour­ nals will substantiate the above judgment. Work in prog­ ress would appear to indicate that man can undergo a scien­ tifically induced mutation potentially as great as the one experienced through the slow process of evolution. Victor

C. Ferkis, reflecting on the potential of recent biologi­ cal breakthroughs, comments as follows: Humanity today is on the threshold of self­ transfiguration, of attaining new powers over itself and its environment that can alter its nature as fundamentally as walking upright or the use of tools.173

^ "^Gordon R. Taylor, The Biological Time Bomb (New York: The New American Library, 1969)",p .' 13. ■^^Ferkis, op. cit., p. 28. 128 According to the above author, man is on the threshold of an "existential revolution"— a revolution which forces man into a radically new moral position. Through experi­ ments in DNA and crygenics, continues Ferkis, man has the potential to create life from non-living matter and pos­ sibly to postpone death indefinitely. If man can create life and control death, asks this social scientist, has he not rivalled the powers of his Creator? 174 ' V/hen one considers that scientists within the next twenty years will be able to manipulate and design the ge­ netic structures of human beings, control the sex charac­ teristics of offspring, prolong human life drastically, regulate human drives, instincts, and emotions through physiological or psychological methods, one catches a glimpse of the epic value dilemmas facing society. As the

Hudson Institute noted, "scientific developments for good or evil exist in every field, but nowhere so spectacular­ ly as in the potential control of the mind, of genetic makeup, and even of the numbers of human beings." 175

The importance of these experiments and their ethical implications has been commented upon by W. H. Thrope of Cambridge University.

The ethical problems are at least as great as those arising from atomic energy and the H-bomb.

174Ibid., pp. 30-31. • 175 Kahn and Wiener, 0£. cit., p. 109. 129 . . . There is no doubt in my mind that several of these developments are as epoch-making for mankind as any that have preceded them. They rank as high, if not higher in importance than the discovery of fire, of agriculture, the de­ velopment of printing, and the discovery of the wheel.176

Thorpe, however, is not the only scientist who is con­

cerned about the ethical ramifications of discoveries in biology and other related fields. The Nobel prize winner,

Francis Crick, has pointed out that the "development of biology is going to destroy to some extent our traditional 177 grounds for ethical beliefs. . . ." Likewise, the Com­ mission on the Year 2000 commented that There is little doubt that developments in the biological and medical sciences during the next thirty-three years will raise fundamental Ques­ tions about the nature of man and society. ^-78

Because of the seriousness of these issues, partic­ ularly the social and political implications of biological

engineering, the Center for Democratic Studies has pointed out that at present our existing structures— social, polit­ ical, and legal— are not adequate for resolving the con­ flicts that will increasingly arise between technological

developments and the welfare of human beings. Moreover, noted the Center, our failure to establish the proper de-

H. Thorpe as quoted in Taylor, The Biologi­ cal Time Bomb, op. cit., p. 15. 177 Francis Crick as quoted in Taylor, The Biologi­ cal Time Bomb, op. cit., p. 14.

^ ^ Daedalus (Summer, 1967), o£. cit., p. 983. 130 cision-making machinery stems from views on the nature of man and the world which science has already shown to be invalid. Continued failure to establish decision-making machinery, concluded the Center, will present very grave problems for society. 179

If the biological revolution is as serious as sci­ entists have predicted, then it promises to have implicit in it a bitter philosophical and political dialogue. Tam­ pering with life processes demands a discussion of ethical norms. It also involves a discussion of life goals, ends, and purposes. Future generations can either adopt a lais­ sez-faire attitude or by intervening in eugenics direct hu­ man evolution. Since science has placed in man's hands the knowledge necessary to control his evolution, his survival requires that he carry out this task successfully.

The final area chosen for survey concerns probable future technological innovations. Since they are numerous, only brief mention of several of them is possible here. (See Appendix for complete listing of technological innova- 1 RO tions.) According to the studies at the Hudson Institute

1 0*1 and the Rand Corporation, the Year 2000 will have many

179 ^ The Center Magazine, op. cit., Vol. II, No. 6. (November, 1969), pp. 47-49. ^®®Kahn and Wiener, pp. 51-57. -I Q-| Olaf Helmer, Social Technology (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966), pp. 78-80. aspects starkly different from anything we know today.

Aside from the widespread use and acceptance of person- ality-control drugs and extensive genetic manipulation referred to previously, the twenty-first century will see the use of sophisticated teaching machines increase with alarming rapidity. Additionally, automated libraries which reproduce material on demand will be commonplace, while automation, itself, will span the gamut from menial service operations to complex decision-making at high level management. Centralization of personal and business information in data banks and pervasive techniques for monitoring and surveillance of both individuals and organi­ zations will be possible. Moreover, cyborg techniques, days of human hibernation for medical purposes, and choos­ ing the sex of unborn children are all distinct possibili­ ties. Moving from earth to outer-space, the twenty-first century will see permanent lunar bases, deep space labora­ tories, and frequent flights to Venus and Mars. From outer-space to the oceans, the century will witness per­ manent undersea installations, undersea colonies, and ef­ fective techniques for desalinization of water.

A second set of possibilities emerge for the twen­ ty-first century; and, while not as assured as the above, they are nevertheless probable. Regional weather control should be far past the experimental stage; primitive forms of artificial life may be generated in the laboratory; and 132 complete correction of hereditary defects through molecu­ lar engineering should be a reality. Automation will have advanced to the creation of sophisticated I. Q. machines; direct input into human memory banks is possible; and a universal language will have evolved through automated communication. Major use of rockets for commercial and private transportation either terrestrial or extraterres­ trial looms as a probability, while chemical control of intelligence may likewise prove feasible. A third set of probabilities for the twenty-first century, while including all of the first set and most likely the second set, may include several "radical pos­ sibilities." Among them are the extension of life expect­ ancy to substantially more than a hundred and fifty years and complete genetic control of human beings. In addition, interstellar travel and lifetime immunization against prac­ tically all diseases may likewise occur. Each of these possible innovations, notes the

Hudson Institute, is enough to produce a significant change in society, either because it is spectacular, ubiquitous, or because it may increase production sensationally.

Therefore, each breakthrough warrants the description "in­ novation" or "revolution." None is simply an obvious minor improvement over what currently exists. The accumulated scientific and technological innovations are not just quan­ titative changes; for at some point they will amount to 133 qualitative changes in the environment and, therefore, change the way man perceives his world.

That man has acquired a capacity to adapt to ex­ tremely massive, rapid, and pervasive change is yet un­ proven. In light of numerous studies, it seems certain that the next generation will undergo an unprecedentedly rapid acceleration in all areas of behavior; and, as some argue, the acceleration may be potentially disastrous.

Avoiding such disasters to man's emotional and physical stabilities will depend upon the capacity of this genera­ tion and future ones to perceive long-range trends, antic­ ipate emergent crises, and respond appropriately. In short, it depends upon man’s ability to control, direct, and channel change. Not only does managing this rapid change place an enormous burden on man, but it also threat­ ens the capacity of institutions to adapt to so much change in so short a time. The stress on man and society has yet to be fully perceived or understood.

It is a cliche to say that the future holds enor­ mous danger. Indeed, the future may even be a moot ques­ tion, for the world either through accident or design could be turned to ashes in a relatively few minutes. Bar­ ring such a catastrophe, however, it is worth emphasizing that as we move into the next century we are facing a unique era. It is unique in several respects. Aside from the fact that we are the first generation in history to 134 hold a total veto over all future generations, we are also

the first generation that is no longer a captive of his­ tory or of environment. That man is total master over his physical environment is new to the human spirit. Also new

to the human spirit is the total absence of restraint on inquiry. Everything is open to investigation and there are no longer forbidden secrets in the universe. This is a

significant change in the moral temper. Moreover, future generations must live with the haunting thought that value systems will change not once in a lifetime, but undergo several mutations within the space of a normal life span.

This, too, is new in history. Finally, our generation may

be the first to realize fully that the past is no longer a guide for the future; for the pace and nature of change re­ duce the validity and value of traditional wisdom.

As society moves into areas of experience in which experience offers little guide and as it employs new pow­ ers for which there are no precedents, there is only mar­

ginal recognition of the awesome burden that man faces.

Too few have sensed the uniqueness of the next century.

Perhaps there is no more accurate symbol of man's novel situation than his recent voyages into the indefinable

reaches of outer-space. CHAPTER III

AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED SOCIAL STUDIES MATERIALS AND PUBLICATIONS

Traditionally the "review of the literature" is an exercise that seeks to investigate various research studies which shed light on the dissertation topic under consideration. Accordingly, articles, past dissertations, and a host of other materials are examined, summarized, and presented for the purpose of avoiding duplication of past efforts and providing a framework for present stud­ ies. The purpose of this chapter deviates somewhat from this traditional approach and for that reason the purpose it is intended to serve requires-a few comments. Since the major focus of this study is to inves­ tigate the field of social studies to ascertain its aware­ ness of the technological society and to see to what de­ gree this awareness is reflected in the literature of the field, it is incumbant upon anyone pursuing such a study to investigate something other than traditional sources.

The field of social studies is itself a rather catholic phrase and can include many things. In order to be able to make any pronouncements on the field of social studies,

135 136 one must examine an array of artifacts which taken to­ gether constitute, in this author's view, a reasonable description of that field. The field of social studies includes, first of all, the views of social studies educators as these views are reflected in published articles. While it would be impossible to ascertain what all or even many social stud­ ies educators think on the topic considered in this study or even to review the many articles they may have written in a diverse assortment of publications, it is possible to single out for extensive review two major publications devoted to the field of social studies and to assume that an investigation of these major publications will reflect a reasonable measurement of interests, concerns, and aware­ ness of the topic. Therefore, the publications released by the National Council of Social Studies— publications which include a monthly journal, an annual yearbook, peri­ odic bulletins, and a curriculum series— will be examined and analyzed to see what light they may shed on this study.

Because the literature on the technological society has appeared only within the past ten years or so, the above mentioned publications would seem to merit a review only over this ten year period. In addition to the publications of the National

Council of Social Studies, one other journal frequently reflecting the views of social studies educators is the 137 journal, Social Studies. Its publications vail likewise be examined to buttress or contradict any conclusions drawn.

But the field of social studies includes more than the ideas of thinking of the educators who write in journals. It includes most assuredly the textbooks used in the schools. Even though within recent years schools have begun using paperbacks and curriculum projects, the textbook still commands a central position in most class­ rooms and is the major vehicle of formal education for imparting ideas, information, and perceptions of reality to a student. For this reason it cannot be ignored.

Since the original scope of this study was confined to materials at the senior high school level (grades 10-12), only certain kinds of textbooks merit examination— namely economic, history, and problems of democracy textbooks. There are several reasons for limiting this study to these particular textbooks. First of all, the types of themes, issues, and ideas which were explored in the previous chapter on the technological society are more likely to be found in these types of textbooks, particularly econom­ ic textbooks and those commonly referred to as problems of democracy. While history textbooks may not be the most fruitful areas to explore, they can hardly be ignored since history makes up the bulk of the eleventh grade social stud­ ies program in the vast majority of schools. A second rea­ 138 son for limiting the examination to these three types of hooks concerns the desirability of keeping this study with­ in manageable proportions. Although there are other text­ books and courses in social studies— psychology, sociology, and geography for example— their exclusion from this study would seem to be justified to some extent. Geography, which might well be a fruitful area for this type of study, is usually taught in the ninth and lower grades, and is therefore excluded by the limitations of this study. Psy­ chology and sociology, on the other hand, are taught at the senior level in some schools, but the supply of textbooks for these courses at the high school level is extremely limited. Therefore, the examination of textbooks will be limited to the three types previously mentioned. Of these textbooks only recently published editions (where possible) will be examined since it would be foolish to expect older editions to reflect recent knowledge of the technological society. Aside from the major publications of the field of social studies as described above and the textbooks used in the classroom, several other artifacts warrant examina­ tion. Dissertations will be examined and attention will also be focused on some of the new curriculum projects to determine the extent to which they reflect an awareness of the technological society. Drawing upon the materials pre­ viously cited, then, and applying the rationale established 139 in Chapter II, it would seem that some tentative conclu­ sions could be reached on the adequacy of the social stud­ ies in conveying to a student an awareness of the issues of a technological society.

Publications of the National Council of Soci'al Studies

Professional journals, whatever the field, are the major disseminator of ideas to the professions they serve. They should do more than this however. They should reflect the avant-garde thinking of the profession by focusing on promising trends in the respective field and forging new vistas for the field to follow. A pro­ fessional journal, then, should be not only a mirror of the field, reflecting present interests and concerns, but it should provide a glimpse of future trends, re­ flecting where the field is heading.

Social Education, which is a major journal of the field of social studies, reaches an audience of thousands of professionally-oriented people. Thus, it should serve as an accurate barometer of the degree to which social studies educators and the field of social studies are aware of the impact of the technological society and the degree to which those same educators feel a need to in­ corporate information and ideas about that society into future social studies curricular materials. 140

For the above reasons the past publications of Social Education were examined for a ten year period

(1961-1971). The findings of this aspect of the research were not without results, but on the whole rather dis­ appointing. ¥ith the exception of two issues and several articles there was no attempt by Social Education to con­ vey any awareness or concern about the impact of science and technology on our institutions, structures, and val­ ues, or any endeavor to impart the impact of these twin forces into the social studies curriculum. The exceptions to the above statements, and there­ fore the positive findings, should be noted. One issue of Social Education (January, 1 9 7 1 dealt extensively with the pollution of our physical environment. And while the application of science and technology have certainly dented our physical environment, it is only the most ap­ parent manifestation of these forces. The other excep­ tions to these findings were more promising. In an article entitled "Economic Education in an 2 Age of Great Expectations and Instant Solutions" an attempt was made to outline the issues for the seventies.

Noting that many of these issues emerged from scientific

■'""The Environmental Crisis," Social Education, Vol. 35, No. 1 (January, 1971), entire issue. 2 Albert Alexander and Edward C. Prehn, Social Education, Vol. 35, No. 3 (March, 1971), pp. 262-26”9"; 276. 141 advances, the authors cited the need to include in cur­ ricular materials the issue of the military-industrial complex as a permanent institution in our economy. Ac­ cording to the authors the growth of this complex has raised serious social problems which present a threat to our ecological environment, our political environment, and our economic environment. Likewise, the authors also advance a plea for including in the social studies cur­ riculum a more realistic view of the conglomerate struc­ ture of our economy similar to the view presented by John Kenneth Galbraith and discussed earlier in this paper.

The other articles of merit were found in earlier editions of Social Education. In an issue devoted to "International Education for the Twenty-first Century" not only did several articles deal with the transforma­ tions caused by science and technology, but there was also an insightful editorial comment. These remarks are worth summarizing.

Drawing upon the comments' of the historian C. E.

Zl Black, the guest editor of the November issue of Social Education maintains that present generations are experi­ encing one of the great revolutionary transitions in human

-z International Education for the Twenty-First Century," Social Education, Vol. 32, No. 7 (November, 1968). ^William A. Nesbitt, an editorial, Ibid., p. 637. 142 history comparable only to the transition from prehuman to human life and from precivilized to civilized society. We live, notes the editor, in a global village where physical, psychological, and cultural barriers no longer exist. Yet despite the enormous acceleration of the forces of the modern world and the future-oriented think­ ing that is taking place in our universities and research centers, most people, concludes the editor, are "still bound by the old ways of perceiving reality."-^ Indeed, continues this writer,

We are approaching the time when people every­ where can see and hear each other almost instan­ taneously. Road maps of the 1940's do not ade­ quately describe the highway system of the 1960's, nor do many of our images of the world acquired in the 1940's enlighten us about today's "space­ ship earth."6

Another article in the same issue, written by Kenneth Boulding, offers some provocative thoughts for educators. Because of technology, remarks Boulding, the world has become a small crowded globe "hurtling through space to an unknown destination and bearing on its surface 7 a very fragile freight of mankind. . . ." This represents, says the author, "a very fundamental change in the condi-

5Ibid., p. 638.

6Ibid. 7 Kenneth E. Boulding, "Education for Spaceship Earth," Ibid., p. 648. 143 tion of man, a change which . . . only a few people have 8 really appreciated." While the changes that have occur­ red both in values and in the environment may be quite disturbing to the prevailing folk culture,

the educator who does not "tell it like it is" is in great danger of being found out if the image of the world he is propagating to his stu­ dents does not correspond to what they are going to discover in their subsequent life experience.9 Some of the current revolt of youth, especially of students may very well be related to the fact that the pablum which they get in . . . schools is so unrelated to the realities of the world today that it proves indigestible.^0

Calling for the creation of a curriculum built around

"spaceship earth" and the preparation of teachers capable of conveying these new perceptions of reality to students, Boulding also urges the creation of a "pioneer book" which will convey to students "the sense of excitement, the sense of wide new horizons and the sense of world recon­ struction"'*"'1' which is taking place today. The final article which calls attention to the ramifications of science and technology is one written by Robert C. North, professor of political science at Stanford.

8Ibid.

^Ibid., p. 650.

10Ibid. ^ Ibid., p. 652. 144 Entitled "The World of the Forthcoming Decades: A Pessi- 12 raistic and Optimistic View," this article postulates the extremes of the technological innovations expected to take place in the twenty-first century. The future, North maintains, will be a close race between the ability of people to achieve wisdom soon enough to use technology constructively or else be engulfed by it. Unfolding tech­ nological developments can be used to save and serve man or to increase his misery, perhaps even bring about his self-destruction. Aside, then, from the articles mentioned, Social

Education reflected no other awareness or concern about 1% the issues of a technological society. For some un­ explainable reason the year 1968 saw more attention de­ voted to articles about the issues of the twenty-first century than the years 1969-1971. While one must conclude that there was no particular urgency sounded about the necessity of conveying to students the ramifications of a technological society except for those articles cited, one can also see a faint growing awareness of technologi-

12Ibid., pp. 670-672. 13 "Tor a good review of what has concerned those who write for Social Education see June R. Chapin and Richard E. Gross's article "A Barometer of the Social Studies: Three Decades of Social Education," Vol. 34, No. 7 (November, 1970), p. 788. 145 cal material creeping into the social studies literature.1^ No doubt this will gain momentum in the next few years. In addition to Social Education, some other impor­ tant sources of information for social studies educators are several additional publications from the National Coun­ cil of Social Studies. These publications fall into sev­ eral categories: an annual yearbook, periodic bulletins, a curriculum series (one or two a year), and an additional but limited group of publications covering a diverse as­ sortment of topics such as civic education, political socialization of youth, and other topics. It was earlier contended that if the field of social studies is aware of and concerned with the impact of the technological society, then such awareness and concern would be reflected in its publications. For this reason these additional publications of the National Coun­ cil of Social Studies were examined throughout the years

1961-1971. The results of this inspection were meager. Of the bulletins, curriculum series, and "other publications" only the annual yearbook showed any recognition of the advent of the technological society. Furthermore, it was

lZtTn light of the fact that the magazine Social Studies had no articles pertaining to the topic under study, it would seem unnecessary to dwell on this in the body of the paper. 146 not until 1969 that that recognition was forthcoming.

What the yearbook had to say is worth summarizing since it supports one of the major contentions made throughout this dissertation. The yearbook began by affirming the fact that the

response of social studies education to societal changes, particularly changes which have occurred since World War II, has been slow. Because of the convulsive changes which have taken place, says the yearbook,

Decisions about social studies programs for the last third of the twentieth century must be made in a setting that is drastically different from that in which today's conventional social studies programs were formulated.15

The yearbook, mentioning the need for new kinds of data to be introduced into social studies curriculum develop­ ment, also recognized the extensive and serious work being

done by futurologists by summarizing the findings of the Commission on the Year 2000. Accordingly, the National Council urged that educators who engage in curriculum

planning should make use of these studies; and, further­

more, it urged that social studies courses should illumi­ nate today's developing trends and problems for the emerg­ ing world of the twenty-first century. Content in the

15 "Social Studies Curriculum Development: Pros­ pects and Problems," The Thirty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Council of Social Studies (Washington: The Nation­ al Council of Social Studies), p. 2. social studies, continues the yearbook, should make avail­ able to students the opportunity to explore and analyze probable decision areas for the next century. Likewise of interest was the statement that "social studies in the schools has lost touch with social reality.In fact, notes the yearbook, American society has changed so rapidly since World War II that social studies programs 17 find themselves "dealing with a world of the past." The prominent role of history in social studies offerings and the failure to devote as much time to other disciplines that deal more directly with contemporary occurrences were given as partial reasons for the irrelevancy of social studies to social reality. The yearbook repeatedly commented on the avalanche of change that has occurred in this century and which promises to continue unabated, and noted also that this change had serious implications for social studies; but few, if any, concrete proposals were forthcoming. In fact, many of the courses of study sug­ gested in other parts of the yearbook appeared to be

little different from what was then and is now being

offered.

l6Ibid., p. 19. 17Ibid. 148 Dissertations, Research Stud­ ies, and National Curriculum Projects

As with the previously examined, areas, an exten­ sive investigation was made of dissertations written in the past ten years in the field of social studies and also of research projects. An examination of Disserta­

tion Abstracts for the years 1961-1971 produced negligible results. Aside, however, from doctoral dissertations, another possible source of investigation was a yearly article in Social Education entitled "Review of Research in Social Studies." A few, brief words about these ar­ ticles are in order.

Every year the journal of Social Education lists the articles published and research projects undertaken

in the field of social studies and appearing in major or minor journals across the country. The number of arti­

cles and projects reviewed varies from fifty to a hundred

in a given year. Since it is impossible for any indi­

vidual to survey such a wide assortment of journals the "Review of Research" provides a valuable source for any­

one attempting to measure the degree to which the social studies field is devoting attention to a given issue. Therefore, no measurement of the field is accurate with­ out a check of these yearly articles. As with the find­

ings for the dissertations no articles appeared in this

review of research, except those cited previously, which 149 would serve to indicate concern on the part of those in social studies about the ramifications of the technolog­ ical society or the need to incorporate such data into the social studies curriculum.

The last area chosen for review is the new social studies curriculum projects. Although it would be impos­ sible to examine each and every one in detail since they are proliferating and now number over sixty, a worthwhile guide to the contents of many of those developed and pub­

lished can be found in an issue of Social Education. ^ Of the curriculum projects published or soon to be pub­ lished very little attention is focused on any aspects

of a technological society. Most of the national curric­ ulum projects were begun in the early 1960’s before a

substantial body of literature was being produced about the technological society and many of them now nearing completion are based upon the format of the early I9601s.

There are, however, several exceptions to the above gen­

eralization which deserve to be noted. The Greater Cleve­

1 ft "A Critical Appraisal of Twenty-Six National Social Studies Projects," Social Education, Vol. 34, No. 4, (April, 1970). A very helpful bibliography is also listed in the above issue of Social Education and was consulted for this research as well as brochures, "flyers" and news­ letters which are in the possession of this author who previously assisted in a Directory of Social Studies Mate­ rials prepared by Frank S. Riddel (mimeographed paper), Social Studies Department, Ohio State University. 150 land Social Science Program has planned .for its twelfth grade a booklet entitled "The Technological Revolution." Through correspondence with the director of the project this author was informed that no table of contents has as yet been developed or has a publication date been an- 19 ticipated. ^ Consequently, no judgments can be rendered. Another interesting possibility in the new curriculum projects concerns the project called "Sociological Re- 20 sources." The project consists of some eleven booklets covering a diverse assortment of topics pertinent to sociology. One such booklet is entitled "Science and

Society" and is to be released next month. The third exception to the above generalization is a booklet in the 21 Harvard Series entitled "Science and Public Policy." This latter booklet raises some excellent questions about the uses and control of knowledge and of public control of scientific work.

With these exceptions, however, there has been no attempt on the part of the new curriculum projects to

19 Description of Materials and Services, 1970- 1971, Educational Research Council of America, Cleveland, Ohio (mimeographed booklet), p. 68. 20 "Science and Society," Sociologica.1 Resources (Belmont, California: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.), 1972. Pi American Education Publishers (Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill Company). 151 convey to students the rampaging effects of science and technology on contemporary society. However, it should be stated that since many of these new curriculum projects consist of individual booklets, and additional titles can be added without revising the entire course, it is .prob­ ably not unreasonable to hope that there will be forth­ coming some titles covering the effects of science and technology in future editions.

Economic Textbooks In another section of this dissertation (pp. 97- 111) it was pointed out that science and technology have had profound effects on the economic theories and struc­ tures of our society. The demands of technology, it was pointed out, have produced an economy of administered prices, market planning, loss of consumer sovereignty, a merger of public and private economic institutions, and a lack of corporate accountability. Moreover, it was sug­ gested by several writers that science and technology had aided and abetted the concentration of large conglomer­ ates (the mature corporation) and had led to a partnership between government and industry in the furtherance of de­ fense spending as a means of regulating aggregate demand.

Additionally, it was pointed out that science and tech­ nology moving at their present rate would likely bring about a cybernated economy in which the major problem 152 would no longer "be those of production, hut of consump­ tion and leisure.

Since these changes have taken place in our econ­ omy, it would be reasonable to expect the materials of social studies, particularly economic textbooks, to re­ flect this. One might also reasonably expect to find some mention of emergent economic issues relevant to the twenty-first century. With these expectations in mind five economic textbooks were chosen for extensive inves­ tigation. In order to be as fair as possible only econom­ ic textbooks of recent vintage were chosen, since it would be unfair to expect anything but the latest economics mate­ rials to reflect such changes. Consequently, while the economic books chosen may not be the most popular of wide­ ly used, considering the fact that older editions have probably not been replaced by school systems as frequently as they should be, the economic textbooks chosen do pro­ vide a barometer of the types of materials that students will most likely be using throughout the next decade. The availability of recent economic textbooks is somewhat lim­ ited since courses in economics are not as frequent as courses in history, and thus the demand for economic texts is not as great. Some major publishing companies have, nevertheless, issued several new economic textbooks re­ cently which serve to illustrate the model of the economy that students are given. Although a detailed discussion 153 of each individual book is impossible in this survey, certain generalizations pertaining to the rationale pre­ viously established are possible and in order.

It was found that contemporary textbooks ritually refer to our economic system as one of "free enterprise." Webster, it might be recalled, defines "free enterprise" as an "economic doctrine or practice of permitting pri­ vate industry to operate with a minimum of control by the government." Needless to say such a definition of our economy is not sanctioned by reality, nor is it sanctioned by most economists. Rarely, however, can one scan more than two pages of the textbooks without reading about free enterprise. It might also be mentioned that definitions of this type allow for a very subtle and seductive form of inculcation. Students are told, for example, that

"American capitalism can 'be described as predominantly a 22 free enterprise system. ..." The following excerpts, in fact, are very representative of the descriptions of the American economy that are found in current economic textbooks. . . . capitalism is that economic system under which individuals and corporations own and run stores, farms, factories, and mines and under which they engage in economic activities for

22 Albert Alexander, Edward C. Prehn, and Arnold W. Sametz, The Modern Economy in Action (New York: Pittman Publishing Company,' 1968), p. 37. 154 profit with a minimum of government regulation.^ Private enterprise means that individuals by using their abilities and initiative, may estab­ lish business and conduct their economic affairs with a minimum of direction by the government. In a "free" private enterprise economy, there is a complete absence of government intervention in the economic affairs of the citizens. Until the beginning of the twentieth century, the economy of the United States could be clas­ sified as almost entirely free private enterprise. In fact, many of the characteristics of a free private enterprise economy remain today in our e c o n o m y . 2 4

The foundation of our economic system is free, public enterprise.25

Even more surprising are statements which not only affirm the existence of the "free enterprise system," but also statements which claim its indispensibility for democracy and progress. Technological progress in the modem world made its great breakthrough under free enterprise. It is even conceivable that the breakthrough might not have come, or would not have corns so soon, without the free enterprise s y s t e m . 2 6

25 Ibid. This author's italics. 2 4 James E. Brown and Harold A. Wolf, Economics: Principles and Practices (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1 9 6 8 ) , p. 9 1 . For a very good refutation of this point see Gabriel Kolko, The Triumph of Conservatism (New York: The Free Press, 1 9 6 5 ) , passism. 25 Richard W. Landholm and Paul Driscoll, Our American Economy (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1970), p. 25. nC Marion R. Daugherty and Carl H. Madden, The Eco­ nomic Process (New York: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1 9 6 9 ) , p . 2 9 8 . 155 When one considers the fact that the breakthrough for science and technology in this country took place during World War II when the United States entertained a tight­ ly managed economy and also that the funding and develop­ ment of technology has been supported almost entirely by government, the statement is, to say the least, interest­ ing. A second generalization concerning the descrip­ tion of the American economy that can be gleaned from the economic textbooks relates to the private vs public spheres of economic activity. It was previously stated and docu­ mented (p. 106) that rapid technological changes, research demands, defense spending, and the development of the ma­ ture corporation have eroded the distinction between govern­ ment and business and the private and public sectors. Such an erosion has been taking place 'since World War II; and, therefore, one would expect to find in recent economic text­ books some mention of this transformation. Indeed, eco­ nomic textbooks seem to be totally oblivious to such an occurrence. On the contrary, the textbooks still continue to draw a sharp distinction between these two spheres of

economic activity and maintain that private economic power counterbalances public economic power. By extension the view is commonly presented that while large corporations

exist "economic power (in the private sector) is divided among millions of private businesses, farms, workers, and 156 27 consumers." The following excerpt supports this gener­ alization.

There are many big concentrations of power in large corporations and organized labor, but cor­ porate management puts a check on the power of unions and vice versa. Thus the various power blocs compete or act as counterforces. No one group gains ascendancy over the whole social order.28

Not only do the textbooks fail to show the interlocking interests between government and business, but they would have students believe that Adam Smith's invisible hand is still working beneficiently to decentralize economic pow­ er within the private sector itself, and likewise between the private and public sector.

A third generalization stemming from this inves­ tigation concerns the role of administered prices and the competitive market. It was argued earlier (p. 101) that the large corporations administer prices, control suppliers, and usurp the competitive market. In fact, Galbraith main­ tains that for all practical purposes, the American economy is a planned economy. Moreover, it was further pointed out (pp. 104-105) that a major factor in vitiating the workings of a free market originated with the desire of technocrats to maintain an orderly, rational, and predict-

27Ibid., p. 71. no Ibid. See also Alexander et. al., The Modern Economy in Action, op. cit., p. 285. 157 able market. The outlays of capital required by advanced technology are very great; and, therefore, are too haz­ ardous to be left to a free competitive market. In one textbook examined the existence of monop­ olies and oligopolies was admitted; however, the presence of administered prices was denied. . . . it is not surprising that in the past his­ tory of some European economies, oligopolists have got together in pools, trusts, and cartels • to bring price stability to their industries. . . . Such overt collusion is per se illegal under our lav/s and rarely occurs.29

Within the next few pages, though, a student is informed that "complete monopolies in this country are rare,"3® , and that when they do occur "government intervenes to re- ■51 store competition."^ Moreover, it is argued, contrary to Galbraith and Berle's thesis, that large conglomerates "increase competition" and lead to "lower prices by monop­ olists" more so than in "competitive industries in which many small, sometimes inefficient, producers compete vig- ■32 orously but wastefully."

It was interesting to note that at the beginning of the above cited textbook a strong case was made for

29 Alexander, et. al., The M odem Economy in Action, op. cit., p. 167. 3°Ibid.

31Ibid., p. 168.

32Ibid. 158 the necessity of a free competitive market, but mid-way in the textbook the necessity for mergers, consolidations, and combinations is argued because they eliminate the wastes of competition such as excessive advertising, duplication in sales staff, and unnecessary freight shipment. Because there is no unruly or unpredictable competition to in­ terfere with their plans, combinations can do a better job of planning ahead and hence tend to stabilize business in their field. Moreover, they are more efficient because they can utilize scientific management, division of labor. . . . As a result of these advantages, the public en­ joys greater variety, a better product and lower prices. 33

Likewise of interest on the subjects of large conglomer­ ates and administered prices were the following statements relating to the steel companies. Because so much overhead and fixed capital are involved, and because of the fear of the economic consequences involved of (sic) a bitter price war, oligopolies usually practice restrained •price cutting.34

In three major economic texts the question of administered 35 prices is not even mentioned. In another it is asserted that while we have a price-directed economy, some refer to the price system we have as one of "ad­ ministered prices." Perhaps this is an over-

33Ibid.

3Z|"Ibid., p.. 177. This author's italics. 35 -^Sanford D. Gordon and Jess Witchell, An Introduc­ tion to the American Economy: Analysis and Policy (Mew York; D. C. Heath and Company, 1967); Economics: Principles and Practices, op. cit.; Our American Economy, op. cit. 159 statement. While it is true that there are many interferences and imperfections in the market, these are far fewer than exist in most c o u n t r i e s . 36

Still other books vacillate on the subject of competitive markets, administered prices, and large conglomerates. For example, one chapter in a particular textbook states that there are relatively few monopolies in this country; then details the anti-trust legislation that has been passed in the country; reiterates the need for competi­ tion; states that two hundred manufacturing firms pro­ duce forty-nine per cent of the total manufacturing out­ put in this country; and ends by asserting that competi- 57 tion is difficult to measure.

A fourth generalization pertains to the treatment of defense spending as a means of regulating aggregate demand (pp. 104-106). The subject of military spending is rarely mentioned except in charts which show "how our money is spent" and any discussion that is forthcoming on defense expenditures is couched in terms of national 38 need and cold war rhetoric. One textbook does, however, raise the point that American prosperity has been due to

36 J. Kenneth Davies and Glen F. Ovard, Economics and the American System (New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1970), p. 113. 37 •^ Daugherty and Madden, The Economic Process, op. cit., pp. 100-108. 38 ^ Lindholm and Driscoll, Our American Economy, op. cit., p . 413• 160 some extent to the demand for goods and services growing out of the spending for national defense and that to this extent our economy may be built on a shaky foundation. Another textbook spends six very short paragraphs on the huge outlays for defense spending without any discussion of its role in regulating aggregate demand, its individ­ ual cost to the taxpayer, its role in underwriting tech­ nology, or the continual outlay of monies for defense vis a vis playgrounds, parks, or the poor.^* Even less atten­ tion is devoted to defense spending in still another book. Although one might expect at least some discussion of the total impact of defense spending on jobs and in stimulat­ ing demand in the economy, Economics and the American

System spends only two brief paragraphs on defense spend­ ing and merely notes that it accounts for the increase in federal expenditures in the past few years.An Intro­ duction to the American Economy, on the other hand, spends 42 only one paragraph. Perhaps the most extensive discus­ sion of defense spending is to be found in The Modern Economy in Action. Here it is recorded that the price of

■^Lindholm and Driscoll, Our American Economy, op. cit., p. 413. ^Brown and Wolf, Economics: Principles and Prac­ tices, op. cit., pp. 211; 217; 218; 219; 223; 258.

^Davies and Ovard, ojd. cit., pp. 444; 447. 42 Gordon and Witchell, Introduction to the Ameri­ can Economy: Analysis and Policy, op. cit., p. 137. 161 world leadership is to forego parks, hospitals, health 43 care, and a variety of other items. Likewise, it is pointed out that defense spending helps to spur the econ- omy 4 4 and also helps to "defend the cause of freedom." 415 Overall, however, one must judge the presentation of the role of defense spending in the economic textbooks as extremely superficial and somewhat misleading. The major idea conveyed to students is that the enormous out­ lays for defense are necessary to the cause of freedom and the maintenance of peace. With a very few exceptions is this spending admitted to be the spur to the economy that it is, and nowhere is it even hinted that it may be a means of underwriting advanced technology and the major determinant of regulating aggregate demand. Perhaps the reason for these sins of omission is, as Galbraith phrased it, that such talk leads to unpleasant introspection, poor advertisement for the system and comfort to Marxists.

Finally, it can be stated as a generalization that there is a serious silence in the' textbooks concerning any of the emergent issues relevant to the twenty-first cen-

43 ^Alexander, et. al., op. cit., p. 4l. 44 Ibid., p. 253*

45Ibid., p. 305. John Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State, op. cit., p. 240. tury. In light of the fact that a cybernated culture promises to he a reality in the future and that this rev­ olution will cause serious modifications in our economic structures, theories, careers, and values, it would seem somewhat derilict for current economic textbooks not to introduce this topic to the present generation of students. But derelict they are. In all the textbooks examined the word "cybernation" was not to be found let alone its pos­ sible consequences to society. Indeed, little and super­ ficial treatment was given to the topic of automation. In one such treatment students were informed that "minimum wage laws and the power of labor unions" have combined to push out the low skilled manual laborer faster than tech- 47 nological change. In another book the topic of leisure was introduced but comparisons were made between the lei­ sure of today and that of 1900. No attempt was made to project the amount of leisure time in the year 2000, how­ ever.

Along these same lines the views presented in these textbooks failed to call attention to several important changes that have occurred in the economy and will continue to occur. One such major change for the economy is that no longer is production a major goal of the system. In-

47 Daugherty and Madden, The Economic Process, op. cit., p. 198. deed, as almost all economists maintain our problem today is one of consumption. Yet information concerning this transformation in the American economy was sorely missing from the textbooks. Another significant shift in the American economy is that no longer are we principally en­ gaged in primary and secondary occupations, but rather have moved into the first service economy in history. This important fact, it would seem, is of such signifi­ cance that it ought to be conveyed to high school students for the implications it holds for their careers. Finally, there was in the textbooks an absence of material focused on the dynamic forces of science and technology and how these are changing work patterns, theories, structures, and institutions. Only one book of those examined did a creditable, though brief, review of the role of scientif- 48 ic research, development, and innovation. The only conclusion that can be reached on the ba­

sis of the economic textbooks examined, assuming that text­ books of this type will permeate the educational market, is that another entire generation of students will pass through our schools having a model of "free enterprise"

firmly moulded in their thinking and their ideas grounded

in the classical pillars of economic thought— the free

competitive market, the invisible hand, the separation of

48 Alexander, et. al., The Modem Economy in Action, op. cit., pp. 8-14. 164 public and private spheres of economic activity. They also will be indoctrinated in the theory of countervail­ ing powers, the necessity of defense spending, and the immutability of the capitalistic system. If dependence for economic education rests on books of the type exam­ ined, then there will be little opportunity for students to project their thinking on economic issues into the twenty-first century or to consider any of the attendant value dilemmas that may accompany the dramatic changes that are in the making. Moreover, if students leave their schools feeling that there is a credibility gap between the materials they have been given in the classrooms and the world as they perceive it around them or on television, it is with good reason.

History Textbooks A statement made earlier to the effect that "his­ tory textbooks might not be a fruitful area of investiga­ tion for the topic pursued in this dissertation" proved inaccurate once the investigation was undertaken. On the contrary, the history textbooks proved to be a rather fruit­ ful area when compared to the other materials examined in this dissertation. Before taking note of the findings of this particular aspect of the research, it should be point­ ed out that ten history books served as sources for investi­ gation and care was taken to include within that scope only 165 the more recent editions as well as those hooks which corn- 4 0 mand popularity and widespread usage in the schools. It is well to begin the summation of the findings with a broad generalization and some statements that ap­ ply to all of the books before singling out specific ones for comment. Generally speaking, all of the books devoted anywhere from half a chapter to a full chapter to changes that had occurred in American society since the 1950’s. The framework utilized for the narration of the changes was the phrase "science and technology." For example, all of the books emphasize that science and technology have been responsible for rapid shifts in the population, the growth of an urban society, medical advances, an affluent economy, the decay of the city, rapid transportation, wide-

49 The textbooks examined were: Canfield and Wilder, The Making of Modern America (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1967); Bragdon and McCutchen, History of a Free People (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967); Todd and Curti, Rise of the American Nation (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968); Frost, Brown, Ellis and Fink, A History of the Unit­ ed States (Chicago: Follett Educational Corporation, 1968')'; Richard N. Current, Alexander DeConde, and Harris L. Dante, United States History (Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1967); Jack Allen and John L. Betts, History: USA (New York: The American Book Company, 1967); Nathaniel Platt and Muriel J. Drummond, Our Nation From Its Creation (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hal 1 ’, Inc.", 1969); Henry F. Graft, The Free and the Brave (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1967); Hofstadter, Miller and Aaron, The United States: The History of a Republic (Englewood Cliffs: Pren- tice-Hall, Inc., 1968); Augspurger, Shafer and Lemore, United States History (Atlanta: Laidlaw Brothers, 1969). See Social Education, Vol. 35, No. 3 (March, 1971), pp. 251-252 for a listing of the most popular American history textbooks used in the schools. 166 spread communications, greater school enrollments, and man’s reach into outer space. In the opinion of this au­ thor some writers of these textbooks, in order to update their editions and become "relevant," had simply discussed many of the same issues as in earlier editions, but given this catalogue of events a new heading labeled "science and technology."

In analyzing the books as a whole the statement can be made that of all the topics relevant to the techno­ logical society automation (not cybernation) received the most frequent emphasis, followed by the merger of indus­ tries, the affluence of American society, and government support of scientific research.

While much was included about the effects of sci­ ence and technology, much was also missing. For example, most historians still see the 1960’s as part of the con- 50 tinuing industrial revolution. Automation, as one his­ torian explained, was a "new phase of the industrial revo- 51 lution." Most historians, while mentioning the affluence of American society, failed to note that the economy had shifted from an emphasis on production to an emphasis on consumption. Only one historian used the term cybernation

50 See for example, Augspurger, et. al., United States History, op. cit., p. 673; and Bragdon and McCutchen, History of a Free People, op. cit., p. 768. 51 Bragdon and McCutchen, History of a Free People, op. cit., p. 768. 167 and introduced comments about it. 52 Likewise few histo­ rians used the term "technological society" or any of the other current phrases to describe what is transpir­ ing in today's world. Moreover, only one historian sug­ gested that what is occurring in today's society marks a serious disjuncture in history. (Exceptions to these statements v/ill be cited and discussed elsewhere.) And finally, few if any really provocative issues were raised about the effects of science and technology on contempo­ rary society at the end of the chapters or in the narra­ tive material. No attempt was made by any historian to stretch a student's thinking beyond the 1970's.

Of all the books examined probably the best analy­ sis of the impact of science and technology on society was given by Richard N. Current, Alexander DeConde, and Harris L. Dante in their book, United States History. I n this book a chapter entitled "The Age of Technology" gave excel­ lent treatment to the forces of science and technology. In the hands of a skillful teacher it could serve as a spring­ board for many invigorating discussions. Their treatment deserves some comment.

The authors briefly make the point that science and technology have caused changes more rapid than history has

5 2 Current, DeConde and Dante, United States His­ tory, op. cit., p. 727.

53Ibid., p. 722. ever before known, but that most people are unable to grasp the full significance of their impact. The authors, in developing this thesis, dwell at length on the fact that these twin forces "threaten to upset the nation's 54 social and economic institutions." A creditable job was done in analyzing the military-industrial complex and in discussing the merger of corporations as by-products of science and technology. As the authors phrased it, "competition in the old-fashioned sense could scarcely 55 survive." It was likewise noted that corporation owner­ ship was divorced from management and that those who ran the corporations were a group of highly trained profes­ sionals, a "technostructure" if you like. In contrast to many of the economic textbooks, the authors of United States History placed power in the hands of the managerial i class, warned of the enormous influence of this class, and finally raised the issue of who would control the managers.

Again, in contrast to the economic textbooks examined in which there was a strong bias against "big" government, the historians stated rather bluntly that "only giant gov­ ernment, it seemed, could cope with the power of giant busi­ ness.

54Ibid., p. 722.

55Ibid., p. 724.

56Ibid., p. 726. 169 It was also in this textbook that the term "cyber­ nation" appeared, followed by a brief description of the effects of computerization and automation on unskilled workers. The shrinkage in jobs, attributed by one econom­ ic text to unions, was attributed to the growth of auto- mation and cybernation. 57 Another issue which was raised in this textbook and found in no others v/as the role of scientists in today’s society. The authors, for example, comment as follows.

Since scientific change v/as often accompanied by social change, many Americans came to feel that the scientist should not pursue his work without giving thought to its ultimate place in society. Bombs that could destroy mankind, computers that could do the work of men, and energy that could serve the needs of all mankind evolved from the work of scientists. Some men argued that the power of scientists, like the pov/er of the giant corporations and unions, must be controlled by society.58

Overall, then, the above book, while subject to the limita­ tions noted previously in all the history texts examined, did, nevertheless, raise some interesting points. In fact, of all of the textbooks examined, it probably had the most honest and realistic treatment of some of the topics dis­ cussed in Chapter II of this dissertation. This is not to say, however, that the textbook by itself would be adequate

57Ibid., p. 727.

58Ibid., p. 733. 170 to convey to students the nature of the technological so­ ciety.

The other textbook which deserves to be singled out for discussion is Rise of the American Nation by Todd 59 and Curti. ^ Todd and Curti in their chapter entitled "Americans Enter a New Epoch" begin by informing students that what may be at stake in this last third of the twen­ tieth century is a significant watershed in history. The rapidly accelerating changes, comment these historians, are "so wide-sweeping that they are taking us from one epoch of human history into another."^® These changes, continue these authors, differ from the changes which have characterized past American history and not even the most far-sighted Americans can foresee where these developments are taking us. The developments which Todd and Curti choose to develop center around the economy of abundance, the considerable expenditures for research and develop­ ment, and automation. (They likewise mention the multiple changes that have occurred in the post-war world presented in the opening generalizations.) Unlike the authors of other textbooks in history, economics, and problems of de­ mocracy, Todd and Curti were the only ones to mention that the American economy had shifted from a production economy

5Q Todd and Curti, Rise of the American Nation, op. cit.

6QIbid., p. 628. 171 to a consumption economy and gave some interesting figures projecting the multiplying output of the gross national product.^1 Moreover, these authors call to the attention of students the increase in money for scientific research and developmerit and the rate at which knowledge is begin­ ning to accumulate A feature of the Todd and Curti book is a series of source readings at the end of every unit. Since these source materials shed light on the points emphasized in this dissertation, they ought to be mentioned. One such reading, an article by the Twentieth 63 Century Fund, highlights the economy of abundance and could be used to provoke an examination of some of the issues of the twenty-first century. Other readings which could serve the same purpose are readings by Arnold B. CL Barach, "The Impact of Science and Technology" and one by Jacques Ellul which weighs the advantages and disad- 65 vantages of technology. These readings are followed by others on population, the development and implications of 66 "exploding cities," automation, and conservation. Ac-

6lIbid., p. 629. 62Ibid.

^ I bid., p. 654.

^ I b i d ., p. 659. 65Ibid., p. 662.

66Ibid., pp. 665-698; 708-721. 172 cordingly, it should he pointed out that such readings if properly handled would aid students to stretch their minds about future problems.

The remaining textbooks in American history must be judged as doing a very poor job in conveying to stu­ dents an understanding of the technological society. As previously stated it is the opinion of this author that words such as "science and technology" have simply been inserted in order to up-date the editions; in fact, a spot check of several later editions with earlier ones would seem to indicate that this was indeed the case.

None of them measure up to the standards of the Todd and Curti book or the Current, DeConde and Dante textbook.

While all emphasize the growth of cities, population, new industries, mobility of population, and burgeoning educa­ tional enrollments and attribute these to the growth of

science and technology, they add little to one's under­

standing of the twenty-first century. Therefore, it would

simply be repetitious and somewhat out of order to single out these remaining textbooks for quotations and extensive comment since they shed no particular light on the study being pursued. What, then, can be said of the relevance of his­ tory textbooks to the technological society and their at­

tempts to convey this to their students? Assuming that

certain history textbooks were used (those cited above), and assuming these textbooks were utilized by teachers who themselves had an adequate knowledge of the techno­ logical society, and assuming also that these teachers were able to complete the last chapter in the textbooks within the year devoted to American history, it is pos­ sible for students to receive a very brief introduction to some of the issues and value dilemmas of the society they are growing up in. However, it should be emphasized that all three of the previous assumptions are indeed ten­ uous. As one of the historians pointed out, most people, and this would include teachers, do not have adequate knowledge of the technological society, its significance, or its implications for our values and institutions. More­ over, most teachers rarely get beyond coverage of World

War II; and, thus, students leave their history classes with past perceptions of reality about their environment and institutions. Consequently, if it is to be left to history classes to convey to a student knowledge that will serve him in the future, and aid him in understanding his world, then one can only render the judgment that such classes and the textbooks used in them will give that stu­ dent few new perceptions of reality.

Problems of Democracy Textbooks If classical economic theories are no longer ade­ quate for explaining the operations of the market today, 174 .classical theories of democracy, pluralism, and represen­

tation are likewise insufficient to explain the political structure of the post-industrial society. Elsewhere in

this dissertation (pp. 112-125) the impact of science and technology on the political structure was elaborated. It was stated that technology has forced institutional con­

solidation unparalleled and unforeseen in democratic so­ cieties; and that these institutional structures which

discharge most of our social functions today are becoming increasingly inflexible, unresponsive, and unaccountable

to the public and to its representatives. As government expands and intervenes in the social and economic life of the nation and as knowledge becomes more complex and scientific, the problem of participation in decision­ making is further compounded by the necessary reliance on

scientific and technical decision-makers. A political theory adequate to the m o d e m technological society will

have to confront anew the idea that knowledge brings power.

Developments of the kinds noted above have seri­

ous implications for democracy. How, for example, will

citizens be able to exert any influence on government? How will legislative bodies hold complex institutions to

accountability? How will the average citizen gain access

to political information? Will scientific elites become

the major decision-makers in society? In what circum­ • 175 stances will this increasing scientific knowledge lead to greater consensus by eliminating uninformed assessments of policies; or to what extent will this knowledge lead to a sharper value focus and, thus, more bitter political disputes? To what extent is the basis of power and au­ thority shifting as science and knowledge gain in social importance? And, finally, to what extent must the theories of democracy, theories of polity that were fashioned in an industrial society, be revised, discarded, or modified?

Although the answers to the questions are consid­ erably more difficult than the questions themselves, these are issues that a citizen must confront as he approaches the twenty-first century. That our society has undergone enormous changes in our political structures since the advent of the post-war world is hardly open to question. Moreover, it has been forcefully argued by social studies educators and others that a major responsibility of the social studies program is to prepare students for effec­ tive citizen participation. In fact, the problems of democracy course usually offered in the twelfth grade was specifically designed to serve this purpose. While the effects of civic education on a student's political values and attitudes appear to be rather negligible according to Cr? research studies, those who advocate that civic educa-

^John J. Patrick, Social Education. Vol. 33, No. 1, (January, 1969), pp. 15-21. 176 tion be an important component of the social studies pro­ gram ask that it do certain things: increase political knowledge, increase political efficacy, and decrease po- go litical cynicism. To accomplish any or all of these tasks, it would seem that presenting students with a real­ istic and honest description of the political system as it operates in today’s society would be the sina qua non of effective civic education.

In order to ascertain whether students are given a realistic and honest picture of political life as it operates in the last third of this century and to see if students are being adequately prepared for the political issues they must confront in the twenty-first century, five recent problems of democracy textbooks were selected for examination.8^

Unlike the textbooks in economics which blatant­ ly committed sins of commission, the textbooks in problems of democracy commit sins of omission. While it cannot be said that the problems of democracy textbooks lie to stu-

68Ibid., p. 15. 69 ^Stanley E. Dimond and Elmer F. Pflieger, Our American Government (New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1969); Frank A. Magruder and William A. McClenaghan, Amer­ ican Government (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1969); William Ebenstein and Edward W. Mill, American Government in the Twentieth Century (Morristown, N. J.: Silver Bur- dett Company, 1971); Richard E. Gross, Civics in Action (San Francisco, Calif.: Field Education Publications, Inc., 1971); Dell Felder, The Challenge of American Democracy (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,1970). 1 7 7 dents about the political process as it actually operates, one would have hoped for a much more sophisticated nar­ rative and analysis. Perhaps this point will become more evident as the following generalizations about these text­ books are developed. In four of the five textbooks examined the concept 70 of pluralism in our society v/as stressed. American po­ litical science has traditionally defined democracy in terms of pluralism with competing groups struggling to gain or maintain power while government acts as a broker among these power groups. It is this model of the polity that directly or indirectly runs throughout the textbooks. It would seem, however, that in an era of large-scale tech­ nology and giant organizations, coordination rather than competition is a more adequate portrayal of the workings of the system. Yet, nov/here in any of the books examined was information dispersed which might shed light on the ever-increasing number of large power blocs intermediate between the individual citizen and the decision-making process. Nor'is any information conveyed that might di­ rect a student's attention to the simbiotic relationships

70 See for example Dimond and Pflieger, Our American Government, op. cit., pp. 84-86; Magruder and McClenaghan, American Government, op. cit., pp. 8-9; 185-190; Felder, The Challenge of American Democracy, op. cit., pp. 76-77; 108; Ebenstein and Mill, American Government in the Twen­ tieth Century, op. cit., pp. 273; 277; 280-281; the re­ maining textbook by Richard E. Gross, Civics in Action, op. cit., avoided mentioning this topic. 178 that exist between these large structures and government itself. Commenting on the concept of pluralism and the centrifugal forces of technology, one political scientist has commented when public policy is made at all, it emerges from the . . . participation of competing oli­ garchies. To this fact, traditional pluralist theory does not do justice, for all its empiri­ cal sources and most of its sentiments antedate the modern industrial, economic, and organiza­ tional revolution.71

It would seem, therefore, that a more realistic appraisal of the political process should take into consideration the erosion of pluralism that has taken place in this coun­ try and that such information ought to be conveyed to stu­ dents .

Perhaps, a reason for the above failure and also the failure to come to grips with some of the political realities of today’s society stems from the fact that all of the textbooks examined take an institutional approach to the discipline of political science rather than a be-

71 Henry Kariel, The Decline of American Pluralism (Stanford, Calif.: University Press, 1967), p. 182; see also Paul Wolff, The Poverty of Liberalism (Boston: Beacon Press, Inc., 1968); Theodore J. Lowi, The~End of Liberal­ ism (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1969); Thomas R. Dye and Harmon Zeigler, The Irony of Democracy: An Uncom­ mon Introduction to American Politics (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., 1970). There is, of course, a considerable amount of literature in political- science v/hich takes issue with the above interpretations. Nevertheless, the simplistic model of pluralism portrayed in most textbooks is no longer an adequate model and for this reason ought to be revised. 1 7 9 72 havioral approach. Such a traditional approach may

ground a student well in the committee structure, the powers reserved to each branch of government, and the various steps in the passage of a bill; but it does not necessarily reflect the important and subtle workings of the political system. One of the books examined did at­

tempt to explain the political process using a behavioral emphasis by inserting "readings" at the end of the chap­ ter.^ Another important generalization which applies to the textbooks in problems of democracy is the impression given of citizen control of government. The picture is a

simplified one in which a citizen has free access to polit­

ical information, casts his ballot, and the system auto- 74 matically responds. In the interests of balance text­ books should include mention of the difficult process of

effective citizen participation on such issues as pollu­ tion, defense spending, taxation, mass transportation,

72 The one exception to this generalization is the book by Richard E. Gross, Civics in Action, op. cit., which combines the institutional approach with a heavy historical interest. 73 -MDimond and Pflieger, Our American Government, op. cit. 74 'Ibid., p. 10; Magruder and McClenaghan, American Government, op. cit., pp. 12-13; Ebenstein and Mill, Ameri­ can Government in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., pp. l41 17; 198; Felder, The Challenge of American Democracy, op. cit., - p. 50. 180 strip mining, and a host of other factors which would con­ vey a more adequate model of the political behavior of a post-industrial society. It also can be generalized that nowhere in the textbooks analyzed v/as the issue raised of the complexity of decisions in the modern day world. As previously noted, many political scientists fear that in a technological age only those possessing a high degree of scientific-techni­ cal knowledge will be in a position to exercise judgments. In the textbooks, however, the view is presented that Con­ gress or the Executive is in full command of the facts and possesses the knowledge required to make adequate deci­ sions. Accordingly, a more realistic picture of the po­ litical process in this country should take into account the very heavy reliance upon "technocrats" and the institu­ tionalization of government in the hands of professionals, experts, and managers whose decisions are governed by laws of bureaucratic behavior, whose interests reflect those of the organizations they serve, and who are unaccountable to the public. The same, of course, would be true of private corporate bureaucracies in this country. As do the economic textbooks, so too do the text­ books in problems of democracy fail to give any adequate appraisal of the military-industrial complex that partial­ 181 75 ly has been an outgrowth of science and technology.'^ The ramifications of the military-industrial complex for oth­ er social priorities are not treated as problems at all, but accepted as simply a permanent institution of society much like that of the courts and the constitution— some­

thing one does not subject to criticism or scrutiny. Furthermore, there is a serious omission of any discussion about the distribution of power in society.

"Who rules?" has always been a classical political ques­ tion and, indeed, may become even more of a classical question in a post-industrial society. If, as some main­

tain, managers of knowledge will make the key decisions, what implications does this have for political democracy,

theories, and values? Since this is increasingly becom­ ing a problem for society, any attempt on the part of text­ books to prepare students to understand the political world in which they will be growing up should give them the opportunity to consider the consequences of such pos­

sible trends. If one were to summarize the picture of the polit­

ical environment that students receive from their text­

books, one would render the judgment that students are pre-

75 Nor are any stimulating questions raised about military expenditures at the end of the chapters. rjr The typical textbook answer to this question is simply "the people rule." 1 8 2

sented with a nineteenth century view of political man and society. The model of politics given hy the text­ books is a theory of democracy that may be vanishing in this society or is at least being called into question by many of the convulsive changes of the recent past. While it can be stated that textbooks in problems of de­ mocracy have vastly improved over the years and are not aimed at the blatant nationalistic indoctrination of ear- 77 lier times, they still leave much to be desired. In the opinion of the author, it would be refreshing to find some mention in these textbooks of the administrative state, the influence of elites, analysis of decision­ making, the relationship of private and public powers, the growth of organizational complexes, questions of in­ stitutional accountability, the role of the scientist in today's society, the implications for democracy of rely­

ing on scientific decision-makers, and the role of the citizen in a technological age. If issues of this type were included in these textbooks, then, perhaps, a more balanced and realistic model of politics would be forth­

coming .

77 The indoctrination is perhaps a bit more subtle, but there, nevertheless. Moreover, it should be mentioned that overall the textbooks do a rather poor job of men­ tioning the gaps between the theory of democracy and the practice of democracy. World History Textbooks

Since world history is usually taught in the tenth grade and since the scope of this study is to examine a sampling of materials in the senior high school (grades 10-12), it is appropriate to include a brief section men­ tioning the relevance of world history textbooks to this study. Accordingly five recent world history textbooks

* 7 0 were examined and analyzed. These findings are a model of brevity. As a whole, only about three to six pages of each text are devoted to "science and technology" in the modern world, and the topics included do not differ sig­ nificantly from many of the topics presented in American history textbooks. For instance, attention is given to the advances in medicine, biology, communications, and space travel which have been an outgrowth of recent scien­ tific innovations. Brief mention is also given to automa­ tion and the application of technology to underdeveloped 7 0 nations. In one book the issue of pollution is raised.

70 Anatole G. Mazour and John M. Peoples, Men and Nations (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, Inc., 1971);Nathaniel Platt and Muriel J. Drummond, Our World through the Ages (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967); T. Walter Wallbank and Arnold Schrier, Living World History (New York: Scott, Foresman & Company, 1969); Mar- vin Perry, Man's Unfinished Journey (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1971); Bernard Feder, Viewpoints in World History (New York: American Book Company, 1968). 7Q Walbank and Schrier, Living World History, op. cit., p. 723. 184 But, generally speaking, the treatment of science and technology in world history courses is superficial, brief, and vacuous.

Conclusions Having examined the major publications in social studies, dissertations, curriculum projects, bibliographi­ cal guides to research, and a sampling of textbooks in history, economics, and problems of democracy, what then can be said of the awareness of social studies educators to the issues of a technological society? The first point that should be made is that as intelligent people they no doubt have some awareness of the rampaging effects of science and technology. How­ ever, for reasons unknown to this author, they have not seen the need to trace or develop the implications that science and technology have for the content in social studies. As one examines the literature in the field of social studies repeated statements are made about the necessity of teaching critical thinking skills and the process of valuing in an "ever changing world." And cer­ tainly this writer would not take issue with this impera­ tive. But v/hen it comes to analyzing this "ever changing world" in terms of the content paraded in social studies classrooms or to meeting the need of introducing a genera­ tion of students to the value dilemmas of the twenty-first 185 century, the field of social studies as it is reflected in its publications, research, and classroom materials has been negligent. The previous statement, however, needs some qualification. There is no way of knowing to what extent social studies teachers across the nation are using the many available paperbacks which do call atten­ tion to the technological society. Indeed, there is no way of knowing to what extent these teachers themselves are aware of the advent of the technological society.

But as many writers and scholars have stated, and this would also apply to teachers, most people are unaware of the cataclysmic changes which are in store for them in the next century. A partial reason for this failure of social stud­ ies to take a hard look at its content and measure it against its relevancy for the twenty-first century may be attributed to the fact that social studies educators have devoted so much of their energy to moving social studies teaching away from the rote memory syndrome that charac­ terized it for years. The application of such energy to this task is, of course, to be applauded, even if it has not completely succeeded. Since so much attention has been directed toward innovation in teaching methods, little effort has been given to analyzing the content itself.

This is not to say, however, that articles about content in the social studies are absent in the literature. Many 186 essays have been written about the role of history in the social studies program, the bias of textbooks, the neglect of the roles of blacks, women, and various minority groups. But aside from re-arranging the structure of the various disciplines, developing generalizations, shifting around courses, no suggestions for sweeping changes have been forthcoming. Yet, the National Council of Social Studies maintains that decisions about the social studies program will have to be made in a manner radically different from today’s if it is to prepare students for the future. De­ spite the fact that a child born today will spend two- thirds of his life in the twenty-first century, there ap­ pears to be little sense of urgency in altering the con­ tent of social studies so that it would reflect the prob­ lems and value choices of the technological society. As Barbara Ward and others have reminded us, unless we can anticipate the problems of the future and provide alterna­ tive solutions, then they will come avalanching down on a society blindly unprepared to cope with them. The fact that man can control, direct, and legislate his own evolu­ tionary process is new to the historical experience. His future, my future, and your future require that he under­ take this task successfully. CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH

Before proceeding with any conclusions and implica­ tions that might be derived from this study, it would seem appropriate to begin by reiterating the reason for under­ taking the research since its contribution must be judged, in part, on whether it fulfilled its task as initially stated. It v/as earlier posited that the past ten years had witnessed a grov/ing body of literature stressing the importance and portent of a technological society. Further­ more, it was stated and amply documented that the impact of science and technology in the contemporary v/orld is so pervasive and influential that it demands urgent attention. And, finally, it was asserted that an examination of the impact of these twin forces on our social institutions and values ought to be a significant part of the social studies curriculum because a study of the ramifications of the technological society is necessary for any student who desires to comprehend the world in v/hich he lives and will live. Therefore, it was the intent of this writer to ex­ amine the literature and materials of social studies to see whether and to what extent they were conveying to students

18 7 188 the tempo, multiplicity, and consequences of technologi­ cal change. Having examined in detail the writings of scholars and the studies emanating from institutions concerned with the impact of technological change on society, and having surveyed a representative sampling of high school curricu­ lar materials, it is the major conclusion of this research that the materials used in social studies classrooms are woefully inadequate in conveying to students the nature of the technological society. Since the particular inade­ quacies of these materials were delineated in Chapter III, it is not necessary to reiterate these points. All that • need be stated for this summation of the research find­ ings is that the materials examined convey to a student a rather classical nineteenth century view of political and economic man and are more relevant to a pre-technological age than to the contemporary technological society. Nei­ ther did the materials examined suggest to students any issues or value dilemmas which technological change may bring about as society moves into the twenty-first century.

In addition to examining the materials used in so­ cial studies classrooms, the professional literature of the field of social studies v/as inspected to ascertain v/hether social studies educators, themselves, v/ere stress­ ing the necessity of teaching about the technological society,.technological change, and the implications that 189 this change holds for the future. With few exceptions, the research revealed that social studies educators (as reflected in the professional literature) had not advo­ cated the inclusion of such material into the social studies curriculum.'*'

It has been ritually repeated by social studies educators that a social studies curriculum has a respon­ sibility to convey to a student the nature of the world in which he will grow up. Since knowledge of the techno­ logical society is necessary for this understanding, it would seem that the research undertaken in this disserta­ tion, v/hich showed that social studies materials are fail­ ing in this task, was not without justification. A func­ tion of this research, then, is to call attention to the inadequacy for a technological age of the materials used in social studies classrooms. One's contribution to a chosen field, however, should not be limited to citing faults. Rather it should include proposals for correct­ ing any shortcoming which research uncovers. Therefore, it appears incumbent upon this writer to reach still fur­ ther and raise the question, "Y/hat implications does this research have for the teaching of social studies?" Ac­ cordingly, the remainder of this chapter will be devoted to an attempt to suggest possible answers to this most

"^See Chapter III for exceptions to this statement. difficult question. It is the opinion of this writer that the research undertaken in this dissertation has strong implications for the teaching of social studies both in terms of con­ tent and methodology. Although the route taken to support this position may be somewhat circuitous, some general statements about technology, society, values, and the fu­ ture need to be drawn together at this point before pro­ ceeding with any specific statements concerning content and methodology inasmuch as the following remarks may aid in providing a rationale for the more specific recommenda­ tions .

Thoughtful and knowledgeable people looking at our society today cannot help being struck by the rapidity with which technological change occurs, nor can they be unconcerned with the numerous problems which derive from this accelerated change. It should be noted, moreover, that many of the problems emanating from technology have resulted not only from the rapid rate of change, but also from the fact that the scope of change has been so broad. In only a few decades the application of science and tech­ nology has spread from its original locus, the production of goods, into virtually every crevice of society. It has brought about profound changes in economic and political theories, structures, and values. It promises to bring about even more profound changes. The value dilemmas which we will confront in the future occur not only with ever increasing frequency, but they also demand urgent attention. Although many scholars are aware of the cata­ clysmic rate of change and of its consequences to man and society, one is probably justified in asserting that millions of people in our society are barely cognizant of this change and of its impact on their lives. Nor have many people given thought to the implications that such change holds for life in the not too distant future. In­ deed, the majority of the public remains bound by the political, economic, and social myths of a by-gone age and gives little attention, let alone serious thought, to the growing number of dilemmas presented by technol­ ogy. For people to continue unaware of these profound transformations in our society is not only lamentable, but vastly increases the probability that man will reach the point where he has even less control over the nature and direction of change than he now possesses. Continued ignorance of the consequences of technological change presents a situation fraught with danger. This is not to assert that technology and the changes it brings about are inherently evil. Indeed, they need not be so. Tech­ nology contains both promise and peril. Given this situa­ tion the challenge for the present and the future is to realize the potential of technology while avoiding its pitfalls. In order to respond to this challenge man must 192 not only educate himself to recognize this dual nature of technology, but learn also to direct and control a tech­ nology which, when properly applied, will create an envi­ ronment compatible with man's needs. Conscious of the rise and demise of civilizations and chronically appre­ hensive of it, contemporary man, surrounded by the most powerful technological tools history has ever witnessed, dares not lose control of the forces of technological change or turn over the direction of the future to blind chance. Knowledge about technology, its utilization, the changes it provokes, and the consequences its impact has for society are certainly some of the major concerns of our age. Given the serious challenge that technology pre­ sents and the sweeping changes it generates, what implica­ tions does this have for 'the teaching of social studies? It is the opinion of this writer that the advent of a technological society strongly suggests a particular methodology for the teaching of social studies. This methodology has been referred to as the reflective meth­ od. It is not the purpose of this writer to suggest that the advent of the technological society alone is the rea­ son which makes the reflective method valuable; its effi­ cacy for any age has been amply demonstrated. It is the purpose of this writer, however, to suggest that living

in a technological age adds considerable weight to the 193 arguments of those who advocate a reflective stance to the teaching of social studies. Accordingly, it is ad­ visable to explicate the reasons for making the above statements. Since reflection as a teaching methodology has 2 been explained and developed elsewhere, it would merely be repetitious to cover the same points. There are cer­ tain aspects of the reflective method, however, which bear repeating. Reflection, it should be noted, stresses the scientific and rational examination of societal/per­ sonal values. John Dewey stated a concise definition of reflection when he said that reflection is the "active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends." Because the end of reflective thought is grounded, tested and warranted beliefs, reflection uti­ lizes the scientific method of inquiry— the submission of one's beliefs to empirical evidence. Moreover, a con-

^See John Dewey, How We Think (New York: D. C. Heath & Company, 1933); H. Gordon Hullfish and Philip G. Smith, Reflective Thinking: The Method of Education (Dodd, Mead & Company, 1961); Alan Griffen, A Philosophical Ap­ proach to the Subject Matter Preparation of Teachers of History, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1942; Maurice P. Hunt and Lawrence E. Metcalf, Teaching High School Social Studies (New York: Harper & Row, 1968).

Dewey, How We Think, op. cit., p. 9. 194 comitant of this kind of value analysis allows students the opportunity not only to test and clarify their values, but also to weigh alternative values and the consequences of acting on behalf of a given value orientation. A stu­ dent who has examined beliefs and values in this manner has taken a step toward intellectual and emotional auton­ omy. Although intellectual and emotional autonomy have been desirable objectives in any age, they seem particu­

larly imperative for a technological age. As Erich Fromm writes, "The danger of the past was that .men became slaves. The danger of the future is that men may become

L l robots." Fromm’s fears are shared by many others. Jacques Ellul, for example, sees in technology an autono­ mous force which will devour man and society, while Lewis Munford sees technology relegating man to an automaton.

Theodore Roszak warns of an era of approaching totali­ tarian technocracy and Zbigniew Brzezinski states that

the technological society that we have created could lead

to the collapse of the democratic ideal. Recognizing that not all scholars see in technology an unmitigated

curse or an uncontrollable force, the previous scholarly points of view should still be seriously considered by

^Erich Fromm, The Sane Society (New York: Harper & Row, 1955), p. 9. 195 anyone engaged in social studies curriculum planning. If the above statements contain only a modicum of truth, it would seem that one of the most valuable contributions to society that social studies could make would be the development of autonomous individuals for a technological age. Otherwise, the next generation may find itself echo­ ing the words of Malcolm Crowley, who in speaking of his own Lost Generation wrote: But the decay of society was psychologically equivalent to its progress: both were automatic processes that we ourselves could neither hasten nor retard. Society was something alien, which our own lives and writings could never effect; it was a sort of parlor car in which we rode, over smooth tracks, toward a destination we should never have chosen for ourselves.5

The long-range hazards for a society that fails to develop autonomous, creative men and women to ensure its continued viability is clear. The purpose of a reflective method- i ology is to ensure that students will not grow up being

inert components of the group, never questioning, never challenging, never thinking as they ride toward a destina­

tion they would never have chosen for themselves. The contribution of reflection lies in the fact that it pro­ vides opportunities for choice by allowing students to

examine their values and develop warranted beliefs about

man, society, and the good life. By developing students

^Malcolm Crowley, Exile's Return (Peter Smith, 1959), pp. 18-19. 196 who have the capacity to inquire, who are deliberate and

self-directing, and who can analyze values and their con­ sequences, social studies will have taken concrete steps to negate any possible totalitarian tendencies emanating from technological forces. The development of autonomous and committed human

beings is not the only virtue which recommends a reflec­ tive methodology for a technological age, hov/ever. Be­ cause reflection has a particular way of viewing truth— relative, naturalistic, and tentative— it helps students not only to appreciate the tentative nature of values but also facilitates the reformulation of values in the light

of new evidence. This way of viewing knowledge and values is of critical importance inasmuch as a technological so­ ciety with its emphasis upon research, innovation, and

advancement of knowledge is the foe of stability and the fulcrum of change. Accordingly, there is in advanced tech­ nological societies an acute and inevitable tension be­

tween traditional values and the need for social policy

based on new knowledge. As this new knowledge impinges

upon society, value change and disruptions will occur with

increasing frequency. For those whose beliefs presuppose a conception of values as immutable, unchanging, and ab­ solute— and this includes most students since our schools

have rarely engaged students in reflective examination of

their values— a technological society characterized by rapid value changes threatens the psychic stability of those who must confront it. It is apparent that the constant change in our society and the knowledge explosion are playing havoc with the concept of eternal values. What is needed, then, in a technological age is a social studies methodology which views values as tentative and which will aid students to adapt their values to this era of change. Robin Williams who is studying the conse­ quences of technological change on value orientations supports this contention.

A society in which the store of knowledge con­ cerning the consequences of action is large and is rapidly increasing is a society in which re­ ceived norms and their "justifying values" will be increasingly subjected to questioning and reformulation.° Given this situation, any social studies program which pre­ sumes a degree of relevancy to a technological age should have as its major focus the "questioning and reformulation" of societal norms in the light of new empirical data gen­

erated by science and technology so that social action and new knowledge do not produce unmanageable tension in so­ ciety and in the individual. In fact, one seems safe in

asserting that a reflective methodology which views truth as relative may well be the only defensible posture for

social studies teaching in the future.

c. Robin M. Williams, Jr., "Individual and Group Val- ues," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 37 (May, 19*07), p. 30. 198 Not only does reflection encourage the development of autonomous human beings and provide students with a way of viewing truth and values— both of which it has been argued are necessary for this unique era— additional rea­ sons can also be invoked for recommending reflection for a technological age. Reflection not only involves pro­ cedures for examining values; it involves procedures for weighing the consequences of certain values for self and society. The need to foster a type of pedagogy which involves looking at the consequences of value choices in a technological age is captured in the remarks of Martin Luther King:

The means by which we live have outdistanced the ends for which we live. Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.7

King’s criticisms are confirmed by the remarks in a dis­ tinguished journal of political science which has warned that "the technological bias of our social attitudes . . . make it easy for technical judgments to become social de­ cisions without adequate appraisal of their implied conse-

O quences." The mere availability of technological skills spurs us to foster continually improved means for care­ lessly examined ends. Irene Taviss of the Harvard Program

"^Martin Luther King, Jr., The Strength to Love (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), p. 32. Q Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 129. 199 on Technology and Society points out that the application of technology not only forces a society to flush out its values, but forces it also to weigh the consequences of normative choices. To illustrate her contention she of­ fers the following examples. Sophisticated computer technology now makes possi­ ble the rapid and efficient collection of voter opinions and could easily provide for instant voting by the entire electorate on any given issue. Technology, then, raises the possibility of a genuine participatory democracy.

While many thinkers may advocate participatory democracy, many others are apprehensive about mass participation and quick opinions. They prefer, instead, a system in which there is time for the reflection and sober political anal­ ysis implicit in our existing system of political debates and legislative delays. Technology acting in this fashion forces society to clarify the meaning it attaches to a definition of democracy. Moreover, it forces individuals to weigh the consequences of a normative choice provoked by technology: Are there greater advantages or disadvan­ tages to instant participation and decisions by the major­ ity of the electorate than in a system of debates, delays, and indirect democracy? What kinds of consequences do these two alternatives have for man, society, and demo­ cratic theory?

On the other hand, sophisticated technological 200 skills make it possible to put into practice what we preach in principle inasmuch as many of the numerous social prob­ lems which plague our society could now be solved with ease. To do so, however, would require vesting consider­ able power for a given period of time in a group possess­ ing scientific and technical expertise. This alternative would lead to a reduction of political participation, leg­ islative control, and political democracy. Are the conse­ quences of this normative judgment provoked by technol­ ogy— serious curtailment of political participation— bet­ ter or worse than the continuance of social problems which threaten the society and deny in practice what we advocate g in theory?

It should be obvious that science and technology not only present society with different sets of value choices, but demand a judicious, rational weighing of the consequences of technological application. The application' of our brilliant technological feats has brought us to a unique era— an era in which man's powers over nature are nearly total. Man can "legislate" his future through planned, deliberate choice. Technology makes available options never before possible. Acting on these options in a haphazard, ill-defined manner and without a weighing of

Q Irene Taviss, as cited in Technological Change: Its Impact on Man and Society, Emmanuel G. Mesthene (New York: Mentor Books, 1970), pp. 51-52. 201 the consequences is an invitation to disaster for man, his society, and his planet. Thus, there is an urgent need to educate a generation of students equipped with a scien­ tific methodology for analyzing value consequences. Re­ flection, because it involves procedures for analyzing alternatives and for evaluating the consequences stemming from a given set of alternatives, holds out the promise of providing intelligent criteria for policy decisions. "Science," said Winston Churchill almost thirty years ago,

"has given to a generation the means of unlimited disaster or of unlimited progress."'*'®

A fourth major reason for urging the necessity of a reflective methodology in a technological age centers around the crucial need for teaching a process of thinking.

Our contemporary era has been described as a high-informa- tion level culture, a scientific super-culture, and a learning society. Whatever term is used to convey the nature of contemporary society, all convey the fact that knowledge is increasing at a frightening speed. The knowl­ edge unleashed by science, writes Don K. Price, will have a more radical effect on our institutions and values than the industrial revolution. It is not difficult to agree with Price when there is a recognition of the fact that the scientific knowledge of the past fifteen years is greater

"^Sir Winston Churchill, Speech in New Delhi, January 3, 1944. 202 in volume than in all previous years of recorded history. As an appendage to this, it might he added that knowledge of this kind has a centrifugal effect on other areas of knowledge and on society. In fact, Lynton K. Caldwell informs us that even if this knowledge explosion stopped, the "momentum" of information and ideas already horn "would carry on to the end of this century."11 As we move toward the twenty-first century, the power and proliferation of this data places enormous burdens on education in general and social studies in particular; for man's capacity to manage this knowledge has yet to be demonstrated. What implications, then, does this aspect of the technological society hold for social studies?

The burden of correlating and synthesizing masses of data into coherent meanings for students and likewise for social policy dictates that social studies teachers place a far greater emphasis on teaching a process of think­ ing than they have in the past. It should be obvious to even a casual observer that the practice of teaching fac­ tual information to students is an exercise in futility. The "facts" are too many for any student to master and those "facts" that are taught often become the fiction of tomorrow. Regrettably, social studies teachers continue to ignore this state of affairs. If one were to step into

11Lynton K. Caldwell, Public Administration Review, op. cit., p. 128. 203 the typical social studies classroom today, one would find it all too frequently marked by memorization of fragmented and meaningless data, uncritical coverage of textual mate­ rial, and regurgitation of quickly forgotten data. Writ­ ing about this arid approach to social studies, Raymond H.

Muessig has said: . . . Nor is the society served well by [the sub­ ject-centered, traditional approach to social stud­ ies educationJ It is true that a portion of the cultural heritage is handed down to learners through this system, but current and anticipated societal problems tend to be disregarded. The status quo is forced upon learners, and they are not prepared to deal with changes taking place in society, let alone to initiate any reforms of their own. . . . Thoughtful educators have strongly and persistently con­ demned this type of teaching; yet its practice predominates in our classrooms today. It would be informative to recall the example of Hegel: as he was writing his dissertation in January, 1801, to prove that there could not possibly be more than seven planets, an astronomer was observing the eighth planet! In league with those social studies educators who condemn the uncritical transmission of factual data as an end in itself are those scientists who have studied the implications of science and technology on our social en­ vironment. Lynton K. Caldwell, quoted earlier, urges edu­ cators to concentrate on a type of pedagogy which will

1 ? Raymond H. Muessig, ’’Social Studies," Dwight W. Allen and Eli Seifman, editors, The Teacher’s Handbook. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, p. 434. 204 teach students hew to think, assimilate, and value: Untutored native talent has never been adequate to provide the conceptualizing skills that . . . CpublicJ policy requires. Inadequate even in simpler societies, it cannot be looked upon as a source of . . . competence today. High intel­ lectual capacity will be noted in the scientific super-culture but the particular type of intel­ ligence . . . includes an ability to assimilate and combine two forms of knowledge— the technical and the teleological.13

Studies in progress at 'the Harvard University Program on

Technology and Society overwhelmingly support the idea of teaching a process orientation in which facts have only instrumental value— a means to analyze and clarify values. Knowledge of factual material is obviously needed; teach­ ing students how to use facts (those presently available and those yet to be discovered) is an indispensable task for any social studies teacher who is concerned with pre­ paring students for life in a technological society. Rec­ ognizing that there are a variety of approaches one can employ in teaching social studies, it would seem, never­ theless, that reflection produces the greatest opportuni­ ties to combine "technical and teleological knowledge." Stated another way, reflection combines data with a way of thinking to the end that values are clarified, alter­ natives defined, and consequences measured. These, then, are the intellectual tools necessary— so critically neces­

13 ^Lynton K. Caldwell, Public Administration Re­ view, op. cit., p. 132. 205 sary— for the technological age in which we live. Perhaps Sidney Hook stated the task of social studies today when he wrote:

What is required of a philosophy of education to­ day is the development of a viable set of values for an age of brilliant experimental advance and threatening social regression. . . . An adequate philosophy of education today will not only re­ flect the social order in which it arises but will also serve to criticize and redirect it.-^

A second major implication stemming from the re­ search is directed toward content in the field of social studies. It is strongly recommended that the area of futurology be incorporated into the social studies cur­ riculum. The reasons for advocating the inclusion of futurology as part of the content of social studies de­ serve some comment.

Throughout the world today there is growing inter­ est in the utilization of man's knowledge and imagination to anticipate future developments in the social and natural environment. What was at one time regarded as a peculiar gift of the prophet or the special talent of the science fiction writer— the ability to describe the future— is now seen as a needed, legitimate, and exciting field of intel­ lectual endeavor. Futurology is concerned with understand­ ing and anticipating scientific developments in order that control can be exercised over the direction of these de-

14 / Sidney Hook, Education for Modern Man (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1967), p. 557 206 velopments. Simply stated, futurology hopes to take the shock out of "future shock."

Given the fact that scientific and technical de­ velopments are increasing with extraordinary rapidity, and given the fact that the margin of control over the direction of these developments decreases in direct ratio to man's delay in understanding them, it is imperative to incorporate a serious study of the future into the social studies curriculum. This position is supported by Dorothy M. Fraser. The purpose of incorporating futur­ ology into the social studies curriculum, states Fraser, is to anticipate major problems that seem likely to develop in the future and consider alternative ways of handling them, to the end that society can choose courses of action deliberately instead of having to respond to unforeseen crises on a piecemeal, ad hoc basis.^5

Moreover, it has become a part of the ritual of social studies educators to urge teachers to prepare stu­ dents for life in a Heraclitian society. One seems safe in asserting that the exclusion of future-oriented stud­ ies not only fails in aiding students to understand their changing world, but fails the student in his ability to exercise control over the direction of change.

Despite the future-oriented studies that are taking

15 Dorothy M. Frazer, Thirty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Council for Social Studies, op. ctt., p. 3. 207 place in our universities and research centers, and the urgent efforts of these institutions to convey to the public the value dilemmas that the future portends, the field of social studies has been slow to respond to the need for orienting students to future studies. That this need exists is clearly stated by Edward S. Cornish, Presi­ dent of the World Future Studies:

Social studies teachers might do well to learn something about the new field of futuristics— the study of future possibilities. Futuris­ tics . . . is giving students an awareness that they can help build a world that will be better than anything they can yet dream of. The fu­ turistic perspective is very important, because students know they can do nothing about the past. All the horrors of history are fixed and un­ alterable. It is only in the future that a stu­ dent's own actions can be effective, and so the future can be intensely meaningful to him. As students begin to consider the various develop­ ments that could occur in the future . . . they almost inevitably become involved in deciding which sort of things they want to see realized. As this happens they may begin to take responsi­ bility for making them happen. . .

Accordingly, then, if social studies teachers truly want to prepare students for that "ever changing world" of which they so frequently speak, the serious study of fu­ turology should be included in the curriculum. It should be understood, however, that the advocacy of including future studies in the curriculum does not in any way sug­ gest jettisoning contemporary problems or ignoring the

-i £ Edward Cornish, "What Can Social Studies Teachers Do to Help Prepare Their Students for the Future?" Social Education. Vol. 3 6 , No. 3 (March, 1972), p. 245. .. 208 past. This proposal merely suggests that equal weight he given to the problems and value dilemmas of the twenty- first century— a century in which our students will be living and a century which, because of man's immense powers over nature, can almost be legislated into existence. By engaging students in the study of possible futures which can be enormously influenced by man's intervention (or lack of it), society can increase the probability of fu­ tures that would be desirable and decrease the occurrence of possible futures which would be undesirable. Consider­ ing the speed with which problems descend on us, failure to incorporate future-oriented studies into the curriculum may allow a rampaging technology to shape a world which is in­ compatible with humane values. "The only sure way to pre­ dict the future," writes Eric Hoffer, "is to have the power to shape the future." 17 ' ’The task of education, Margaret

Mead has suggested, is to engage students in thinking ahead by decades, even centuries, if we wish to preserve moral choice and prevent blind chance from taking over.

Before suggesting a number of future-oriented is­ sues worthy of inclusion in a social studies curriculum and suggesting some teaching strategies to accompany these issues, it is advisable to suggest how a course at the senior high school level might be organized and how the

■^Eric Hoffer, The Passionate State of Mind (New York: Harper & Row, 195A-), p. 78. 209 disciplines might he utilized. Social studies, states Hunt and Metcalf, needs a "strikingly different approach to content selection, organization, and methodology." Otherwise, we will be unable, continues these authors, to educate youth concerning social problems at a fast enough pace to prevent the problems created by a presently out-of-hand technical and scien­ tific world from engulfing us.1^

If one were to take seriously this injunction it v/ould seem desirable to select a range of social problems that reflect contemporary concerns and future concerns— prob­ lems that will face society in the twenty-first century. These problems should be of such a nature that they will touch on students' fundamental beliefs and will prod stu­ dents to examine many traditional value orientations. As was previously suggested, the examination of these problems should provide students with the opportunity to reflect on their own values in the light of empirical evidence, see value alternatives, and consider the consequences of a given value orientation. In doing the above, students will not only clarify their own values and be introduced to a method of thinking, but they will have taken a giant step forward toward becoming intellectually and emotionally autonomous— a needed contribution to the twenty-first cen­ tury since many of the problems they will confront will

1 fi Hunt and Metcalf, Teaching High School Social Studies, op. cit., p. 280. 210 demand radically different kinds of perceptions than our traditionally blessed and bound ways of perceiving reality. If students are to examine both contemporary and future-oriented studies, what, then, should be the role of the social science disciplines? Recognizing that there are many who insist upon the necessity of studying the disciplines qua disciplines or the structure of the dis­ ciplines, it would seem more pertinent in today's complex world to suggest an interdisciplinary approach. The re­ marks of Noel F. Mclnnis, a member of the Center for Cur­ riculum Design at Northwestern University, states the rea­ son for combining rather than compartmentalizing the dis­ ciplines.

Our present teaching methods, at all levels of education, tend to foster a common intellectual skill: thinking the world to pieces. . . . Hav­ ing been taught mostly to think the world to pieces, is it any wonder that we are now tearing it to pieces. . . . We are desperately in need of perceiving the planet as a gestalt.19

If we are not "to think the world to pieces," a social studies curriculum which focuses on current and future con­ cerns, and which draws upon data, concepts, and generali­ zations from all the disciplines as reflection dictates, might piece the world together. Having discussed the necessity for a particular

"^Noel F. Mclnnis, "What Can Social Studies Teach­ ers Do To Help Prepare Their Students For The Future?" Social Education, op. cit., p. 243. 211 methodology for a technological age, and having suggested some new and different content for a social studies cur­ riculum, the remainder of this chapter will be devoted to elaborating on the type of futuristic content that could possibly be included in the curriculum. 20

20 It would seem appropriate to include only cur­ riculum material which deals with futurology since there is excellent material available on current problems. WHY STUDY THE FUTURE?

"If we do not learn from history, we shall be com­ pelled to relive it. True. But if we do not change the future, we shall be compelled to en­ dure it. And that could be worse." Alan Toffler "In the coming world the capacity to face the new appropriately is more important than the ability to know and repeat the old." Carl Rogers "We cannot alter the past. At current speeds, the present becomes the past even as we set hand to it. At such speeds, our options for today are drastically narrowed. Only tomorrow can be dealt with." U. S. Department of the Interior

Factors for Analysis: Stating the Issue "Change," remarks Alan Toffler in his recent book

Future Shock, "is avalanching down upon our heads, and most people are utterly unprepared to cope with it."

Change has always been one of the forces that man has had to confront in history, but today the speed and scope of change has greatly accelerated. In fact, change today is moving at cataclysmic speed. As v/e confront the present 213 and contemplate the future we are filled with both a sense of fright and exhilaration. A major reason for this sense of awe about the fu­ ture stems from the fact that science and technology have advanced more rapidly in the past 50 years than in the previous 5,000. A computer, for example, can accomplish the 500 years’ work of 500 scientists in less than 5 min­ utes, while the volume of scientific work accomplished within the past 15 years alone is greater than that of all previous years of recorded history. Science and technology have given us powers and tools never before available to man. Kenneth Boulding reminds us, for instance, that it took centuries for man to recuperate from the physical destruction that accompanied the collapse of the Roman

Empire, but after World War II it took only 20 years to rebuild the shattered and' burned cities of modern Europe. In 1835 it took Andrew Jackson three days to travel from his home in Tennessee to Washington; today man can make this same journey in 23 minutes; indeed an astronaut can travel to the moon in less time than it took Jackson to reach the Capitol. Six thousand years ago the fastest transportation available to man, the camel caravan, attain­ ed speeds of eight miles per hour. Today man can circle the earth at 18,000 miles per hour. As an appendage to this it might also be added that not only can we reach our shrinking geographical distances in shorter time than 214 before, but we can do it in airplanes which are longer from nose to tail than the entire distance flown by the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, in 1923! Finally, if further evidence is needed to convey the unique scope and scale of change around us, the fol­ lowing illustration by Alan Toffler vividly captures it. If the past 50 years of man's existence on this planet were divided into average lifetimes of 62 years, there have been some 800 such lifetimes. Of the past 800 life­ times, at least 650 of these lifetimes were spent in caves. Only during the past 70 lifetimes has man seen a printed page; only during the past 4 lifetimes has man been able to measure time with any precision; only in the last 2 lifetimes has man utilized electricity. In fact, the vast majority of the material goods and inventions we use today were produced v/ithin the last 800th lifetime! It is this

800th lifetime, argues Toffler, that "marks a sharp break with all past human experience" and has led Kenneth Bould- ing to make the startling statement that almost as much has happened since he was born as happened before. The political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski points out the im­ plications that this rapid acceleration of change has for the future. The world is on the eve of a transformation more dramatic in its historic and human conse­ quences than that wrought either by the French or the Bolshevik revolutions. Viewed from a long perspective, these famous revolutions merely 215 scratched the surface of the human condition. The changes they precipitated involved altera­ tions in the distribution of power and property within society; they did not affect the essence of individual and social existence. Life— per­ sonal and organized— continued much as before, even though some of its external forms (pri­ marily political) were substantially altered. Shocking though it may sound to their acolytes, by the year 2000 it will be accepted that Robespierre and Lenin were mild reformers. Unlike the revolutions of the past, the de­ veloping metamorphosis vail have no charismatic leaders with strident doctrines, but its impact will be far more profound. Most of the change that has so far taken place in human history has been gradual— with the "great revolutions" being mere punctuation marks to a slow . . . process. In contrast, the approaching trans­ formation will come more rapidly and will have deeper consequences for the way and even per­ haps for the meaning of human life than any­ thing experienced by the generations that pre­ ceded us. 21

Already many scholars are beginning to speak of our own age as something radically different from what has preceded us. Daniel Bell speaks.of a "post-industrial so­ ciety" to describe our times, while theologians such as Harvey Cox and Teilhard de Chardin allude to a "post- Christian society" which we are entering. Lynton K. Cald­ well calls our period a "scientific super-culture," and Marshall McLuhan sees the new electronic media of our times bringing about a totally new environment that will alter everything from politics to sexual behavior. If these things, then, are already a part of our

21 Zbigniew Brzezinski, "America in the Technetronic Age," Encounter. January 1968, p. 16. 216 landscape, what can we expect in the next thirty years?

We have fairly reliable evidence that the future will be drastically different from the past and that unless we can 'understand this change that is "avalanching down upon our heads" and direct it toward purposes and goals we desire, then we may end up with a world not of our liking. Like Dr. Faustus, the knowledge that we have unleashed contains within it the dual promise of triumph or death and of promise or peril. Unless we give serious thought to what kind of a future we want, plan for it, direct it, and control it, then the Frankenstein myth may well become a reality. Barbara Ward shares this concern.

In a world that is being driven onward at apocalyptic speed by science and technology, we cannot, we must not, give up the idea that human beings can control their political and economic policies. They must have some sense of where they are trying to go, of what they are trying to do, of what the world may look like twenty years from now. It is surely inconceivable that we should turn the whole human experiment over to forces of change which we can neither master nor even fully understand. If one thing is true about the world we live in, it is that these forces are now in such spate that the physical background of our world twenty years hence will be almost completely different from what we see today. Unless as a human society, we have some sense of direction, blind chance will take over. . . .22

The future is too important to be left to chance. Since we cannot invert the past, but can invent the future, through planned, deliberate choice, it would seem a topic

22 Barbara Ward, "Spaceship Earth," Technology, Industry and Man, op. cit., p. 289. 217 eminently worthy of consideration. Because man for the first time in history has almost total control over his environment, he can literally "legislate the future." It is hoped that the units which you will he studying in the next few days may help you to reach some value judg­ ments about the type of world you would like to see de­ signed.

Questions: a. Before we undertake a serious study of the future, let1s try to pull together some things we might already know. Many of the people in the above article re­ peatedly stated that the future will be "drastically" different from the past. Can you think of some specific things that will cause the future to be unlike anything we have known? Read any sci­ ence fiction lately? Watched any "weird" television shows? Seen any science fic­ tion films? What kinds of things do you . remember about them? b. Can you think of any good reasons why we should think about the future now rather than waiting until later?

Case Study A Dialogue "Hi, there. Who are you?" asked the inquiring gentleman. "My name is Tom," responded the young lad.

"Oh," replied the gentleman, "is that all?" "Well, no," said Tom. "I am Thomas H. Present. The child of my par­ ents and the sum of all my experiences," came the reply proudly and confidently. "What's more I am going to be a doctor." "But," replied the old gentleman, "here on your card, there is no name, just a number— 48-0071-367. What's more, my lad, have you ever considered the possi­ bility that your existence is merely a mathematical prob­ ability, a biological accident?" "Well, no, not exact­ ly," Tom responded rather hesitantly. "You say you're going to be a doctor?" asked the strange gentleman. "What if by the time you get your degree— say some thirty-five years from now, let's see, that's about 2007 A. D.— medi­ cal functions are performed by machines? Who, then, are you?" Irritated, Tom blurted out, "I am a human being. '

I can think." "So can a machine," replied the gentleman. "Is that all you can do?" "I can feel," shouted Tom. "So can an animal," the calm elderly voice responded. "Is that all?" "I can create values. I can make the world a better piace in which to live. I can love. I have options. I can make choices. I can make this planet the best of all possible worlds. No machine can do that. No animal can do those things. I alone, among all the species on this earth, can do these things. So there, what do you say to that?" "Hm! We'll see," replied the old man as he walked away. 219

Questions for Reflection:

a. Tom defined himself by name, occupation, and by his ability to make value choices. Can you foresee any possibilities whereby the future may obliterate all of these definitions of a person? If so, how then do we answer the question, "Who am I?"

b. Every generation thinks it can make the world over and in so doing make it a bet­ ter place to live. Drawing upon your knowledge of world history see if you can support this contention. Can you offer contrary evidence to invalidate this state­ ment? Perhaps one member of the class could take one side of this argument and someone else the other side. c. Examine the logic and evidence that were advanced in the above arguments. What values were expressed, either implicitly or explicitly to evaluate the phrase "a better place to live."

d. If you agree with Tom, in the previous case study, that you .can make the world a better place in which to live, do you think some criteria ought to be estab­ lished at the outset? If so, what in your opinion constitutes the good man, the good life, and the good society? These are difficult questions, but don’t hesitate on them. You will have plenty of opportunities to change your mind later. In fact, just write down a few answers, tuck them away, and realize that as you gain additional knowledge from this study, you most likely will change them. No penalties are involved, and as one member of your generation has said, "If you can’t be sincere fake it!" 220 To aid you in the last assignment you may want to do a hit of reading. Why don't you take a look at several pages in a popular bestseller entitled The Greening of

America by Charles Reich, pp. 91-140; 141-170; 171-203. These three chapters are appropriately called "The Corpo­ rate State," "The Lost Self," and "It's Just Like Living." Also, you might want to take a look at another bestseller, Theodore Roszak's, The Making of a Counter Culture, espe­ cially the chapter entitled "An Invasion of Centaurs," pp. 42-83. One last point to keep in mind before you begin this assignment. The story is told that as Gertrude Stein

(check your teacher out on this one) was dying she said to her friend who was with her, "Ah, Alice, what is the an­ swer?" After a rather long silence during which she re­ ceived no response from Alice, Gertrude Stein asked, "In that case, what is the question?" The story which is said to be true is not unlike the remarks of the poet Archibald MacLeish who wrote: "We have learned the answers, all the answers. It is the questions we do not know." If you found yourself agreeing with Tom Present that you can cre­ ate a better future you may have to question some answers, rather than answering some questions, as you usually do. To get you into this habit, we are going to give you the answers and you supply the questions! 221 The Answers The Questions*

We have developed diabol­ Are we violent by nature? ical weapons which can Is man governed by reason destroy our planet in a or instinct? If man is matter of seconds. set on a path of destroy­ ing himself, should we not We have polluted our riv­ use genetic engineering to ers and streams, spawned change this course? How ugly urban centers, de­ do we go about "invoking stroyed the beauty of our the wonders of science in­ landscapes, and poisoned stead of the terrors of our atmosphere. science?" We have explored the heav­ How do we go about avoiding ens, penetrated the depths the pitfalls of technology of our oceans, eased the while achieving the poten­ burden of toil for mil­ tials of technology? Is lions of human beings, and technology a curse or a created an abundance of blessing? material goods beyond the dreams of men in past ages.

We have created computers If we can create computers which can now perform the which are superior to man's tasks of any high school mental capacities, what graduate, can operate en­ then is man? Is man obso­ tire factories without lete? What are human be­ human intervention, and ings for? can if we so desire per- . form the vast majority of the tasks man has always defined for himself.

We have invented com­ Should we manipulate I. Q.? puters which could con­ Who should make these de- , ceivably surpass us in cisions? Should we modify intelligence. human behavior? Who should make these decisions? Can We have the capacity to we avoid making them? completely change the hu­ man species: we can re­ arrange the genes to pro­ duce any sex we desire; we can raise the I. Q. level by drugs; we can

*In the material the right side should be left blank. Here, however, are some possible questions which you as a teacher might want to probe. 222 make human beings more aggressive or more pas­ sive .

We are now able (or will Who are we? What makes us shortly be able) to per­ unique? ARE we unique? form kidney transplants, What will happen to per­ heart transplants, and sonal identity? Will brain transplants. In there be such a thing as fact, we will shortly be personality identity? able to completely trans­ Why or why not? plant an entire human being.

Concluding Questions: a. What answers would you now give to the ques­ tion, "Why study the future?"

b. Should we ignore a study of the past in this study? What, if any, value do you see in a study of the past? The present? 223

HOW ARE WE GOING TO THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE?

"If all environments were stable the well-adapted would simply take over the earth and the evolu­ tionary process would stop. In the period of en­ vironmental change, however, it is the adaptable, not the well-adapted who survive." Kenneth Boulding, The Meaning of the Twentieth Century ". . . the struggle for survival becomes a strug­ gle with the ideas one has inherited, and not with nature himself. Man would rather sacrifice sur­ vival than change the ideas he has learned from the group." Ernest Becker, Beyond Alienation

Factors for Analysis: Stating the Issue

It has been argued that as we move into the twenty- first century science and technology will lead to changes in our cultural styles and intellectual attitudes. The

Hudson Institute which is one of the many research centers studying the future advances the hypothesis that American society will veer toward a "late sensate" cultural style

(see charts below for the characteristics of this type of society). 224

SYSTEMS OF TRUTH

Ideational Sensate Late Sensate

Revealed Empirical Cynical Charismatic Pragmatic Disillusioned Certain Operational Nihilistic Dogmatic Practical Chaotic Mystic Worldly Blase Intuitive Scientific Transient Infallible Skeptical Superficial Religious Tentative Weary Supersensory Fallible Sophistic Unworldly Sensory Formalistic Salvational Materialistic Atheistic Spiritual Mechanistic Trivial Absolute Relativistic Changeable Supernatural Agnostic Meaningless Moral Instrumental Alienated Emotional Empirical, or Expedient Mythic Logically Veri­ Absolutely fiable Relativistic

*Frora Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social and. Cultural Dynam­ ics, Vol. I, pp. 84-91 as cited in Herman Kalin and Anthony J. Wiener, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years (New York: The Macmillan Com­ pany, 1967), pp. 43-44.

Study carefully Sorokin's "Systems of Truth" and the words and adjectives he used to describe various periods in his­ tory. If there are any terms you do not understand, ask your teacher to explain them to you. Having done this, see if you can answer the questions below. These are im­ portant questions and may aid you in understanding some things about yourself that you probably have not thought about before. 225

Questions:

a. Since Sorokin’s "Systems of Truth" presents several ways of viewing truth and says a great deal about the kinds of values we hold, can you place yourself— your values, beliefs, thinking process— in one of these categories? Do you, for example, believe in the Bible as the absolute word of God? Do you think right and wrong are relative to a particular time, place, and society? Do you believe in Truth or truth? (Notice one is spelled with a small "t" and one with a capital "T"). Do you think that what is true for today can be false for tomorrow? Do you believe that certain things are true which can not be "empiri­ cally" verified? Try answering some of these questions. It will help you to find out where you are on the chart. b. Can you identify a period in western his­ tory that corresponds to the "Ideational" view? Which one of the categories do you think best describes our own society? What evidence would you advance to support your position?

Case Studies

In the year 1543 Galileo, at work in his laboratory, looked into his telescope and discovered four moons around Jupiter. His excitement prompted him to invite his col­ leagues, some of the most learned men in Europe, to share in his discovery that the earth was not the center of the universe. They adamantly refused to do so because they had been taught by their Christian faith and the Church fathers that the earth was the center of the universe. As thought­ 226 ful and devout men, they did not ask, "What are the facts?"

On the contrary, they asked a much more profound question, "What is the Truth?" Indeed, these learned men knew all of the essential Truths about God, man, and the universe; and they knew all of these Truths on the best of author­ ity— Aristotle, the Church, and Thomas Acquinas. Galileo, on the other hand, was summoned to Rome, brought to trial on a charge of heresy, his teachings denounced, and he was forced to deny what in fact he had discovered.

Questions: a. Can you identify the "system of truth" held by the Church and Galileo's col­ leagues in the above case study? Since the Church felt such teachings endangered peoples' souls and consequently their salvation, do you think the Church was justified in the position it took and the things it did? What are the impli­ cations of this value position for so­ ciety? Do you favor some institution being established in our society today to determine what are right and wrong beliefs? Would the disadvantages of such a proposal outweigh the advantages? Cite some evidence from history or the social sciences to support your answer. b. Can you identify the "system of truth" that Galileo was using? What are the. implications of viewing truth in this manner? Do you think this system of truth serves man better? Why or why not? Do you think this system of truth makes man happier? Why or why not? c. Examine the answers you have given to the above questions and see if those answers 227 imply some underlying assumptions you may have made about the good life and the nature of man. Did they? What were they?

d. In a society in which new scientific knowl­ edge is constantly being discovered about man and his behavior, which of these two systems of truth do you think will serve you better? Why do you take this position? Can you cite evidence from history or the social sciences to support your view? e. Examine the steps you have taken in these exercises and the types of answers you gave to the questions. Do you think you were lead, directed, influenced, or ma­ nipulated into viewing truth in a certain way? If so, are you sure that is the way you want to go? Think about this care­ fully because you may not be able to re­ verse this particular thinking process.

Case Study Recently a physicist was working in his laboratory on a project which if successful could destroy the entire world and every living thing in it in a matter of a few seconds. The knowledge of his work spread throughout the community and produced a violent reaction from the people.

Many argued that God had not created the universe for man

to destroy it. Others argued that the work of this scien­ tist was a threat to their constitutional rights— their right to life and liberty, not to mention the pursuit of happiness. The scientist responded to their charges that as a scientist he should be free to work on any experi­

ment, regardless of its consequences to society. "As far 228 as I'm concerned," replied the scientist, "there are no inherent secrets in the universe that are not subjects of scientific investigation. If scientific investigation produces a weapon that can destroy the world in a second, the scientist still must be left free to pursue his knowl­ edge."

Questions: a. By now you should have no difficulty in identifying this scientist's frame of reference or his "system of truth." What was it?

b. If you choose this "system of truth" as the one you wanted to follow, does this second case study cause you to modify your previous stance? c. What are some of the consequences, other than the rather obvious one given in this case study, from acting on this system of truth? Are the consequences more or less desirable than acting on the system of truth held by the Church in the first case study?

You are now asked to go back and once again read the section "Stating the Issue." You will remember that the Hudson studies suggested that our culture is veering toward "late sensate." The historian Theodore Roszak in his book, The Making of a Counter Culture, is quite criti­ cal of this scientific world view and where it is taking 229 us. He suggests that your generation is opting out of

. the sensate or scientific world view. The reading below, taken from parts of Roszak's book, explains why he is critical of the sensate style of life and where he thinks it has taken us. It would, of course, be much better if you read his entire book. Theodore Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture Roszak begins his argument by endorsing the pro­ tests, demonstrations, and defection of your generation— a generation he calls the "young centaurs" from the sci­ entific world view.

I believe that despite their follies, these young centaurs deserve to win their encounter with the defending Apollos of our society. For the ortho­ dox culture they confront is fatally and con­ tagiously diseased. The prime symptom of that disease is the shadow of thermonuclear annihila­ tion beneath which we cower. __ The counter culture takes its stand against the background of this absolute evil, an evil which is not defined by the sheer fact of the bomb, but by the total ethos of the bomb, in which our politics, our public morality, our economic life, our intellectual en­ deavors are now embedded with a wealth of ingen­ ious rationalizations. We are a civilization sunk in an unshakeable commitment to genocide, gambling madly with the universal extermination of our species. And how viciously we ravish our sense of humanity to pretend, even for a day, that such horror can be accepted as "normal" or "nec­ essary." Whenever we feel inclined to offer a cautious "yes . . . but" to the protests of the young, let us return to this fact as the decisive measure of the technocracy's essential criminality; the extent to which it insists, in the name of progress, in the name of reason, that the unthink­ able and the intolerable become tolerable. . . . It is the young arriving with eyes that can see 230 the obvious, who must remake the lethal culture of their elders, and who must remake it in des­ perate haste.23

Roszak then goes on to describe the technocratic society we have created. He states that all our knowledge, feel­ ing, and ways of looking at life have become "scientized"— subjected to the rigors of science and empiricism. . . . what is "reliable knowledge?" How do we know it when we see it? The answer is: reliable knowledge is knowledge that is scientifically sound, since it is that to which modern man refers for the definitive explication of reality. And what in turn is it that characterizes scientific knowledge? The answer is: objectivity. Scien­ tific knowledge is not just feeling or specula­ tion or subjecting ruminating. It is a verifable description of reality that exists independent of any purely personal considerations. It is true . . . real . . . dependable. . . . It works.24

The end result of a society dedicated to this scientific ethos, argues Roszak, is depersonalization, alienation, and the other adjectives you will .find under Sorokin's "late sensate" stage. Says Roszak: . . . we may only have to wait until our fellow humans have converted themselves into purely im­ personal automatons capable of total objectivity in all their tasks. At that point, when the mechanistic imperative has been successfully internalized as the prevailing life style of our society, we shall find ourselves moving through a world of perfected bureaucrats, man­ agers, operation analysts, and social engineers who will be indistinguishable from the cybernated

^Theodore Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture, op. cit., p. 47.

24Ibid., p. 208. 231 systems they assist. Already we find these images of internally deaded human beings appearing in our contemporary novels and films. Dispassionate lovers, dispassionate killers fill the movies of Godard, Truffant, Antonioni, Fellini with their blank gaze and automatized reactions. So too in the absurdist plays of Harold Pinter and Samuel Beckett we find the logical— or rather psycho­ logical— conclusion of life dominated by ruthless depersonalization. Here we have the world of completely objectified human relations: people hopelessly locked off from one another, maneuver­ ing their isolated In-Heres around and about each other, communicating only by their externalized behavior. Words become mere sounds, concealing more than they convey; gestures become mere physiological tv/itches, bodies touch without warmth. 2 j)

Questions:

a. Roszak, it should be remembered, is talk­ ing about the ethos of science rather than the methodology of science. The first part of this unit was to aid you in under­ standing various ways of looking at truth of which one was a scientific methodology. Can you distinguish between the ethos of science and the methodology of science? Based on the material you have been given explain and distinguish between the two. b. If the methodology of science is carried to extremes can a methodology become an ethos? Is this happening today in our society? c. From your knowledge of history would you say there has been more progress in the world after the birth of the scientific revolution than before? Support your answer with evidence.

25Ibid., pp. 231-232. 232 d. In this excerpt from Roszak's book he suggests that science and technology may be taking us where we may not want to go. Based on this excerpt can you state sev­ eral of his arguments? Do you agree or disagree with him? Can you begin to describe some of the value dilemmas fac­ ing those who will live in the twenty- first century?

e. If as Roszak suggests the scientific world view (Sorokin's sensate) is producing a society characterized by cynicism, dis­ illusionment, superficiality, alienation, meaninglessness (late sensate) what im­ plications does this have for our politi­ cal, economic and social fabric? For democracy? For an orderly society? f. Do a quick check of your history book and see if you can find a society in the twentieth century that was characterized by the attitudes listed under late sensate. What happened to .it? What consequences did this have for that society?

Concluding Questions:

a. Having taken a look at several ways of view­ ing truth and having also looked at some possible consequences that stem from one position or the other, can you now decide which "system of truth" you will use to analyze your beliefs and values? Think carefully about this, for it may be a methodology you will use the rest of your life. Therefore, you should think through the full implications of it. b. Did you derive any suggestions or reasons why you should study the future from this unit? What were they? 233 c. Do you think this unit provided you with • anything useful that will serve you in the future? 234

WHAT ARE HUMAN BEINGS FOR?

"I am a human being. Please do not fold, spindle, or mutilate."26

"Machines get between me and other people. They make me feel less human. I send a letter and I get an IBM card."

"I am afraid the machine will take over my job. Then what will happen to me?"

"The machines we are introducing into society are becoming self-operating, self-regulating, and self­ directing. And man is adapting himself with pa­ thetic docility to this machine." "Machines get between me and nature. Will I have to live in a man-made world and never see a tree?" "I am losing my self-sufficiency, my privacy, my individuality. I am dependent on machines and the people who control them. I have less influence on the development of my own children than the TV set." "I have less and less influence on society. Com­ puters calculate the results of an election before I have even cast my vote."

"I feel that my world is no longer guided by human intelligence and human values. If computers can outthink us now in some ways, perhaps in a few years they can outthink us in all ways. Then what will happen to the human race?"

26 All of the following quotations are taken from Maryjane Austan and Patricia W. Garlan, Worlds in the Mak­ ing: Probes for Students of the Future (Englewood Cliff, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970), pp. 161, 164, 166, 167, 168, 171. 235 "Computers even play games, write poems, sing songs. I thought those were things only people could do."

Children Sob suddenly, the bongos are moving. Or could we find that tall child? And dividing honesty was like praying badly, And while the boy is obese, all blast could climb. First you become oblong. To weep is unctious, to move is poor. A poem written by a com­ puter, Commit ers: The Machines We Think With27

"I love you— this is a recording." Arthur Hoppe

Factors for Analysis: Stating the Issue

When the Emperor Augustus came to power, the citi­

zens of Rome were granted 76 holidays a year. Several

t centuries later when the Emperor Nero died, Roman citizens ’ enjoyed 176 holidays a year. Even though the cause for this extended leisure did not derive from cybernation (bet­

ter look up this term) the historical example does call attention to three critical problems facing American so­

ciety in the 21st century— cybernation, leisure, and af­ fluence. While we are on the threshold of solving man­ kind's most pressing problem— the struggle for subsistence,

^D. S. Halacy, Jr., Computers: The Machines We Think With, (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), p. l44. we also face the prospect of a world of leisure and af­ fluence. Although on the surface having lots of free time and material things may not immediately sound like problems to you, a deeper inspection of this topic may convince you otherwise. Cybernation and its offsprings— leisure and affluence— threaten revolutionary consequences to a work-oriented society and to your generation; con­ sequently, they are topics eminently worthy of your con­ sideration. The economist John Diebold, for example, sees cybernation as "a breakthrough more revolutionary than Henry Ford’s assembly line," while another economist,

Henry Winthrop, says that "cybernation represents one of the most important phenomena of our times." Cybernation, it is asserted, will drastically alter work patterns, in­ crease per capita income, produce shorter work weeks, and provide ample leisure time. In fact by the time you are in your late twenties or early thirties it has been esti­ mated that you will most likely spend 40 per cent of your time on your vocation, 40 per cent of your time on an avocation, and 20 per cent on neither! Before exploring this issue further, let’s pause a moment and think about the implications of some of the things you have already read. 237

Questions: a. If you are like other students you have probably had certain values inculcated in you without even realizing it. Most likely your parents and the school have taught you to get ahead, strive for suc­ cess, compete (especially in grades), work hard, and put in a full day's work. We sometimes call these "bourgeoise val­ ues." How appropriate are these values in the 21st century given the type of society that has been hypothesized?

b. If you questioned the usefulness of these values for the 21st century, can you cite some alternative values that might be more appropriate? What do you think would be the consequences to society of acting on the values you chose? c. Engage about five people (preferably adults) in a short conversation and ask them to tell you something about them­ selves. Chances are they will define themselves in terms of their occupation (but don't take this for granted, check it out empirically). If your research supports this hypothesis, what implica­ tions does a leisured society have for one's identity? Does it make it harder to answer the question, "Who am I?" How are you going to define yourself if you perform no specific function or role in society?

The Reversed Sequence

In the first unit, you will remember, you were given some answers and then asked to supply the questions. The reason for doing this was to get you to question some traditional answers. Here, then, is another exercise in 238 which you will be given answers and you must supply the questions.

The Answers The Questions (In student material this column should be left blank.)

By the use of machines How do we determine who unlimited output of goods gets what goods when dis­ and services can be a- tribution is no longer tied chieved with little co­ to work? What correlation operation from human be­ exists, if any, between ings . work and consumption?

In the industrial society How will we measure social income and occupation class in a cybernated so­ have been two major de­ ciety? Will classes exist? terminants of status, so­ cial class, and prestige.

Because of an ability to What are the implications provide abundance for for our political institu­ everyone through the use tions and the stability of of machines, poverty need society of not completely no longer exist. eliminating poverty? Man can satisfy his mate­ If man no longer needs to rial wants and needs with­ work, what does he strive out labor. for? What gives meaning to his life? What kinds of meaningful substitutes exist for work?

Scenarios; In order for you to see some "alternative worlds" you are going to be introduced to scenarios. So that you will use these fruitfully perhaps it would be desirable to explain to you just what a scenario does. Scenarios are hypothetical events constructed for the purpose of giving one a glimpse of the future consequences of making certain 239 value choices. Scenarios allow opportunities for discussing "future worlds" and for an analysis of specific issues that might he involved in the "future worlds" that could be con­ structed. By helping you to focus on directions and des­ tinations, scenarios can aid you in making your own deci­

sions about what you would like to see avoided or what you might like to see come about. They are also useful devices to allow you to expand your thinking into the future and the implications of life in the future.

The Freudian Scenario: The Implications of a Leisure Society According to Sigmund Freud, a psychologist of con­

siderable repute, work and its associated traits of respon­ sibility, punctuality, and goals, provide a means of bind­ ing the individual to reality. By forcing the individual to face reality through work induced techniques, a mature

character structure is formed. The absence of work accord­ ing to this hypothesis coupled with widespread leisure may

produce an outburst of childish individualism, anti-social frustration, and increasing narcissism since the mature character structure does not develop. This increase in self-centeredness could likely produce a society in which

there was a decreased interest in government, politics,

and the pursuit of the common good. There are several rea­

sons for this. A by-product of the absence of a reality- .focusing influence such as work, assuming there were no substitutes provided and society was unprepared for lei­ sure, would cause masses of people to be disoriented about life goals and consequently alienated from society. Work, however distasteful it may appear to be, does provide a goal-orientation for the vast majority of people. Thus, technology, while it may decrease economic frustrations for people by providing economic abundance, increases personal frustrations for the individual and the society as a whole by removing goal-oriented behavior. According­ ly, it is possible that if we choose to go with a cyber­ nated society, the politics of plenty could become the cynicism of the many. "Bumming around," hip patterns of life, indifference to ethical values, and irresponsibility in personal behavior could become increasingly common among youth. Traditional middle class American values— work, achievement, advancement, delayed gratification, punctuality may be substituted for pleasure, hedonism, and sensual gratification.

The Pollard Scenario: The Implications of a Leisured Society The Dollard scenario presents a completely dif­ ferent type of society which will result from leisure.

According to the Dollard scenario most work that is done by the vast majority of people is meaningless and repeti­ 241 tive. Because most work is of this nature man’s frustra­ tions, cynicism, and alienation will decrease once work is removed. An affluent and leisured society by demanding less of the individual and forcing him to assume fewer challenging roles decreases his tendencies toward aggres­ sion and frustration. Accordingly, a cybernated society would be a humanistic-oriented society devoted to personal self-fulfillment.

Questions: a. How accurate do you think is the Freudian scenario? Can you cite individuals in past and recent history who have never worked a day in their life, yet were strongly oriented toward public service? Can you cite a society in history where leisure was a way of life? What evalua­ tion of that society would you make? Did it resemb.le the Freudian scenario? Did it resemble the Dollard scenario?

b. On the other hand, can you cite a modern industrial society in which for all prac­ tical purposes work was involuntarily eliminated by high unemployment caused by a serious economic' decline? What hap­ pened in that society? Did it resemble the Freudian scenario? The Dollard scenario?

c. Since you have had an opportunity to look at two possible "future worlds" which could stem from the man-inade choice to completely automate our society, what specific issues, value crises, and social consequences can you identify that should be of concern to you as you go about mak­ ing your decision on whether we should au­ tomate and bring about a leisured society? 242 d. Having looked at these two scenarios can you spell out specifically things we might want to avoid? How can we go about this? What kinds of things can we do? e. Can you now reach any type of value judg­ ment on the question, should we encourage a cybernated culture? Are the consequences of a cybernated society more advantageous than disadvantageous? In answering this question is the thinking process you used here somewhat different from that in unit two? You might ask your teacher if there is any kind of evidence that is available to you in attempting to make value judg­ ments about the future.

Before concluding this unit and in order to give you a balanced view of cybernation, you most likely would like to look over the following reading before answering

the concluding question in this unit. The article is entitled, The Cybernetic Age and is written by Glen T. Seaborg. The ultimate potential of the computer puts us to the test as human beings. It brings up questions we have lived with for centuries, but never have been asked to answer fully or act upon if we believed we knew the answers. It gives us new freedom and yet tremendous responsibilities which, if not acted upon, could result in a loss of almost all freedom. It presents us with choices and decisions of enormous consequences. If offers man a remarkable new chance to shape his own des­ tiny, but asks him to be God-like enough to select that destiny without much margin for error. Let me project a few thoughts on how the com­ puter may forge our future— and, more important, on some of the ideas and alternatives with which we must come to grips if we are going to control the direction of that future. To begin with, I believe that cybernation— the complete adaptation of computer-like equipment to 243 industrial, economic, and social activity— will represent a quantum jump in the extension of man. The Industrial Revolution amplified (and to a large extent replaced) man's muscle as a produc­ tive force. Still, a large percentage of our production resulted from the energies of man and beast. Today in the United States, only a frac­ tion of 1 per cent of our productive power re­ sults from the physical energy of human beings or animals. Springing from our Scientific Revolution of recent decades is what is being called a "Cyber­ netic Revolution." This revolution, which, com­ paratively speaking, is only in its infancy, amplifies (and will to a large extent replace) man's nervous system. Actually, this is an under­ statement because computers amplify the collective intelligence of men— the intelligence of society— and, while the effect of the sum of men's physical energies may be calculated, a totally different and compounded effect results from combining facts and ideas— the knowledge generated within a so­ ciety or civilization. Add this effect to the productive capacity of the machine driven by an almost■ limitless energy source like the nucleus of the atom, and the resulting system can perform feats almost staggering to our imagination. With the fullest development of cybernation we could be faced with prospects that challenge our very relationships to such basic concepts as freedom and the nature of work and leisure. Depersonalization, a separation of man and product, a collapse of time, a further reduction of human work, and a shift of needs and skills— all of these offer both threats and promises. I believe that the promises will eventually override the threats, but not before they have made us face and solve a great many problems we have not had to face before. This in itself is going to account for a great deal of human growth. There is no doubt that the Cybernetic Revolu­ tion is going to make us reexamine the relationship between our freedoms and our responsibilities within the framework of society and find ways to guarantee a maximum of freedom for the individual within a highly organized society. Another way in which the Cybernetic Revolution is going to force considerable human growth is in making us take a more rational, long-range ap­ proach in handling our affairs— our relationships 244 with our fellow man and with nature. We are be­ ginning to learn that the crisis-to-crisis approach that we have been using to carry on will no longer work. Science and technology have shrunk time by increasing the rate of change and have forged the world into a global civilization capable of exert­ ing tremendous forces in a highly interrelated sphere of activity. We must make the fullest use of tools like the computer to help us prevent chaos and self-annihilation in such a complex world. Looking at the most positive aspects of the computer, and projecting how its growing applica­ tions might control and multiply the forces of sci­ ence and technology, one can foresee some remark­ able "alternative futures," The most promising among these would be an era of abundance for all mankind— one in which most goods and services are provided by cybernated systems. And this brings us to the most striking aspect of human growth that could take place as a result of the Cyber­ netic Revolution— the change in our relationship to labor and leisure. For a good part of our history we have been shaping through the manipulation of wealth what Peter Drucker calls "economic man." Perhaps the Cybernetic Revolution will carry us to a new level of man— a higher level— at which we will enjoy different values. On this subject it is inter­ esting to recall what the great economist John Maynard Keynes wrote in 1932 in his Essays in Persuasion: When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid our­ selves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for 200 years, by which we have ex­ alted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of highest values. If the Cybernetic Revolution produces such a social millennium, a radical change in man's rela­ tionship to work would take place and the growth of leisure time would pose new problems to be solved. As a result, our ideas on leisure would change drastically. Most people today do not recognize the true value of leisure. A little leisure has always been treasured, and there have been societies in 245 which certain men and women lived in almost com­ plete leisure, though at the expense of others' labor. But the idea of almost an entire civiliza­ tion living in even relative leisure is beyond the comprehension of many of us and still frowned upon by most others. A civilization equipped and educated to live in an era of relative leisure can bring about a new Golden Age— one without a slave base, other than those mechanical and cybernetic slaves pro­ duced by the ingenuity of a higher level of man. Such an age does not have to be, as a few predict, a civilization of drugged, purposeless people con­ trolled by a small elite. But it could tragically become that, if we did nothing but let ourselves be swept along by some of the forces in motion today. There are indications that some of these forces are .just that overwhelming. There are also indica­ tions, however, that society is reacting to the "feedback" of certain personal and social effects of technology. This feedback is coming from more and more people in all levels of society and all walks of life. It is expressing an increasing uneasiness about the state of our personal and community lives in a highly materialistic society, a concern over the individual's role in the grow­ ing complexity and impersonalization of that so­ ciety, a groping for "national purpose," and a feeling that the unity of man, referred to by poets and philosophers throughout the ages, is becoming a reality with immense psychological and physical implications. To me, these feelings forecast the need for a huge re-evaluation of our goals and values, and it will be in our universities where such a re- evaluation will take place. Perhaps its seeds have already been sown in the current unrest on the campuses of many of our universities. From this re-evaluation, from the debates and soul- searching that take place, will evolve both a new understanding and reinforcement of those old ideals which are still valid, and new ideals and goals. Together they may provide us with some­ thing like a comprehensive philosophy of life to match the physical unity of mankind rapidly being fostered by today's science and technology. If we can use this new philosophy to guide the great scientific and technological forces we have created, we could witness, possibly within 246 a few decades, the equivalent of a new "human break­ through"— an advance to a new stage of social de­ velopment— one that was initiated by our reactions to today's trends. In such a development the university, the great­ est depository and dispenser of man's knowledge, should play a major role. In fact, I can see no other institution more logically equipped to be the central force in this evolutionary process, to de­ velop, refine, and pass on to the new generations a new heritage of a higher level of mankind. But if we are to carry out such a monumental task, many changes will probably have to take place in the universities and our educational system in general. One such change will involve reconciling the continuing importance of specialization with a growing need for interdisciplinary thinking— not only in science and technology, but in all areas of our economic, social, and human development. Specialization has been giving us increasing amounts of knowledge, but the world cries out today for more of something beyond knowledge— for wisdom. All of this demands a new role of leadership from our educational system. Most of today's schools are involved to a great degree in serving the re­ quirements of an industrial age, in fulfilling the needs of a society which has been only partly and indirectly of their making. In the future, this role will shift to one in which the nature of so­ ciety is determined more by the thinking of the university, and in which the‘industrial community will tend to serve goals created by that thinking. What we must look for from the universities is the development of an education that turns out in­ dividuals of the highest intellect and broadest outlook, able to understand man and machine, and live creatively with both. Such an education could not be expected in a four-year curriculum or even a six- or eight-year one. It would start as early as the beginning of school or sooner and involve continuing education of one type or another through­ out a person's lifetime. And, as Robert Theobald indicates, education in the age of the Cybernetic Revolution would not be directed toward "earning a living" but tov/ard "total living." This is a big order involving imagination, energy, and bold leadership from the academic world. But the time is certainly ripe for this kind of leadership. The coming Cybernetic Revolution which calls forth these new goals for education will also give 247 education valuable new tools and technologies for pursuing them. The computer v/ill make knowledge more accessible. It will perform miracles in com­ piling, organizing, and analyzing information. It should link the knowledge of the world's libraries and depositories of information into networks re­ sponding like a giant brain. And it should put at the fingertips of anyone who wishes to be a modern- day Faust all the knowledge he desires without selling his soul to the Devil. Some believe that, in a cybernated utopia, hu­ man incentives will diminish and we v/ill completely stagnate. I don't believe this v/ill happen at all. New incentives v/ill arise as man moves up to higher levels of needs. The quest for new knowledge v/ill always grow. The domain of science is practically boundless. We are only beginning our adventures in space, and we still have a long v/ay to go in understanding many things about this planet and the life on it. Much has been said about the impersonalization caused by the growth of machines, but as a result of this growth I can see a new and better relation­ ship arising among men. If in the past we have spent most of our time working with machines, serv­ ing and being served by them, naturally we feel a sense of isolation and alienation among them. But v/hen machines have truly freed us from the neces­ sity of physical v/ork, perhaps we can better accept them for what they are and have the time to see and relate to other people in a different light. When we have more time to be with other people— not accidentally, on crowded buses, in elevators, in markets and offices, but in places of our own choosing at our own leisure— we may feel different­ ly toward one another. V/hen v/e are less likely to be in competition v/ith one another, much of the hypocrisy of society will vanish and more honest relationships will be formed. And, finally, v/hen we can walk down the street— anywhere in the v/orld— in a community free from want, where every human being has a sense of dignity not gained at the expense of others, we might not only walk free from fear but v/ith a great feeling of exaltation. If v/e can make the transition of living with and using the complex machines of the future in a human-oriented society, the rev/ards will be worth any effort we can make. As everyone knows, such a transition will not be easy, because it involves 248 so much of v/hat Eric Hoffer has called "The Or­ deal of Change." But I think v/e will have to make such a transition eventually. We may have already begun to do s o . 2 8

Concluding Question:

You will recall that the topic of this unit v/as, "What Are Human Beings For?" If you will flip back and once again look over the quotations you will find that computers, which are at the very heart of a cybernated culture, can think, make choices, write songs and poet­ ry, invent games, play chess, make high manage­ ment decisions, and perform even the highly sophisticated v/ork done by man, not to mention the numerous repetitive and routine jobs that man performs. Also you are asked to remember the case study in unit one where it v/as pointed out that animals can feel, have instincts, and can procreate. Considering all these things and considering also the material in this unit, you are now asked to write a short essay en­ titled, "Is Man Unique?" If you ansx/er this question in the affirmative, you should clearly spell out what it is that makes man different from a computer and different from an animal. In other v/ords you are being asked to come to grips v/ith the question, "What am I?" "Who am I?" Perhaps in attempting to answer.this question you may find some ansv/ers to the major question, "What are human beings for?" Good luck!

^®Glen T. Seaborg, "The Cybernetic Age," Saturday Review, May 24, 1967. 249

TO WHAT ENDS SHOULD WE USE OUR KNOWLEDGE?

"Man . . . is about to undertake the breath-taking adventure of re-creating himself. By tinkering v/ith the mechanisms of his heredity, he plans to improve on nature's design. He believes he can learn to change any part of his body's engineering: his susceptibility to disease, his height and in­ telligence and beauty, the very span of his life. After tv/o billion years of evolution by trial and error, we now stand at the beginning of human­ kind's next phase: the Second Genesis." Max Gunther, 1968 "V/e are in the opening stages of a biological rev­ olution v/hich will affect human life more profound­ ly than the great Mechanical Revolution of the nineteenth century or the Technological Revolution through which we are now passing." Gordon Taylor, 1969 "Humanity today is on the threshold of self-trans­ figuration, of attaining new pov/ers over itself and its environment that can alter its nature as fun­ damentally as walking upright or the use of tools." Victor Ferkis, 1970 "There is little doubt that developments in the bio­ logical and medical sciences during the next thirty- three years will raise fundamental questions about the nature of man and society." The Commission on the Year 2000

"Two great trends characterize our times. One is to mechanize humans, the other is to humanize machines. The ultimate will be for the tv/o trends to cross— for the man machine to be identical with the machine man." Richard Landers, 1963 250 Factors for Analysis: Stating the Issue

Will Man Direct His Own E v o l u t i o n ^ The following account is not a comprehensive survey of present-day investigations in biology and medicine. Its intent is rather to give some ad­ vance notice of what may be in store as a conse­ quence of current research, . . . related to man's new abilities to tamper with his body. . . . Tam­ pering after birth is nothing new. In fact, that is what the whole history of medicine and psychia­ try is about. But the latest ways of tampering constitute radical departures from the ways we have known. They involve such procedures as the whole­ sale replacement of failing body parts with trans­ planted or artificial organs . . . ; the control of the body, brain, and behavior through electronics, drugs, and cybernetics; the freezing of "dead" bodies for possible earthly resurrection. . . . Tampering before birth . . . covers not only prenatal medicine— improving the health of the fetus while it is still in the womb. Far more than this, it covers the variety of new methods of con­ ceiving and growing babies— inside or outside the womb, v/ith or without sex. And it deals with the further possibility of modifying future generations through eugenics or through the actual molecular manipulation of the genes. As scientists daily edge-closer to the solution of some of nature's deepest mysteries, no idea seems too wild to contemplate. Would you like education by injection? A larger, more efficient brain? A cure for old age? Parentless babies? Body size and skin color to order? Name it, and somebody is seriously proposing it...... In sober scientific circles today there is hardly a subject more commonly discussed than man's control of his own heredity and evolution. And the discussions seldom leave much doubt that men will acquire this control. It is a matter of when, not if. Scientists tend to agree that some of the most exciting future developments will come out of in­ sights and discoveries yet to be made, with implica­ tions we cannot now foresee or imagine. So we live in an era where not only anything that v/e can imagine

^Albert Rosenfeld, Life, October 1, 1965, pp. 96- 251 seems possible, but where the possibilities range beyond what we can imagine. In such an era it is hard to tell physics from metaphysics, to distin­ guish the mad scientists from the real ones, to judge what is a true possibility and what is sheer rot. But there is no resolving this kind of un­ certainty. Even the scientists cannot give us sure guidance on what is really going to happen.

• i « . . . As man's knowledge takes on new dimen­ sions, hardly any human concept or value v/ill re­ main sacrosanct. Health and disease, youth and age, male and female, good and evil— all these will take on transformed meanings. Life and death will have to be redefined. Family relationships will be quite different. Even individual identity may be hard to ascertain. Nothing can be taken for granted. . . . Of all the variations that might be played upon the theme of human procreation, the ultimate— at least, the "ultimate" we can now project— v/ill be the production of beings whose specifications can be drawn in advance. This could come about, scientists predict, through the manipulation of the genetic material itself, though the estimates of v/hen this might come to pass vary considerably. The basic genetic material, the stuff of which chromosomes are made, is deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA. . . . In the coiled structure of the DNA molecule and the complex arrangement of its atoms lie the final secrets1 of heredity. DNA's genetic messages are written out in a four-letter code, each "letter" being a specific chemical substance. Scientists have begun to be able to read the genet­ ic code— but only in a halting, incipient way, and it may take a long time before they become really fluent readers. But once v/e can read, v/e may then learn to "write"— i.e., to give genetic instructions in the DNA code. When that time comes, man's powers will be truly godlike. He may bring into being creatures never before seen or imagined in the universe. He may even choose to create new forms of humanity— beings that might be better adapted to survive on the surface of Jupiter, or on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. Even without going that far, man presumably will be able to write out any set of specifications he might desire for his ideal human being. This . is what many scientists mean v/hen they talk about 252 man controlling his own evolution. And who can find fault v/ith that? Is there anyone not in favor of emphasizing man's good qualities and eliminating the bad ones? The rub, of course, is that "good" and "bad" are words that are easier to say than to apply. There is at least one area of consensus as to what is good for man— the medical area. Most people would agree that it is good to reduce infant mor­ tality, to make it possible for infertile parents to have children, to eradicate cancer and heart disease. But consensus is not unanimity. Dissident voices are even now insisting that many of our so- called medical advances actually militate against human progress by aggravating the population prob­ lem, thus assuring an overcrowded planet where more people v/ill die of v/ar and starvation. Others warn of the deterioration of the human race because so many people v/ith hereditary defects— people v/ho formerly would have died at an early age— are often now being kept alive, to marry and pass on their defects. A majority undoubtedly would choose— at least for themselves and those they love— the bene­ fits of health and longevity, and worry later about problems like overpopulation and the possible de­ terioration of the race. Beyond getting rid of diseases and defects, there is the prospect that v/e can actually improve human beings— making them more intelligent, more talented, more virtuous— by manipulating genetic material. No one would argue that man couldn't stand some improvement, but having the actual power to do so presents some sticky choices. Who is it that v/e v/ill appoint to play God for us? Which scientist, which statesman, artist, judge, poet, theologian, philosopher, educator— of which nation, race or creed— will you trust to write the specifications, to decide v/hich characteris­ tics are desirable and which not? . . . Writers and artists already devote much artic­ ulate worry to the subject of how alienated they are, and psychiatrists' couches are full of people v/ho say, in effect: Doctor, I don't know who I am. So, even before the new age of biology has set in, modern man has begun to face a crisis of identity. If people today have such troubles, what of a child turned out "in vitro"? What is his status and identity as a human being? Will city hall record his existence? Who is his father, and who 253 is his mother? Can he have any brothers or sisters? What are his citizenship and voting rights? Can the scientist who produced him simply keep him as an experimental animal? . . . We are . . . entering an era where children may be born of geographically separated or even long-dead parents, where virgin births may become relatively common, where women may give birth to other women's children, where romance and genetics may be separated, where some few favored men may father thousands of babies, where a permit may be required in order to have a baby. Can the tradi­ tional family— already a shaky institution— survive in the midst of all this? Do we want it to survive? If so, how will v/e insure its survival? If not, what will v/e substitute for it? If a new being is grown from the cell of a man still living, does it, too, have a soul? If he has none, is he human? Can he be saved? And sup­ pose 100 people are grown from the cells of a dead man. Do they all have souls? Where v/e re they mean­ while? Perhaps in the DNA of the cell nucleus? Could .the present concept of the soul become barren of meaning, and would some other theological concept have to be substituted for it? . . . Even you and I— .in 1965, already here and beyond the reach of prenatal modification— could live to face curious and unfamiliar problems in identity as a result of man's increasing ability to control his own mortality after birth. As organ trans­ plants and artificial body parts become even more available, it is not totally absurd to envision any one of us walking around one day with, say, a plas­ tic cornea, a few metal bones, and Dacron arteries; with donated glands, kidney, and liver from some other person, from an animal, from an organ bank, or even from an assembly line; with an artificial heart, and computerized electronic devices to sub­ stitute for muscular, neural, or metabolic functions that may have gone wrong. It has been suggested— though it will almost certainly not happen in our lifetime— that brains, too, might be replaceable, either by a brain transplanted from someone else, by a new one grown in tissue culture, or an electronic or mechanical one of some sort. . . . Dr. Seymour Kety, an outstanding psychiatric authority now with the National Institutes of Health, points out that fairly radical personality changes already have been \m)ught by existing techniques like brainwashing, electro-shock therapy, and pre- 254 frontal lobotomy, without raising serious questions of identity. But would it be the same if alien parts and substances were substituted for the per­ son's own, resulting in a new biochemistry and a new personality with new tastes, new talents, new political views— perhaps even a different memory of different experiences? Might such a man's wife decide she no longer recognized him as her husband and that he was, in fact, not? Or might he decide that his old home, job, and family situation were not to his liking and feel free to chuck the whole setup that may have been quite congenial to the old person? Mot that acute problems of identity need await the day when wholesale replacement of vital organs is a reality. Very small changes in the brain could result in astounding metamorphoses. Scientists who specialize in the electrical probing of the brain have, in the past few years, been exploring a small segment of the brain's limbic system called the amygdala— and discovering that it is the seat of many of our basic passions and drives, including the drives that lead to uncontrolled sexual ex­ tremes such as satyriasis and nymphomania. . . . Improved brain capacity is one innovation that appears likely. An actual physical enlargement of the brain might be brought about by genetic or pre- • natal manipulation. Even without that, we can do infinitely more with the gray matter we presently possess. A variety of experiments in hypnosis, drug therapy, electric brain'stimulation, and mo­ lecular biology point to the probability that specific memories including all of experience and education are stored at specific sites in the brain, and that they are stored electrochemically. Several years ago Dr. Wilder Penfield, the eminent Canadian brain surgeon, discovered that when a certain spot in a patient's brain was elec­ trically stimulated, it called up, in vivid de­ tail, an incident the patient thought he had al­ together forgotten. The stimulation of the same \ spot brought forth the same memory every time. Similar feats have been performed under hypnosis and under the influence of certain drugs. The long- range promise is that these powers of recall, in­ stead of being sporadic and conditional, could be permanent and constant, and that our own conscious minds could replace the outside experimenter. Think what our intellects might be like if we could really remember everything, and have it all efficiently stored away for instant retrieval. 255 No one really knows what the capacity of the human brain might be, used to its limit. But this limit, whatever it is, may one day be overcome by hooking up the human brain to a computer. V/hen this kind of brain-computer hook-up is imagined, it is usually to envision the computer as remotely controlling and directing the brain or a dozen brains, or a hundred. There is no reason why it could not work the other way around, as Dr. Simon Ramo suggests, v/ith the computer serving as a vast storehouse of readily accessible information for the brain's use. But v/e need not stop here. Some of the same experiments revealed that a man may be made to remember things that never happened to him at all. If memory does indeed consist of electrochemical changes in the structure of certain molecules in the brain cells, there is no theoretical reason why, v/hen it becomes possible to alter these struc­ tures, experiences of any kind cannot be implemented at v/ill. The brain thus influenced would never know the difference. . . . In his recent book Profiles of the Future, Arthur C. Clark expressed his conviction that the famous "mechanical educator" of science fiction is no longer necessarily relegated to fiction. He believes information might be fed into the brain almost as sounds are recorded on a magnetic tape, to be stored there for playback on command. If true information could be recorded and stored this way, why hot false information? And if information is recordable as on a magnetic tape, might it not be erasable as well? Any knowl­ edge no longer useful, any memory of an experience a man would rather forget, could be wiped out as if it had never been there at all. And artificial experiences could be supplied-at will. . . . It is fitting that doctors and scientists, who are most closely involved v/ith the new devel­ opments, are the first to express their concern. But everyone will have to be concerned. It would be hard to exaggerate either the challenges or the opportunities for educators, for business leaders, for legislators and jurists, for artists and writers, for theologians and philosophers— and for you and me, personally. . . . The most tempting solution is to let things ride and pay as little attention as possible to these mind-boggling developments. But a decision to ignore them is simply a decision to turn them 256 over to any unscrupulous opportunist v/ho chooses to employ them for his own ends. To appreciate the consequences, we need only imagine some to­ talitarian nation of the future, led by a man sure he knows what is best for everybody. He has at his command all the new means of controlling re­ production and the human brain and behavior. In addition to being able to raise entire populations in vitro or in tissue culture, he could implant electrodes or begin administering drugs to people at a very early age, maintaining his subjects in a constant state of hard-working subservience and at the same time in a constant state of euphoria by stimulating the pleasure centers of their brains. Practically no one in such a society would have any true choice in any area of life which v/e now consider important. But everybody would be "happy." Who cares about the pursuit of happiness if everybody already has it? If everybody is happy, can anything be wrong? If v/e think so, says Sir Julian Huxley, we must ascertain once again that we know what an­ swers v/e v/ould give to some basic questions: What are people for? What human values are v/e eager to hang onto? Without ansv/ers to such questions we remain helpless to use scientific advance as it should be used— as a tool to serve human values in a society that can still be called democratic. The overriding political predicament, then, is this: how to plan and organize— intelligently, efficiently, flexibly— and at the same time safe­ guard the individual from intolerably restrictive state controls. Can there be real planning with­ out real control? Some breakthroughs in political science, and in the other behavioral sciences, may be necessary to handle the problems created by breakthroughs in physics and biology. Obviously the professional political types, though they will ultimately be responsible for making the laws and administering them, cannot do it all themselves. They v/ill need all the help they can get. Artists and writers, for instance, can make a major contribution. There will be much more for them in the new age than n e w themes and new plots for plays, poems, novels, and paintings. With a vast, opened-up universe of new possibilities and relationships to explore and portray, v/ith unpar­ alleled human powers and dimensions, they can help create an already badly needed new image of man.

• • • 257 Many biologists are hopeful that the reve­ lations of biology itself v/ill give us new and profound insights into the true nature of man, allowing us to draw up laws and ethical systems that are consistent v/ith that nature. The New Man science helps create may also be much bet­ ter equipped to deal v/ith problems that now look insoluble, and the new powers v/e get may give us answers v/e cannot now predict— or may even render some of the problems obsolete. So, even at a time when the daily newspapers are full of wars and riots and murders, and we despair that "human nature" can never be different, let us not give up hope yet. "Can the Ethiopian change his skin," asked Jeremiah, "or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also do good, that are ac­ customed to do evil." If it suddenly turns out that the Ethiopian and the leopard and you and I can change anything it pleases us to change, then it follows— does it not?— that even we may also do good. It may be comforting to know that the states­ men and the theologians and the philosophers and the scientists are worrying about all these things, but v/e cannot let them do all the worry­ ing for us, or make all the decisions for us. The time ahead is wild and uncharted. No one has been there, so there are no experts. Each of us, whose body and brain may be modified or whose descendants' characteristics may be pre­ determined, has a vast personal stake in the out­ come. V/e can guarantee that good v/ill be done only by looking to it ourselves.

Questions; a. If man can create life through his ex­ periments in DNA and postpone death through cyrogenics techniques, has he not rivalled the powers of his Creator? Assuming you believe in a Divine Being what powers do you attribute to Him that are not now or soon v/ill be at the disposal of man? V/hat makes man different in power from a God? Is there a difference? V/hat then is man? 258 b. Should we intervene to improve human be­ ings, i.e., make them more intelligent, more talented, more virtuous? Should we remove from man through controlling his experiences and/or the use of drugs his aggressive tendencies, his cruelty, his hostility? Before you answer this ques­ tion, why don't you study in some detail the society of ancient Athens under Pericles and the modern society of Nazi Germany under Hitler. You might also want to investigate the brutality of the Spanish Civil War (or Vietnam) and juxtapose this against the beauty of the Renaissance. Which society do you prefer— Athens under Pericles or Germany under Hitler? The brutality of the Spanish Civil War or the beauty of the Renaissance? Man has a choice. Can we afford to leave the future or future history to chance, fate, acci­ dent, human caprice? c. During the 1950's the Russians launched Sputnik. Thereafter, many Americans argued that our national defense demanded that v/e beat the Russians to the moon. Nov/ as v/e enter the 1970's, v/hat if the Russians, the Chinese, or some other al­ leged "enemy" decides to create a super­ race of talented, brilliant people ca­ pable of executing any conceivable tasks a society might demand. Is America not compelled to do the same in the name of national interest or defense? d. In the article Rosenfeld argues that human engineering and human control of evolu­ tion v/ill be done and that it is only a question of giving science time to perfect its techniques. In other words the past laissez-faire attitude toward human evolu­ tion is no longer possible. If you see merit in this argument— and it is worthy of merit, then tampering v/ith life proc­ esses demands value clarification on life goals, ends, and purposes. Write an essay on what you see as the good man, the good life, and the good society. Remember we can make man any thing v/e want him'to be. We can create the type of society we v/ant. The sky is the limit. 259 e. Assuming you did the previous exercise, you might now give serious consideration to this question: How can v/e plan man’s future evolution and at the same time safeguard the individual from restrictive state control? Can there he long-range planning without control? What kinds of things are you prepared to give up in order to bring your type of society into existence? How do we go about develop­ ing a public consensus on the type of future society we want? Who will make these decisions? As Rosenfeld put it, "V/ho will play God for us? V/hat group of scientists, statesmen, artists, judges, poets, theologians, philosophers, educa­ tors— which nation, race or creed— " are you willing to trust to write the speci­ fications for the future society? V/hat are the alternatives to not doing this? f. If we can perform wholesale replacements of vital organs— especially of the heart and brain— and if we can flush from a person his total life experiences and substitute new ones, v/hat is unique about man? g. Assuming all of these inventions and ex­ periments are realized within the next several decades, what implications do these things have for family life, edu­ cation, political life, religion, and traditional value structures? Write a short essay describing not only the sci­ entific breakthrough, but the consequences it might have for one of the above. For example, what impact will virgin birth have for marriage? For religion? If permits are necessary in order to have a child, v/hat are the implications of this for marriage, religion, freedom, etc.? h. In unit two we looked at several ways of viewing truth and the implications it might have for the kinds of values you as an individual hold. Review Sorokin's "Systems of Truth" and then think through some of the questions raised in this unit. 260 What implications do all these things have for a methodology you v/ill need to analyze your values in the future? Does your an­ swer differ from the one you chose in unit two?

Since many of the previous questions are difficult to answer and should not be answered lightly, perhaps you should do some additional reading especially if you ended up v/ith more questions than answers. Suppose you read

Aldous Huxley's Brave New World and B. F. Skinner's Walden II. Skinner has just recently published a new book entitled Beyond Freedom and Dignity which, if you can se­ cure a copy, you ought to also read. Just in case you can­ not find a copy of his book in your library, its major points are summarized below. Skinner argues that a "technology of behavior" is not only possible, but that government ought to apply sci­ entific knowledge to move society toward a utopian state; otherwise, survival for the human species is impossible. The old behavior that society has reinforced for centu­ ries will destroy us if it is continued. Skinner arrives at these conclusions by starting v/ith the premise that human genetic endowment and social environment determine the whole of human behavior. Man is not really free to make choices; on the contrary man is controlled by the two previous factors and by propaganda, 261 an unquestioned socialization process, societal norms, an educational system, indoctrination, and a host of other factors. From the time of birth, states this author, all of man’s behavior is shaped deterministically by the re­ inforcements— either negative or positive— he receives from his environment. Man is not an autonomous being and his so-called acts of choice are only illusions. The idea that man is free is simply a myth which has prevented us from seeing how continually and subtly we are shaped by our environment and social settings.

Today, Skinner continues, we stand between an old society and ethical values that developed by accident and a new culture which we can design— which we must design if the species is to survive. Designing for survival'demands planning or what Skinner calls "operant conditioning." It is the "'illusion of freedom’— an illusion shared by many in Western culture that stands in the way of creating a world in which people live together without quarreling . . . enjoy themselves and contribute to the enjoyment of others. . . . Yet all this is possible."

In a recent interview Skinner summarized his posi­ tion in the following manner:

They (the young) know they are being manipulated now. They know that the trick is not to free one­ self from control, but to improve control. That is the whole issue. The literature of freedom has supposed that man could be free from control. The struggle for freedom has freed man from certain 262 kinds of control, the kinds you resist— religious, governmental, economic, despotism— but it has not freed him from the kinds he cannot resist. It is a mistake to suppose that the whole issue is how to free man. The issue is how to improve the way in which he is controlled.^®

Questions:

a. Drawing upon the reading you have used in these units— The Making of a Counter- Culture , The Greening of America, Brave hew World, Walden II, and the other ar­ ticles, v/ould. you agree v/ith Skinner? If you do agree advance specific argu­ ments for your position and be sure to take note of the consequences that may flow from your decision. If you dis­ agree v/ith Skinner's proposal, then ad­ vance specific arguments for this posi­ tion and likewise take note of the con­ sequences of that position.

b. Refer back to the question that Rosenfeld raised: "V/ho v/ill play God for us? What group of scientists, statesmen, artists, judges, poets, theologians, philosophers, educators" are you willing to allow to carry out this "technology of behavior?" Did Skinner's arguments in any way cause you to modify your position? Is "freedom" of greater value to you than survival?

Concluding Questions: a. Throughout these units that you have studied certain major questions v/e re raised: Why study the future? What

~^The Center Magazine, Vol. 5, No. 2 (March-April, 1972), p. W. 263 kinds of values will serve us in the future? To what ends are we to use our knowledge? What are human beings for? Running throughout these units v/e re also other questions which asked you to for­ mulate some answers to what is the good man, the good life, and the good so­ ciety? You are now asked to write a paper in v/hich you will pull all of these things together. In your essay you should (l) design the future society you would like to see come about; (2) specify the values you think that society should cherish; (3) specify v/hat kinds of things you are prepared to do in order to bring this society into existence; (4) specify what kinds of things you are prepared to give up in order to bring it into exist­ ence; (5) outline the decision-making groups in your society; (6) define it, i.e., democracy, utopia, benevolent fas­ cism, etc. Perhaps you might want to construct several "alternative worlds." b. Having written this essay examine it carefully and analyze the implicit or explicit values you stated and rank these hierarchially. (l) Survival; (2) Free­ dom; (3) Happiness; etc., or some other combination. c. Now look over the answers you gave in the earlier units. What changes in your values, if any, came about as you studied these units? What was responsible for this value change? APPENDIX TABLE I ONE HUNDRED TECHNICAL INNOVATIONS VERY LIKELY IN THE LAST THIRD OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY*

1. Multiple applications of lasers and masers for sensing, measuring, communication, cutting, heating, welding, power transmission, illumination, destructive (de­ fensive), and other purposes. 2. Extreme high-strength and/or high-temperature struc­ tural materials.

3. New or improved superperformance fabrics (papers, fibers, and plastics).

4. New or improved materials for equipment and appliances (plastics, glasses, alloys, ceramics, intermetallics, and cermets).

5. New airborne vehicles (ground-effect machines, VTOL and STOL, superhelicopters, giant and/or supersonic jets). 6. Extensive commercial application of shaped-charge e^qjlosives. 7. More reliable and longer-range weather forecasting. 8. Intensive and/or extensive expansion of tropical agri­ culture and forestry.

9. New sources of power for fixed installations (e.g., magnetohydrodynamic, thermionic and thermoelectric, and radioactivity).

10. New sources of -power for ground transportation (storage battery, fuel cell, propulsion or support

*Herman Kahn and Anthony J. Wiener, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years '(New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), pp. 51-57.

265 266 by electro-magnetic fields, jet engine, turbine, and the like).

11. Extensive and intensive worldwide use of high alti­ tude cameras for mapping, prospecting, census, land use, and geological investigations. 12. New methods of water transportation (such as large submarines, flexible and special purpose "container ships," or more extensive use of large automated single-purpose bulk cargo ships).

13. Major reduction in hereditary and congenital defects. 14. Extensive use of cyborg techniques (mechanical aids or substitutes for human organs, senses, limbs, or other components).

15. New techniques for preserving or improving the environ­ ment . 16. Relatively effective appetite and weight control.

17. New techniques and institutions for adult education. 18. New and useful plant and animal species.

19. Human "hibernation" for short periods (hours or days) for medical purposes. 2 0. Inexpensive design and procurement of "one of a kind" items through use of computerized analysis and auto­ mated production. 21. Controlled and/or supereffective relaxation and sleep. 22. More sophisticated architectural engineering (e.g., geodesic-domes, "fancy" stressed shells, pressurized skins, and esoteric materials).

23. New or improved uses of the oceans (mining, extrac­ tion of minerals, controlled "farming," source of energy, and the like).

24. Three-dimensional photography, illustrations, movies, and television.

25. Automated or more mechanized housekeeping and home maintenance. 26. Widespread use of nuclear reactors for power. 267 27- Use of nuclear explosives for excavation and mining, generation of power, creation of high temperature— high pressure environments, and/or as a source of neutrons or other radiation.

28. General use of automation and cybernation in manage­ ment and production.

29. Extensive and intensive centralization (or automatic interconnection) of current and past personal and business information in high-speed data processors. 30. Other new and possibly pervasive techniques for sur­ veillance, monitoring, and control of individuals and organizations. 31. Some control of weather and/or climate. 32. Other (permanent or temporary) changes— or experi­ ments— with the overall environment (e.g., the "per­ manent" increase in C-14 and temporary creation of other radioactivity by nuclear explosion, the in­ creasing generation of C0? in the atmosphere, projects Starfire, West Ford, and Storm Fury).

33. New and more reliable "educational" and propaganda techniques for affecting human behavior— public and' private.

34. Practical use of direct electronic communication with and stimulation of the brain.

35. Human hibernation for relatively extensive periods (months to years). 36. Cheap and widely available central war weapons and weapon systems. 37. New and relatively effective counterinsurgency tech­ niques (and perhaps also insurgency techniques).

38. New techniques for very cheap, convenient, and re­ liable birth control. 39. New, more varied, and more reliable drugs for control of fatigue, relaxation, alertness, mood, personality, perception, fantasies, and other psychobiological states. 40. Capability to choose the sex of unborn children. 268 41. Improved capacity to "change" sex of children and/or adults.

42. Other genetic control and/or influence over the "basic constitution" of an individual.

43. New techniques and institutions for the education of Children.

44. General and substantial increase in life expectancy, postponement of aging, and limited rejuvenation.

45. Generally acceptable and competitive synthetic foods and beverages (e.g., carbohydrates, fats, proteins, enzymes, vitamins, coffee, tea, cocoa, and alcoholic liquor).

46. "High quality" medical care for undeveloped areas (e.g., use of medical aides and technicians, referral hospitals, broad spectrum antibiotics, and artificial blood plasma).

47. Design and extensive use of responsive and super­ controlled environments for private and public use ' ” leasurable, educational, and vocational pur-

48. Physically nonharmful methods of overindulging.

49. Simple techniques for extensive and "permanent" cos- metological changes (features, "figures," perhaps complexion and even skin color, and even physique).

50. More extensive use of transplantation of human organs.

51. Permanent manned satellite and lunar installations— interplanetary travel.

52. Application of space life systems or similar tech­ niques to terrestrial installations.

53. Permanent inhabited undersea installations and per­ haps even colonies.

54. Automated grocery and department stores.

55. Extensive use of robots and machines "slaved" to humans.

56. New uses of underground "tunnels" for private and public transportation and other purposes. 269 57. Automated universal (real time) credit, audit and banking systems. 58. Chemical methods tor improving memory and learning. 59. Greater use of underground buildings. 60. New and improved materials and equipment for buildings and interiors (e.g., variable transmission glass, heating and cooling by thermoelectric effect, and electroluminescent and phosphorescent lighting). 61. Widespread use of cyrogenics. 62. Improved chemical control of some mental illnesses and some aspects of senility.

63. Mechanical and chemical methods for improving human analytical ability more or less directly.

64. Inexpensive and rapid techniques for making tunnels and underground cavities in earth and/or rock.

65. Major improvements in earth moving and construction equipment generally.

66. New techniques for keeping physically fit and/or acquiring physical skills. 67. Commercial extraction of oil from shale. i 68. Recoverable boosters for economic space launching.

69. Individual flying platforms. 70. Simple inexpensive home video recording and playing.

71. Inexpensive high-capacity, worldwide, regional, and local (home and business) communication (perhaps using satellites, lasers, and light pipes). 72. Practical home and business use of "wired" video com­ munication for both telephone and TV (possibly includ­ ing retrieval of taped material from libraries or other sources) and rapid transmission and reception of facsimiles (possibly including news, library mate­ rial, commercial announcements, instantaneous mail delivery, other printouts, and so on).

73* Practical large-scale desalinization. 270 74. Pervasive business use of computers for the storage, processing, and retrieval of information. 75. Shared time (public and interconnected?) computers generally available to home and business on a metered basis. 76. Other widespread use of computers for intellectual and professional assistance (translation, teaching, lit­ erature search, medical diagnosis, traffic control, crime detection, computation, design, analysis and to some degree as intellectual collaborator generally). 77. General availability of inexpensive transuranic and other esoteric elements. 78. Space defense systems. 79. Inexpensive and reasonably effective ground-based BMD. 80. Very low-cost buildings for home and business use.

81. Personal "pagers" (perhaps even two-way pocket phones) and other personal electronic equipment for communica­ tion, computing, and data processing program.

82. Direct broadcasts from satellites to home receivers.

83. Inexpensive (less than $20), long lasting, very small battery operated TV receivers. 84. Home computers to "run" household and communicate with outside world.

85. Maintenance-free, longlife electronic and other equip­ ment. 86. Home education via video and computerized and pro­ grammed learning. 87. Stimulated and planned and perhaps programmed dreams. 88. Ineixpensive (less than one cent a page), rapid high- quality black and white reproduction; followed by color and high-detailed photography reproduction— perhaps for home as well as office use.

89. Widespread use of improved fluid amplifiers.

90. Conference TV (both closed circuit and public com­ munication system). 271 91. Flexible penology without necessarily using prisons (by use of modern methods of surveillance, monitor­ ing, and control).

92. Common use of (longlived?) individual power source for lights, appliances, and machines.

93. Inexpensive worldwide transportation of humans and cargo.

94. Inexpensive road-free (and facility-free) transporta­ tion.

95. New methods for rapid language teaching. 96. Extensive genetic control for plants and animals.

97. New biological and chemical methods to identify, trace, incapacitate, or annoy people for police and military uses. 98. New and possibly very simple methods for lethal bio­ logical and chemical warfare.

99. Artificial moons and other methods for lighting large areas at night. 1 0 0 . Extensive use of "biological processes" in the extrac­ tion and processing of minerals. 272

TABLE II

SOME LESS LIKELY BUT IMPORTANT POSSIBILITIES

1. "True" artificial intelligence. 2. Practical use of sustained fusion to produce neutrons and/or energy.

3. Artificial growth of new limbs and organs (either in situ or for later transplantation).

4. Room temperature superconductors. 5. Major use of rockets for commercial or private trans­ portation (either terrestrial or extraterrestrial). 6. Effective chemical or biological treatment for most mental illnesses. 7. Almost complete control of marginal changes in heredity. 8. Suspended animation (for years or centuries). 9. Practical materials with nearly "theoretical limit" strength. 10. Conversion of mammals (humans?) to fluid breathers.

11. Direct input into human memory banks.

12. Direct augmentation of human mental capacity by the mechanical or electrical interconnection of the brain with a computer. 13. Major rejuvenation and/or significant extension of vigor and life span— say 100 to 150 years. 14. Chemical or biological control of character or intel­ ligence .

15. Automated highways. 273 16. Extensive use of moving sidewalks for local trans­ portation.

17. Substantial manned lunar or planetary installations. 18. Electric power available for less than .3 mill per kilowatt hour.

19. Verification of some extrasensory phenomena. 2 0 . Planetary engineering. 2 1 . Modification of the solar system. 22. Practical laboratory conception and nurturing of animal (human?) foetuses.

23. Production of a drug equivalent to Huxley’s soma. 24. A technological equivalent of telepathy.

25. Some direct control of individual thought processes. 274

TABLE III

TEN FAR-OUT POSSIBILITIES

1. Life expectancy extended to substantially more than 150 years (immortality?).

2. Almost complete genetic control (but still homo sapiens). 3. Major modification of human species (no longer homo sapiens). 4. Antigravity (or practical use of gravity waves). 5. Interstellar travel. 6. Electric power available for less than .03 mill per kw hour.

7. Practical and routine use of extrasensory phenomena.

8. Laboratory creation of artificial live plants and animals. 9. Lifetime immunization against practically all dis­ eases. 10. Substantial lunar or planetary bases or colonies. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR TEACHERS ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR TEACHERS

Bell, Daniel. "Notes on the Post-Industrial Society," The Public Interest, Nos. 6 and 7 (Winter and Spring 1967), pp." 24-35 and 102-118. These essays by Bell have served as landmark treatises for much of the ferment surrounding the need for future social planning. They provide an excellent introduction to the transitions occurring in our society— the transition from an industrial to a post-industrial society, from a production economy to a service economy, and from a business-oriented society to an education-oriented society.

Boulding, Kenneth. "Dare We Take the Social Sciences Seriously?". American Behavioral Scientist. No. 10 (July, 1 9 6 7 ), pp. 12-16” For anyone in search of a method of teaching BouldingTs essay is pertinent. The author maintains that science in whatever society it has existed is corrosive of values which are based on simple episte- mological processes. The ethic of science and the ethic of many subcultures therefore conflict. Ac­ cordingly, there is a need for value analysis and resolution.

Clark, Arthur. Profiles of the Future. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. A very well-written and thought provoking book which not only describes possible future worlds, but also a book designed to convince the doubting Thomases about the predictions which have been made about the future. Dunstan, Maryjane, and Garland, Patricia W. World in the Making: Probes for Students of the Future. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970. As its title implies, the above book, while not designed for social studies, does contain many pro­ vocative and interesting readings and curriculum mate­ rial for the teacher wishing to pursue futurology.

Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. New York: Alfred Knopf, Inc., 1 9 6 7 .

276 277

A frightening and pessimistic view of the future implications of technology written by a French soci­ ologist. In treating both an historical account of technology and a contemporary one; Ellul argues that the technology we have unleashed is autonomous, out of control, and will ultimately end in destroying man and devouring society. He sees this as inevitable and irreversible.

Gabor, Dennis, Inventing the Future. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1966. In this book Gabor argues that we now have such vast powers at our disposal that we can literally legislate or invent any kind of future we desire. Noting that this is new to the historical experience, the author asserts that the major obstacle to invent­ ing the future is recognition of this fact and an understanding of the issues involved. Gabor, like others, suggests some of the future alternative worlds possible.

Heilbroner, Robert. "Do Machines Make History?" Tech­ nology and Culture, No. 8 (July, 1967), pp. 335-37+5. Heilbroner in this essay argues that while tech­ nology will have a significant effect on social struc­ ture and values because it determines the composition of the labor force and the organization of work, tech­ nological forces are subject to direction by human beings. In the past, maintains this author, technology has been a major determinant of social conditions, but the future will see man assume more control over his technology.

______. The Limits of American Capitalism. New York: Harper and Row, ±96E~. The author's major thesis is that technological change -will eventually destroy capitalism although the latter will probably exist to the end of this century. Galbraith, John Kenneth. The New Industrial State. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1967. The imperatives of technology, argues Galbraith, have replaced the classical market of supply and demand and given birth to a technostructure which engages in market planning, price-fixing, and organi­ zation of economic life. The book likewise examines the relationship between government and the economy and analyzes the modern corporation. An excellent account of the impact of technology on economic be­ havior. 278 Helmer, Olaf. Social Technology. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966. A discussion of the methodology used in forecasts about the future and a detailed listing of the range of possible innovations and discoveries for the year 2000 as seen by the Rand Corporation. Kahn, Herman, and Wiener, Anthony J. The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967. A must book for any teacher of futurology. It includes a detailed study of the probable worlds in the year 2000 and the social implications of each. Excellent chapters on the methodology employed in futurology and a good bibliography of the literature. The book covers both domestic and international aspects of the next century. McHale, John. The Future of the Future. New York: Braziller, 1969". The above essay is an excellent text for the beginning student of futurology. It presents the scope and compirehension not always found in other books on futurology. Emphasis is placed upon the phenomenon of the growth of a common v/orld culture as a result of the impact of contemporary techno­ logical developments. The absolute imperative at this stage in civilization, states the author, is the need to develop a global perspective in place of the provincialism of tribalism of the nation- state . Mesthene, Emmanuel G., ed. Technology and Social Change. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1 9 6 7 . This is a series of reprints examining the im­ pact of technology on modern society. It contains essays by the editor, Harvey Brooks, Herbert Simon, Marshall McLuhan, Jacques Ellul and a host of others.

Michael, Donald. The Silent Conquest. Santa Barbara, Calif.: The Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1962. One of the original studies calling our atten­ tion to the cybernetic revolution and its projected impact on man, work, values, institutions, and so­ ciety. An excellent and comprehensive examination of the topic. The New Revolution: The Dawning of the Technetronic Era. John P. Rasmussen, ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1972. 279 This book, a collection of outstanding essays on the technological society, could profitably be used in history classes as an organizational framework for the curriculum. The central thesis of these essays is that much of the turbulence and uproar we see in America today results from rapid, massive social change which has been produced by advanced technology. The interaction of this massive change and accelerating technology has produced a revolu­ tionary era.

The New Technology and Human Values. John Burke, ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1966. A collection of essays which are designed to raise questions of value in the area of politics and economics. It contains essays by many of the lead­ ing writers on the technological society and on futurology. Ozbeklam, Hasan. The Triumph of Technology: "Can" Implies lf Ought." Santa Barbara, Calif.: The Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1967. This critical essay strikes out at a technological complex that is hostile to all qualities of values except those that further its own expansion. Tech­ nology, as it is presently used in our society, main­ tains the author, is of this nature. Shubik, Martin. "Information, Rationality and Free Choice in a Future Democratic Society," Daedalus, No. 96 (Summer, 1967), pp. 771-778. The author maintains that technology is calling into question the very essence of democracy— rational man, free choice, and public participation. In a highly complex and information-rich society the lim­ itations of the individual to make intelligent choices becomes less and less. Accordingly, argues the au­ thor, we need a new theory of "democracy" to replace that which is disappearing. Skinner, B. F. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1972. Probably one of the most current and controversial books written in this past year, but a persuasive argument for implementing a technology of behavior. Skinner, a Harvard psychologist, argues that con­ trolled behavior is necessary for the survival of the species. Since we now have the knowledge and tech­ niques for this technology of behavior it should be used. The major obstacle of the implementation of 280 controlled behavior stems from our notion of "free­ dom." The latter Skinner argues is an illusion since man is not and has never been free.

Social Education. Vol. 36, No. 3 (March, 1972). Entire issue. The journal for the above month is devoted to time and the future and contains guest articles by- men who are engaged in studying the future. The articles suggest ways and things teachers can do to bring about future consciousness.

Taviss, Irene. The Computer Impact. Englewood Cliffs, N. J . : Prentice-Hall, 1970. This reader examines the implications of com­ puters on the economy, the political structure, and the culture. Selections stress the impact of the computer on man and institutions also, particularly management, industry, white collar workers, and the privacy of the individual.

Technology, Industry and Man: The Age of Acceleration. Charles R. Walker, ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968. An excellent series of essays covering a wide range of topics pertinent to the technological so­ ciety.

"Toward the Year 2000: Work in Progress." Daedalus, No. 96 (Summer, 1967). The entire issue is devoted to the work of the Commission on the Year 2000 of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Daniel Bell, the Chairman of the Commission, provides an introduction and selected excerpts from the working sessions of the Commission. It includes some twenty-two stimulating essays and discussions covering every aspect of futurology.

A complete bibliography on futurology can be attained by writing Billy Rojas, Program for the Study of the Future in Education, School of Education, The University of Massachusetts. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR STUDENTS ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR STUDENTS

Boulding, Kenneth E. The Meaning of the Twentieth Century: The Great Transition. New York: Harper and Row," 1964.' Boulding argues that the first great transition in human history was the transition from precivilized to civilized society which began some ten thousand years ago. The second great transition which is now occur­ ring is the passage from the civilized to the post­ civilized society. Throughout this short, but inter­ esting book, the author traces the role of science and technology in history and the problems we face today in handling these forces. Accepting a cautious and critical acceptance of this transition, the author of­ fers strategies for handling it. Fromm, Erich. The Revolution of Hope; Toward a Humanized Technology. New York: Bantam Books, 19^8^ A well-written, humane account of the pitfalls and benefits of technology. Fromm is critical of the use to which we have put our technology to date and feels that unless man is educated about the implica­ tions of technology we will have a society in which humane values have been dethroned and replaced with values of gro\h:h and efficiency.

Gardner, John. Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Inno­ vative Society. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. This small book presents a view from the twenty- first century and discusses from this vantage point how it was that twentieth century man brought about the destruction of his civilization. The author stresses that societies, like individuals, need to orient themselves to the future in order to renew themselves. Harrington, Michael. The Accidental Century. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1965. The author examines the cultural and intellectual crisis confronting the United States and the rest of the Western world in the twentieth century. He sees this crisis as being brought about by the "accidental revolution" in which unplanned technology has hap­ hazardly reshaped our lives. While recognizing that

282 283 technology must continue, he argues that it must cease to be accidental and become instead conscious and planned. Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. New York: Harper and Row, 1932. With a new forward, 1946. One of the most ruthless and complete descriptions of a society which implements genetic, political and social engineering. A good balance to Skinner's Walden Tv/o.

______. Brave New World Revisited. New York: Harper and "Row, 1958. Written against the background of Nazi and Commu­ nist totalitarianism, Huxley strongly argues that the human perversions he set forth in his earlier book (see above) are no longer centuries away. Mead, Margaret. Culture and Commitment: A Study of the Generation Gap. New York: Doubleday and Co., 1970. Mead attempts to trace the gap in values between generations from an historical and anthropological perspective. She argues that the technological so­ ciety and the society of the future will be as dif­ ferent from today as the Stone Age to our own century. In fact, says Mead, the young today are like a nation of immigrants born into a new world that is so vastly different from anything their parents have experienced that they can no longer learn from their elders.

Mesthene, Emmanuel. Technological Change. Its Impact on Man and Society. New York: Signet Classics, 1970. A short, well-written book which provides the various arguments for and against technology, the impact of technology on politics, economics, and val- . ues. It raises many value dilemmas for the future worthy of consideration. Munford, Lewis. The Myth of the Machine. The Pentagon of Power. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, 1970. This is an historical treatment of the interaction between man and technology. Although the author ar­ gues that throughout history man, not his machine, has been dominant, he finds our contemporary use of tech­ nical tools over-taking man. Reich, Charles. The Greening of America. New York: Bantam Books, 1971. A bestseller which deals with the various aspects of the technological society. Like Roszak, Reich sees 284 technology producing a new generation, new values, and new life styles. His chapter on the "Corporate State" is an excellent essay on the organizational complexes that have been forged by technology. How­ ever, one would find a more scholarly account in Galbraith's book, The New Industrial State.

Roszak, Theodore. The Making of a Counter Culture. New York: Doubleday and Co., 1968. This historian argues that because of the scien­ tific ethos of our present environment we are bring­ ing forth a generation of young people who are opting out of the empirical, scientific world view. This movement of the young Roszak calls a "counter culture" and argues that it presents a radical disjuncture from the past three hundred years of history. An interest­ ing counter argument can be found in John H. Schaar and Sheldon S. Wolin, "Where Are We Now?", New York Review of Books, May 7, 1970, and Bruno Bettleheim, "Obsolete Youth," Encounter, September, 1969. Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr., "The Velocity of History," News­ week. July 6, 1970, pp. 32-34. Increasingly observers of American society are concluding that the ills v/hich beset our society are neither random nor unconnected. From student rebel­ lions to pollution and from urban blight to popula- ' tion explosion, these problems are all related to the unprecedented acceleration of change. It is this velocity of history and its .effect on our society that Schlesinger discusses in the above article. Skinner, B. F. Walden II. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1962. A fictional account of a technocratic behaviorist utopia in which this well-known psychologist puts forth his controversial ideas. Taylor, Gordon R. The Biological Time Bomb. New York: New American Library, 1969. An exciting book v/hich notes not only the medical and biological breakthroughs in store for the future, but notes also the social, religious, and philosophi­ cal implications of these discoveries. Taylor argues that the biological revolution v/ill be more far-reach­ ing than the Industrial Revolution on man's way of life. Toffler, Alan, ed. The Futurist. New York: Randam House, 1972. 285 A series of excellent essays written by men who are deeply engaged in the study of futurology. In­ cludes essays by scientists, philosophers, and social critics. . Future Shock. New York: Bantam Books, 1970. ■A bestseller which argues that the rapidity of change, its scope and dimensions, threaten the psychic stability of man unless society begins to prepare for the value dilemmas of the future. This is a very interesting chapter on education and the future that social studies teachers may also find interesting. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS

Alexander, Albert, Edward C. Prehen, Arnold W. Sametz. The Modern Economy in Action. New York: Pittman Publishing Co., 1968.

Allen, Jack, and John L. Betts. History: USA. New York: The American Book Co., 1967.

Augspurger, Everett, Shafer, Boyd C., McLemore. United States History. Atlanta: Laidlaw Brothers, 1969.

Bacon, Francis. "Sacred Meditations," Selected Essays of Francis Bacon, ed. Richard F. Jones. New York: Odyssey Press, 1937. Becker, James. "Organizing the Social Studies Program," Social Studies Curriculum Development: Prospects and Problems, ed. Dorothy M. Fraser. Thirty-Ninth Year­ book o±" the National Council for Social Studies. Washington: The National Council for Social Studies, 1970. Boulding, Kenneth. The Meaning of the Twentieth Century: _The 57_ Great Transformation.------New York: Harper and Row,

Bragdon, Henry W., and Samuel P. McCutchen. History of a Free People. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967. Brown, James E., and Harold A. Wolf. Economics: Principles and Practices. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Publish­ ing Co.,1968. Callahan, Raymond. Education and the Cult of Efficiency. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1962. Chamberlain, Neil W. "Unions and the Managerial Process," Technology, Industry, and Man, ed. Charles R. Walker._ New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968.

287 288 Chase, Edward T. "Politics and Technology," The Mew Tech­ nology and Human Values, ed. John Burke, Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., 1966. Cohn-Bendit, Daniel. Obsolete Communism. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969.

Commager, Henry Steele. The Nature and Study of History, eds. Raymond H. Muessig and Vincent R. Rogers. Social Science Seminar Series. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1965.

Conkin, Paul. The New Deal. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1967.

Cox, Harvey. The Secular City. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1965. Current, Richard, Alexander DeConde, and Harris Dante. United States History. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1967. Daugherty, Marion R., and Carl H. Madden. The Economic Process. New York: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1969. ’ Davies, Kenneth J., and Glen F. Ovard. Economics and the American System. New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1970.

Dewey, John. "Science as Subject Matter and a Method," John Dewey on Education, ed. Reginald D. Archambault. New York: The Modem Library, 1964.

______. "Theory of Valuation," International Encyclo­ pedia of Unified Science, II, No. 4~ Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939.

Dickens, Charles. A Tale of Two Cities. New Yor^c: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1942.

Diebold, John. "The Nature of Automation," The New Tech­ nology and Human Values, ed. John Burke.” Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., 1966.

Dimond, Stanley and Pflieger. Our American Government. New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1969. Dollard, John. Frustration and Aggression. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1939. Drucker, Peter. The Age of Discontinuity. New York: Harper & Row, Inc., 1969. Dye, Thomas R., and Harmon Zeigler. The Irony of Democ­ racy: .An Uncommon Introduction to" American Politics. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co"., Inc., 1970.

Ebenstein, William, and Edward W. Mill. American Govern­ ment in the Twentieth Century. Morristown, N . J .: Silver Burdett Co., 1971.

Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. New York: Alfred Knopf,“inc., 19677^ Eramus, Desiderius. "Adagis," The Adages of Eramus. Margaret Mann, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964. Feder, Bernard. Viewpoints in American History. New York American Book Co., 1968"! Felder, Dell. The Challenge of American Democracy. Bos­ ton: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1970. Ferkis, Victor C. Technological Man: The Myth and the Reality. New York: New American Library, 1969” Fraser, Dorothy M. "The Changing Scene in Social Studies, Social Studies Curriculum Development: Prospects and Problems. Thirty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Council for Social Studies. Washington: The National Council for the Social Studies, 1970.

Fromm, Erich. The Revolution of Hope: Toward A Humanized Technology. New York: Bantam Books, 1968.

Frost, James A., Ralph A. Brown, David M. Ellis, and William B. Fink. A History of the United States. Chicago: Follett Educational Corporation, 1968.

Fuller, Buckminister, and John McHale. World Design Science Decade, 1965-1975. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 1963. Gabor, Dennis. Inventing the Future. New York: Alfred Knopf, 1966. Galbraith, John Kenneth. The New Industrial State. The New American Library, Inc., 1968. Gilbert, Felix. The Norton History of Modern Europe. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1971.

Gordon, Sanford D . , and Jess Witchell. An Introduction to the American Economy: Analysis and Policy.' New York: D. C. Heath and Co., 19b7.

Gould, Julius, and William L. Kolb, eds. A Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Glencoe, Illinois’: The B'ree Press, 1 9 6 4 .

Graft, Henry. The Free and the Brave. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 196?.

Gross, Richard E. Civics in Action. San Francisco, Calif.: Field Education Publications, Inc., 1971. Helmer, Olaf. Social Technology. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966.

Huxley, Aldous. "Over-Organization," The New Technology and Human Values, ed. John Burke. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1966.

Illich, Ivan. Deschooling Society. New York: Harper and Row, 1971. James, William. "What Pragmatism Means," American Thought Civil War to World War I, ed. Perry Miller. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

Johnson, Samuel. "A Dictionary of the English Language," Major British Writers, ed. G. B. Harrison. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.*, 1954. Kahn, Herman, and Anthony J. Wiener. The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-Three Years. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1967. Kariel, Henry. The Decline of American Pluralism. Stan­ ford, Calif.: The University Press, 1967. Keynes, John Maynard. Essays in Persuasion. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1932.

Kolko, Gabriel. The Triumph of Conservatism: A Re-inter­ pretation of American History. 1900-19161 New York: The Free Press, 1 9 6 3 . Kronenberger, Louis. "The Spirit of the Age," Company Manners. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1954. 291 Landholm, Richard W,, and Paul Driscoll. Our American Economy. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1970. Lowi, Theodore. The End of Liberalism. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., 1969. MacLeish, Archibald. "The Hamlet of Archibald MacLeish," Collected Poems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin and Co.,

Magruder, Frank A., and William A. McClenaghan. American Government. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1969.

Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon Press, 1964. Marvin, Francis. Comte, The Founder of Sociology. New York: Russell and Russell, 1937.

Mazour, Anatole, and John M. Peoples. Men and Nations. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Javandvicb, Inc., 1971. McLuhan, Marshall. The Medium is the Message. New York: Bantam Books, 1967. Mead, Margaret. Culture and Commitment: A Study of the ' Generation Gap. New York:. Doubleday and Co., 1970.

______. "First Steps Toward A.Common World Culture," Technology, Industry and Man: The Age of Acceleration, ed. Charles R. Walker. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968. Michael, Donald. Cybernation: The Silent Conquest. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1962. Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Ma.jor British Writers, ed. G. B. Harrison. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1954. Oppenheimer, J. Robert. The Open Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1955. Pagnol, Marcel. Critique des Critiques. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1949- Patterson, Franklin. "Human Issues in the Post-Industrial Society: The Context," The High School of the Future: 292 A Memorial to Kimball Wiles, ed. William Alexander. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Co., 1970. Peirce, Charles. "The Fixation of Belief," American Thought: Civil War to World War I , ed. Perry Miller. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

Perry, Marvin. Man's Unfinished Journey. New York: Houghton-Mifflin, Inc., 1971. Platt, Nathaniel, and Muriel J. Drummond. Our Nation From Its Creation. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. _____. Our World Through the Ages. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967. Price, Don K. "Science, The New Technologies and Govern­ ment," Technology, Industry, and Man, ed, Charles R. Walker. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968.

______. "The Endless Frontier," The Sense of the Sixties, eds. Edward Quinn and Paul J. Dolan. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Reich, Charles. The Greening of America. New York: Ban­ tam Books, 1971. Reisman, David. Individualism Reconsidered and Other Essays. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 195zi-.

______. "Leisure and Work in the Post-Industrial Society," The New Technology and Human Values, ed. John Burke. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1966.

Roszak, Theodore. The Making of a Counter Culture. New York: Doubleday and Co., 1969. Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr. The Crisis of Confidence: Ideas, Power, and Violence in America. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1959. Shaver, James P., and Harold Berlack. Democracy, Plural­ ism and the Social Studies. New York: Houghton- Mifflin Co., 1968. Simon, Herbert. The Shape of Automation. New York: Har­ per & Row, 1966. 293 Taylor, Gordon R. The Biological Time Bomb. New York: New American Library, 1969’.

Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre. The Future of Man. London: Fontana Books, 1964.

Thompson, Sir George. The Foreseeable Future. New York: Viking Press, I960.

Todd, Lewis P., and Merle Curti. Rise of the American Nation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968. Toffler, .Alvin. Future Shock. New York: Bantam Books, 1970.

Veblen, Thorstein. "The Place of Science in'Modern Civi­ lization," American Thought: Civil War to World War I , ed. Perry Miller. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

Walbank, T. Walter, and Arnold Schrier. Living World History. New York: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1969. Ward, Barbara. "Spaceship Earth," Technology, Industry and Man: The Age of Acceleration, ed. Charles R. Walker. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1968.

Wiebe, Robert H. The Search for Order, 1877-1920. New York: Hill and Wang, 1967. Wiener, Norbert. The Human Use of Human Beings: Cyber­ netics and Society. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1950.

Wolff, Paul. The Poverty of Liberalism. Boston: Beacon Press, Inc., 1968.

Wood, Robert C. "The Rise of an Apolitical Elite," Scientists and National Policy-Making, eds. Robert Gilpin and Christopher Wright. New York: Columbia University Press, 1964. Yeats, William Butler. "The Second Coming," Major British Writers, ed. G. B. Harrison. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1954. Young, Michael, ed. Forecasting and the Social Sciences. London: Heinemann',' 1968. 294 B . PERIODICALS

Alexander, Albert, and Edward C. Prehen. Social Educa­ tion, 35, No. 3 (March, 1971), 262-269; 2761 Ball, C-eorge. "The Trap of Rationality," Newsweek, July 26, 1971, 43. Bell, Daniel. "Alternative Futures," Daedalus, 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), 666-679. ______. "Notes on the Post-Industrial Society," The Public Interest, 7 (Spring, 1967), 102-118. ______. "The Year 2000: The Trajectory of an Idea," Daedalus, 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), 639-651. "Toward A Communal Society," Life, May 12, 1 9 V ? , 23-25. ______. "Twelve Modes of Prediction: A Preliminary Sorting of Approaches in the Social Sciences." Daed­ alus , 93, No. 3 (Summer, 1964), 845-880. Boulding, Kenneth E. "Education for Spaceship Earth," Social Education, 32, No. 7 (November, 1968), 647- '651. Brzezinski, Zbigniew. "America in the Technectronic Age," Encounter (January, 1968), 16-27. ______. "Centralization and Decentralization," Daeda­ lus, 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), 680-690. Caldwell,•Lynton K. "Managing the New Scientific Super- Culture," Public Administration Review, 26, No. 2 (June, 1967), 128-133. The Center Magazine, 2, No. 6 (November, 1969), Santa Barbara, Calif.: The Center for the Study of Demo­ cratic Institutions. Chapin, June R., and Richard E. Gross. "A Barometer of the Social Studies: Three Decades of Social Educa­ tion," Social Education, 34, No. 7 (November, 1970), 788-795. Clurman, Harold. The New York Times, November 13, 1966, p. 27. 295 Conference on the Cybercultural Revolution: Cybernetics and Automation. New York City, 1964. (Mimeographed paper.)

"A Critical Appraisal of Twenty-Six National Social Studies Projects,” Social Education, 34, No. 4, April, 1970. Dellinger, David, and Paul Goodman. "The Manifesto of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution," Libera­ tion (April, 1964), 9-15.

Dissertation Abstracts. 1961-1971. Educational Research Council of America. Mimeographed booklet. Cleveland, Ohio, 1971. Frank, Lawrence. "The Need for a New Political Theory," Daedalus, 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), 309-816.

Heilbroner, Robert L. "The Future of American Capital­ ism," Commentary, April, 1966, pp. 23-35. Hutchins, Robert. "Science, Scientists, and Politics." Santa Barbara, Calif., 1963. (An Occasional Paper of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institu­ tions. ) Journal of Industrial Arts Education, 29, No. 5 (March- April, 1970). Jouvenal, Bertrand de. "Letter From France: The Techno­ cratic Age," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 20 (October, 19647"? 27-29. ____. "The Political Consequences of the Rise of Science," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 19 (December, 1963), 2-8. _ . "Political Science and Prevision," American Political Science Review, 59 (Spring, 1965), 29-38. Lane, Robert E. "The Decline of Politics and Ideology in a Knowledgeable Society," American Sociological Review, 31? No. 5 (October, 1966)7 649-662. LaPorte, Todd R. "Politics and Inventing the Future: Perspectives in Science and Government," Public Ad­ ministration Review, 27, No. 2 (June, 1967), 117-127. 296 Mesthene, Emmanual G. "How Technology Will Shape The Future," Science, 161, No, 5, July 12, 1968, 135- 143. "The Impact of Science on Public Policy." Public Administration Review, 27, No. 2 (June, 1967), 97-104.'

Munford, Lewis. "The Automation of Knowledge," Vital Speeches, May 1, 1964, pp. 440-445. Nesbitt, William. An Editorial. Social Education, 32, No. 7 (November, 1968), 637.

Oliver, Donald, and Fred N. Newmann. "Education and Com­ munity," Harvard Educational Review, 37, No. 1 (Win­ ter, 1967), 61-104: “ ______. "The New Deal: Free Enterprise and Public Planning," Harvard Social Studies Project. Columbus: American Education Publishers, 1968. Palmer, A. M. F. "On Public Accountability," Socialist Commentary, 40, No. 4 (January, I960), 12-15.

Patrick, John J. Social Education, 33, No. 1 (January, 1969). "Science and Public Policy," American Education Publishers. Columbus, Ohio: Charles.Merri.il Co., 1971. Shubik, Martin. "Information, Rationality, and Free Choice," Daedalus, 96, No. 3 (Summer, 1967), 771-778.

Social Education. 1961-1971. Social Education, 32, No. 7 (November, 1968). Entire issue cited.

Social Education, 35, No. 1 (January, 1971). Entire issue cited.

Social Education, 35, No. 3 (March, 1971), 251-252.

Social Studies, 1961-1971. "Social Studies Curriculum Development: Prospects and Problems," The Thirty-Ninth Yearbook of the National Council of Social Studies. Washington: The National Council of Social Studies, 1970. 297 Sociological Resources. Belmont, Calif.: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972.

Toynbee, Arnold J. "Sir Lewis Namier and History," Har­ pers (May, 1967), 57-63. Wesley, Edgar. "Let’s Abolish History Courses," Phi Delta Kappan, 5, No. 3 (September, 1967*), 3-7. Wheeler, Harvey. "Bringing Science Under Law," The Center Magazine, 2, No. 2 (March, 1969), 58-61. Winthrop, Henry. "The Sociological and Ideological Assump­ tions Underlying Cybernation," The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 25, No. 2 (April, 1966), II3 -I2 6 .

1