Needless Needs!

Dec 27th, 2011 | By | Category: Articles

Want to hear something funny? I have a good one for you-“Necessity is the mother of invention.

Cracks me up every time.

The actual saying should be-“Necessity is the mother of adaptation, or maybe evolution.” Look around people, the nature is full of creatures that have adapted; not invented, but adapted, out of the need to survive, sustain, grow and multiply. But if anybody is itching to give me the whole –“Unlike other creatures, man is an intelligent being with a superior encephalon, which can innovate and invent” kind of an argument, I suggest you hold that itch for a few minutes more and read me out.

Let us not look at the saying in the Stone Age context, but in the context of recent times. In today’s world, where research and innovation are the henchmen of commercialization, a product is invented first and its necessity is created afterwards. Medicines are invented first and then diseases follow.

In other words, necessity follows invention. And this is made possible by one of the biggest scams in the history of the world-“Consumerism”. In today’s world success is equated with consumption. The more you consume the more successful you are. The entire education system pushes students to become better consumers. You are considered well educated and successful in life if you earn and spend more.

The latest addition to this con is the creation of a new species that I like to call-“The Uberconsumerist”. These mutants are like consumerists on steroids, specially designed to consume even those products that come with a guarantee that necessity will never follow their invention. Talking refrigerators, gory virtual games getting gorier with every new version, mobile apps that claim to make life simple but do just the opposite, combat and assault weapons that claim to be killer friendly and countless other things. It feels like, out of the entire human population, one part is paid just to come up with things that are not needed at all.

What these so called research and innovation teams, oh-so-proudly and aptly call “brainstorming”, is actually their “brain itching up a storm” to create something, anything necessary or unnecessary. These inventions are not followed by necessity, but addiction. After all, what is addiction, but an intense need which is not a necessity.

But addiction should be the least of our concerns while dealing with such inventions. The real threat comes from the fact that no one, not even the inventors can asses the risk of such inventions. Paraphrasing the words of renowned sociologist Anthony Giddens, we are not just manufacturing products but are manufacturing risks along with the products. It is a matter of great concern for social scientists all over that risk assessment as a branch of science has not been able to catch-up with the burgeoning inventions in the other disciplines of science. Such poorly equipped risk analysis system is incapable of fully assessing the risks of the new inventions.

We the market are handed these inventions just like a tiny toddler is handed a shiny looking pen. We don’t know that what we have in our hands may be mightier than sword. We are mesmerized by its shiny look and so we start scribbling, thinking of the entire world as our canvas. Social networking anyone? People, with no sense of restrain or propriety, doodle with the entire virtual world as the audience.

Here’s another good one for you – A voyeur and narcissist got married. Guess what they named their kids – Twitter and Facebook.

Another such invention – the reality shows on T.V – have changed the role that Television plays in our lives. T.V viewing used to be about vicarious entertainment, but not any more. With the advent of reality shows, the innocent couch potato’s vicarious needs have transformed into a voyeur’s perverted needs.

But, enough of this whining. Let’s talk about the solutions.

Remedy no.1 – The science of risk assessment should giddy-up so that all inventions can saddle up and ride safely on its back.

Another problem with the scientific community is that it works in isolation.

So, Remedy no.2 is in order – The scientific community needs to work in tandem with the civil society in order to address the real needs of the people. As far as assessing risk is concerned, a joint effort from both the scientific community and civil society will help identify not just the scientific risks but social risks as well.

Remedy no. 3  The legal system can also help by making an example out of those who make technology an accomplice while violating law. In this context, the law of precautionary principle needs to be revisited and revamped.

The self-contradictory nature of this principle makes it easy for people to bend it in the way that profits them. Better and well defined laws should be framed that make innovators and manufacturers more accountable for their innovations and products.

All said and done, if we get down to the brass tacks, it is our responsibility as a society to blaze a clear line between use and abuse; moral and amoral, that will help all these instruments of society, be it science, commerce or law to function for public interest at large. We have to make efforts towards creating an intelligent and morally responsible society.

Think of it this way – Mahatma Gandhi was an inventor. His innovative ways of non-violence, hunger strike and non-co-operation won us independence. But these Gandhian ways have been misused time and again by many twisted and sometimes shrewd people who abuse the power of these ways for the wrong causes. Is Gandhiji to be blamed for introducing us to the power of persuasion? The answer is no. But, even if the answer is yes, what good will come of blaming him?

Our only shot at sanity is to be more perceptive and responsible while handling such inventions so that we use their power for good. The role that Facebook played in the latest Egyptian uprising is a case in point.

Remember kids, Spider Man said-“With great gizmos comes great responsibility”.

(Image courtesy: Daniel Conway )


Tags: ,

About

This post has been viewed by 7934 unique visitors.
avatar

Srividya has written 3 articles on The MAG. View all articles by


2 comments
Leave a comment »

  1. Dear Srividya, Excellently put up the views,God bless you with all such thoughts. I would like to read more such ideas from you. Jayaram

  2. Very rightly said & I appreciate your analysis skills on this.

    But I dont agree or see a possibility that scientific community can work with civil soceity, since, civil soceity needs a cooked solution & they dont wanted to assist/support the reseachers during development/conceptualization. Scientific soceity’s work is over, once the solution is cooked. Hence, I dont agree with your remedy no. 2. I hope you will also rethink on this.

    Appreciate to bring this topic, in such a nice way.
    Best Regards.

Leave Comment