Book: Amusing Ourselves to Death, by Neil Postman
09:52 Saturday, 19 May 2018
Words: 1435
When I was about to retire in 2013, some of the people I worked with asked me what I was going to do with all my time, seeming to believe that without a job, there'd be nothing to fill it. One of my replies was that I had a stack of books taller than I am, and that I hoped to read them all.
Well, if anything, the stack is taller today than it was five years ago. But I did read a book this week.
Someone had recommended Amusing Ourselves to Death to me some time ago, perhaps more than a decade ago, since my email shows that I ordered the book from Amazon in 2007. What prompted me to pick it up on Wednesday was the same thing that prompted my last Editorial Note. I've begun a little project I'm thinking of as the post-mortem of late 21st Century civilization. Not that there'd be anyone around to read it then, so it's perhaps best that we begin it now.
I'll digress a bit here and reveal that I believe we can identify today a number of significant developments in the course of history since the enlightenment that had, within them, the seeds of what would ultimately become our undoing. Many of these developments are regarded as positive, and indeed, for the most part, they were. But they had an effect that we've recently begun to call "unintended consequences."
One of the first developments, and at this stage, I'm calling it the first, is Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations. Now, like many, hopefully, educated people, I know what The Wealth of Nations is, but I've never read it. So it occurred to me that I'd probably better read it to make sure it says what I think it says. Basically, I suspect that it cemented the notion of the "free market" as the preferred economic system by which wealth is created and resources, goods and services are distributed within a population. And, by most accounts, it's been a resounding success. But I want to see what Smith wrote about competition, the role of the government and what he thought "free" really meant.
The second development would be Darwin's Origin of the Species. In part because it helped diminish the authority of the church, but especially because of how I suspect it influenced our thinking with regard to the idea of competition. I suspect that Darwin, without ever intending, was essential in establishing within western culture the idea of competition as its central organizing principle.
The third would be the development of electronic media. By this, I had in mind radio, but Postman is convincing that it is really the telegraph that started it all.
The fourth would be the development of advertising or propaganda, essentially, "messaging" by large organizations or perhaps, "social organisms."
I suppose the zeroth development would be the discovery of fire; though more proximally, the discovery of "fossil" fuels, chiefly coal and oil. The effects of the combustion thereof, being ultimately what causes changes to our planet that our civilization is unable to adequately address, leading to its eventual collapse.
But it will be our notions of free markets, the role of competition, and the way that we distribute and "process" (by which I mean "think about") information, that create a system that is fundamentally unstable and unsustainable, and that ultimately consumes itself. There is no "check" on the system, no "governor." It is unconstrained by design, and in the absence of constraints, it proceeds to its logical conclusion and eventually consumes itself.
Enough about that! I've ruined the whole thing for you. Now you know the whole plot, and therefore there's little to "entertain" you. So let's get back to the book.
Amusing Ourselves to Death was written in 1985, or roughly a generation ago. "Mobile" phones were the size of a brick, and very few people used one. Before the internet (Yes, yes, I know. ARPANET 1971ish). Before the era of ubiquitous computing. A year before Nikon introduced the first digital single lens reflex camera. Two years before the FCC repealed the Fairness Doctrine (what a quaint notion!). Three years before Rush Limbaugh began his national radio program. Only two years after the CD was commercially introduced. Ronald Reagan was in his second term, Michael Dukakis hadn't yet been photographed in a tank wearing a helmet that made him look like Snoopy. Four years before America Online (AOL). Seven years before the House Check Kiting Scandal, nine years before Gingrich and Armey's Contract with America. In other words, it was written a long time ago. Long, long before "social media."
As damning as Amusing Ourselves to Death is, everything he condemned is so much worse now, because of "progress" and competition.
The problem is information, and the media by which it is conveyed. At least, it's the problem in this environment, where competition is the central organizing principle, and the purpose of life, it seems, is to generate and amass, insofar as it is possible, wealth.
Postman makes the point that since at least the 60s and up to perhaps the decade after the book was published, television had overtaken school in terms education. That's not to say that children did not go to school, or that colleges and universities weren't cranking out graduates, only that what they "learned" in their formal schooling was but a tiny fraction of what their minds "learned" from television. Today I think you can substitute "screens" of any type, the problem is the same, only much worse.
If you're having any trouble following this, I encourage you to please read the book. Alternatively, the theme is nicely captured, I think, in the first several paragraphs of David Foster Wallace's commencement address at Kenyon College. Television, more generally, electronic media, is the water you've been swimming in. You think you learned how to think in school. You've been learning it your whole life, in front of a screen. Your experience in the classroom is just an anomaly, that you've been told is somewhat applicable to "real life." But we all know "real life" is perceived through a screen.
And what has electronic media taught us? How has it molded and shaped our intelligence? What form of thought does it permit? And the answer is simple. Our thoughts have become tweets. Powerpoint slides. Facebook posts. Twenty second spots on TV. Slogans. Jingles. Memes.
tl;dr!
Sure, there are people who put more cognitive effort into thinking, but they're the exception today, and mostly because their job or profession requires it. Worse, as portrayed by much of the electronic media, they've become the élites, the people who seem somewhat condescending, somewhat distant from "regular" people. Postman makes a compelling case that it wasn't always so, and that people were capable of, and routinely did, perform strenuous amounts of thinking about things; not just reacting to them. Because, by far, the single biggest form of engagement actively sought by electronic media is some type of emotional engagement. The "hot take." The "like." The retweet.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Well, this has been a bit of a long post, I must say.
The book has given me a lot to think about. Some of which I'll do here, as I try to write this. Even the act of writing these posts is challenging from the standpoint of wanting to get everything out all at once and posted. I'll start writing and the thoughts are whirling around in my head faster than my fingers can put them on the screen. And at some point, I just have to step away from it. I took a long break from this post after I wrote thirteen paragraphs. And the paragraphs aren't very long! And I'm writing very casually here, not making much effort to put this down in a more formal kind of presentation. Partly because it's faster to do it that way, and partly because I don't think anyone reads long blog posts; and while I have no idea who or if anyone does read these, well, I know about three or four people do, I don't wish to tax their attention!
So, more about this in another post. But this is very exciting to me. The post-mortem project is perhaps the larger effort, but having some new or different insight into the effects of electronic media is stimulating. I think some changes may be in order in my own life.
But it is refreshing to read something exciting for once. Even if it is all bad news.
Last Night's Moon
Current Wx: Temp: 89.29°F Pressure: 1008hPa Humidity: 55% Wind: 11.5mphWords: 42
Shot this just before bed last night. The night before last wasn't cloudy, but it was definitely hazy. I like this shot, there's a larger version at Flickr.
✍️ Reply by emailWinterfell
05:03 Monday, 19 May 2025
Current Wx: Temp: 73.85°F Pressure: 1014hPa Humidity: 90% Wind: 1.01mph
Words: 1546
(tl;dr: Mitzi made it to Albuquerque. Dave made it to Winterfell. Driving sucks. Maverick gets great mileage. It's cold, wet and gray and feels like home.)
High today is predicted to be 54°F. It was 93°F in Ponte Vedra when I left. I was soaked with sweat as I packed up the truck. It was even 90° in Quantico, where I stopped for the night. Never got much above the 70s as I drove north, 63° in Watkins Glen when I arrived.
Mitzi made it to her hotel early Saturday morning. Like, 0230 early. And she was up and on the go four hours later!
As for me, I was mistaken when I mentioned it had been decades since I'd driven this far solo. I'd driven from DC back to Florida in November '22 when Mitzi stayed behind to look after her grandson for a couple of weeks. But I did that trip in two legs. This time I did nearly the same distance in just one. I stopped below DC, as planned, because I figured it was about all I was good for, and I wasn't wrong.
I'm just not fit for sitting in essentially one position for hours at a time anymore. I developed an ache in my right should from keeping my hands on the wheel, which was a new thing for me. Later on, I developed some kind of cramp or spasm in my left side. It may have had something to do with being dehydrated, because I was limiting my fluid intake to keep the stops to a reasonable number.
For the most part, the drive was benign until I approached Richmond, VA. (Shout-out to Chris ODonnell.) For much of the trip, I'd been staying in the middle or right lane, keeping my speed 5-7 miles above the limit, passing when necessary. Because it wasn't bumper-to-bumper all the way up 95, that made it a fairly low-stress affair.
As I approached Richmond, traffic density increased, though it was no where near as bad as I've experienced it before on a weekday. What also seemed different was the number of drivers who were barreling through traffic at up to 20mph above the posted speed limit, weaving in and out of traffic. I had to be alert for idiots, er, I mean, drivers passing me on the right at incredibly high speed if I planned to move to my right.
Between Richmond and Quantico, traffic density picked up a little more. Then we started getting the compression waves where traffic is flowing along and then suddenly screeches to a halt. There were two occasions where a little red VW Jetta riding my bumper nearly rear-ended me. I try to keep a safe stopping distance between me and the car in front of me, which mostly serves as an invitation for drivers to insert themselves in it.
Both times, I spotted the brake lights far ahead of me and began braking early, trying to modulate it so I could stop without hitting the car in front of me, but also not causing the Jetta to rear end me. When you're close enough you can make out the panicked expression in the face of the driver behind you, you're too close.
All's well that ends well, but it was an awful experience. Especially coming at the end of a long day of driving.
No restaurants to speak of near the motel, so I had an unappealing supper of some micro-wave concoction and a can tuna and crackers. Back on the road at 0633, foregoing the Residence Inn free breakfast, which was still not serving at the advertised time of 0630.
I was hoping an early Sunday morning start would avoid much of the drama of getting around DC. Mostly the case, but on 270, I think, there was another episode of 70-0 sudden stopping, and again, trying to not make the vehicle behind me rear-end me. Accomplished, but it felt like a near thing.
Maps put up an 8-minute delay estimate and I watched that creep up to 16 minutes as cars ahead of me were driving down the left shoulder to a place in the road where they could turn around. Eventually, I came to the site of the disruption. A fire truck was blocking the left lane, purposefully, as people were working to get a vehicle that had apparently lost control out of the median.
After that it was fairly benign again, except for some bizarre driving by a couple of people who couldn't seem to make up their minds how fast they wanted to go. Again, I'm running in cruise control in the right lane, about 7 miles above the posted limit, so 72 in a 65. I can stay in the right lane for a long time when traffic is light, only passing as necessary.
Well, there was this one car, an SUV of some kind that I can't recall, which I passed because they were doing something like 70 I guess. Apparently, this offended them? Because they then passed me and again slowed to 70. This happened twice and so I decided to put some distance between us and got in the left lane and did 75 until they were a tiny spot in the rear-view, and there were several cars between us. (Nobody was zooming up behind me in the left lane, wanting to go faster than 75.)
There was a long stretch of open road ahead of me in the right lane, so I moved over and resumed 72.
Several minutes go by, and here's the SUV again, only now it's behind me. Well, ok, they're not slowing me down, I don't care. Until they decide they want to be in front of me again. And then they do slow down.
We're not exchanging glances, I have no idea what's behind this behavior. When another car passes us doing significantly above the limit, I pull out and follow that car. The whole thing is just bizarre.
But it must be contagious because as I got closer to New York, a little Chevy compact I couldn't name exhibited the same behavior. This time I did take a look at the driver, and it was an older gent, like me. He's in the right lane doing 70, I pass him and resume 72 in the right lane. He decides he has to be in front of me, passes me, and resumes doing 70!
I really don't get it. What's up with that? Are they people who just resent being passed? Maybe they don't like Florida drivers? Maybe it was my license plate. I'm doing my best to not be a maniac (you can decide if doing 7mph above the posted limit is maniacal), and just encountering this bizarre behavior.
Now formerly, I'd have been pretty much staying in the left lane doing between 75 and 80 in a 65mph zone, hoping there wouldn't be any troopers out on a Sunday morning. (And this trip I saw only one car pulled over the whole trip. Probably all out looking for immigrants.) The behavior you encounter there is someone will decide they want to follow you, which is fine, as long as they're not on my bumper. But this trip, I'm trying to keep my speed down, and drive with a less mission-focused intensity. (I'd normally try to reach my destination by a particular time that I'd set as a goal. This time I had no arrival time goal, to try to be more relaxed as I'm driving.)
I'd never encountered this kind of behavior before, and it's unsettling.
The Mav was outstanding. I still have to fill up from the last leg, but the average fuel economy for the first three fill-ups was 36.5mpg, which was nearly all at highway speeds, and significantly faster than the speeds the EPA uses in its testing. EPA estimated highway fuel economy is 33mpg.
The worst tank was the second one at 34.2mpg, which was nearly all I-95, flat and fairly fast. It seems to do better with some hills and variation in speed.
Apart from my aches, the car was comfortable to drive, felt secure on the road. The base sound system doesn't get especially high marks from anyone, but I was pleased with it. I listened to Apple Music's "Focus" channel for the first part of the trip, then the "Chill" channel, and finally "Dave's Channel," which is music it thinks I like, which wasn't wrong. It did repeat a number of songs though, which seemed strange.
I'll be flying back to Florida at the end of the month, then Mitzi and I will drive the RAV4 up, probably starting on the 9th. We'll share the driving so I don't expect to encounter the same issues with shoulder aches and muscle spasms. We stop more frequently, as well, but only a little. We'll press farther, to stay with her daughter in DC, but sharing the driving makes a big difference.
Anyway, I'm here. It's cold, it's windy, wet and gray, but it still feels like home.
Now if we can just get the other place sold...
✍️ Reply by emailWe're Still Listening to Eric Schmidt?
14:39 Monday, 19 May 2025
Current Wx: Temp: 89.87°F Pressure: 1013hPa Humidity: 65% Wind: 8.01mph
Words: 54
Maybe I'm just not very bright. That's probably it. But listening to this bullshit scares the hell out of me.
You remember Eric Schmidt. The guy who said "You have no privacy. Get over it." Yeah, I'm sure this is all going to work out just fine.
We are so well and truly fucked.
✍️ Reply by emailA Pretty Nice Day
Current Wx: Temp: 80.35°F Pressure: 1013hPa Humidity: 84% Wind: 1.01mphWords: 91
Although it didn't get much higher than 50°F, the skies cleared and it was a pretty nice day. I walked around a bit outside with the camera. This is from the part of the property where we think we're going to build a slightly larger house. Certainly something with more storage space!
Sun just went down. No clouds to speak of, so not especially photogenic. I'll charge the drone tomorrow and fly it.
Anyway, time to watch some Perry Mason and then call it a night.
The beat goes on...
✍️ Reply by emailThe Fifth Fundamental Force of the Universe
07:21 Tuesday, 19 May 2026
Current Wx: Temp: 66.56°F Pressure: 1018hPa Humidity: 82% Wind: 6.53mph
Words: 611
Is irony.
While I was eating my breakfast, I tried to catch up on the blogs I follow. I didn't get far, because one of the first ones was this one from Charlie Stross. It was another one of those record-scratch moments when you just can't go on because of the discontinuity.
Possibly my worst miss is that I completely discounted the profound social impact of LLMs (or so-called "AI"), not simply as a massive technology sector investment bubble and happy hunting ground for snake oil salesmen and grifters, but as a corrosive influence on population-level critical thinking. I should have seen it coming--I read Joseph Weizenbaum's Computer Power and Human Reason back in the 1980s--but I didn't recognize just how unable to see past the ELIZA illusion most people would prove to be.
I'm ok with the AI/LLM bias, he's an author and I'm pretty sure they all feel as though they've been victimized/violated by the AI companies; and they probably have a point of some kind, though I don't think it's of the magnitude they all seem to think it is.
No, it was the "corrosive influence on population-level critical thinking," that made me drop my fork.
What the fuck is "population-level critical thinking"? Is it just an inarticulate, unfortunate construction? Does he believe that "populations" possess "critical thinking" abilities? Does he think everyone in a population possesses critical thinking abilities? Really?
If populations had critical thinking abilities of some kind, would we even be where we are today?
This kind of sweeping assertion makes me question the "critical thinking" abilities of the author!
Ironic, ain't it?
Didn't the study of economics rely on the idea of the "rational man," or "rational actor"? Is that still a thing? I hope not.
I was listening to a podcast about hydronic heating and cooling on my trip down to Pennsylvania. One of the speakers made a point that I hadn't really thought about before, though it's similar to one made in other contexts.
He offered something to the effect that people will "do their research," intensely study all the specifications of their prospective car purchase (or any consumer purchase that probably has some identity significance), but when it comes to the equipment and features of a home that maintain the indoor environment, the place where they live, eat, sleep and breathe, they know nothing. All they know is that they want to be warm, or they want to be cool.
Rational actors. Critical thinkers.
Whatever cognitive abilities they possessed were hijacked by cultural cues and marketing messages at birth.
This notion of "critical thinking" as an ability inherent in any individual is a fantasy. A conceit.
It's bullshit.
It's a skill. Like playing the piano. (I hasten to add that you can be very skilled in any number of disciplines, and still lack critical thinking ability.) It takes training. It takes practice. It requires resources. It's demanding. It's hard.
And almost nobody does it.
All this pearl-clutching about our diminishing "critical thinking abilities" in the wake of AI/LLMs is baseless.
Let's make "critical thinking" a skill that we want everyone to master at some level, like literacy, and then we can talk. It's not even a social or cultural priority. Most people, like Charlie, just seem to assume everyone has it! They don't. Maybe it would be nice if they did, because maybe then we wouldn't have elected Donald Trump the first time.
Anyway, become the change you wish to see in the world.
Or something.
The beat that can be counted is not the beat, but it goes on...
✍️ Reply by email