It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SouthernForkway26
If we have robots doing our work than humans would find more time for social and recreation activities. No real need for me to go to school unless I want to learn how to build and fix the labor bots.
Just the act of going to school is not productive at all to society, in fact it consumes resources from society. Its the education from school that has value. Its value is also only worth the person's ability to effectively use it, usually at a workplace somewhere. But without the need for a job who would waste the time unless you just wanted to know something.
Money isn't given as a reward of a person's level of intelligence. It is given based on productivity. Theoretically a college graduate usually earns more money because they are able to do a skilled job that someone without the education could not.
I imagine most people would probably just chill and be social more with the free time we would all have. All of the necessities and common conveniences would be available for free such as food, shelter, phone, internet, etc. Only the robot owners would even have money (if there was more than one robot company) and it would be used for things that are forever limited like real estate or water.
I think the government would make sure you went to school. In order to maintain order in society, the government would make sure you have something to do to keep yourself busy. If no one went to school, then after a few generations, we might have these robots, but no one would know how to use them.
And education has more value than just its applicability to a specific field of work. Education builds people to become greater. Without education and without work, we would lose our humanity. I'm in school right now and what I'm learning here about industrial electronics isn't the only thing I'm learning here. I'm not just becoming a better technician, I'm becoming a better person. An education definitely is productive to society, even if you never apply your knowledge in the field of your expertise. When A.I. hits the shelves, we will have a choice of becoming a society of lazy fools or a society of hyper-intellectual technological masters.
The thing is, with an education, and especially a hyper-education, as in this utopian scenario, what exists today won't be what exists tomorrow. People with educations are more creative. So, when our basic needs are automatically met, we will all have time to become engineers and create our own jobs through the new products we invent. With everyone getting a hyper-education, there will be new things all the time. People will work, its just that we will have a higher class of average worker. There will be no more arbitrary tasks.
Originally posted by SouthernForkway26
reply to post by smithjustinb
Sure a certain level of education would be required, but how much? I think that society will dictate how we spend our time rather than the government. Our priorities would change once the high priority of having to work to pay for everything is gone. This is what would lead me more to things like spirituality, liberal arts, and many other social activities rather than going to school.
I agree that there are other valuable things to learn at school other than something from a book or classroom. I will even argue that this knowledge can be more useful than than the technical knowledge. But for a person to be productive in society they have to contribute something to society. A co-worker of mine has only a high school education and over the 10 years that he has learned and worked in construction he has helped with approximately 15 new houses. He has made a valuable contribution to society by helping create a home and shelter for 15 families for at least the next 150 years. One of his friends earned a civil engineering degree from a party school and is a car salesman earning more than 3x as much. He uses his education every day but his position has little real contribution to society imo. Another friend of his has a PhD in marine biology and she is jobless, literally just consuming the earth's resources. Spending years in school to become a super-genius might allow you to live a more fulfilling life, but that itself isn't a contribution to society and has no value to anybody but you.
In this scenario I see just a few super-talented people working, most likely building the newest model of robot that produces the newest great idea from another super-talented person. Everybody else would just chill with their new amazing gadget they got for free because robots mined raw material and assembled the parts and sent them to everybody. Real true wealth is either a physical thing of value created with labor or a limited resource. If we all have essentially unlimited free labor we would all have infinite wealth.
And it is widely acknowledged that if you aren't working, and you're not going to school, you're not serving a purpose.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Throughout history, man has developed a system of going to work and getting paid. But with the emergence of new technology, the need for human work is going down the drain. One thing we're not going to do, as humans, is lose a purpose for existing. The new way of distribution of wealth will be wealth distributed to those who go to school.
Originally posted by Bodhi7
If our technology gets that advanced, we will also probably have technology advanced enough to integrate computers with our brains and therefor download all the knowledge we need. School will be useless in the world you invision as well.
Originally posted by AdAstra
reply to post by smithjustinb
And it is widely acknowledged that if you aren't working, and you're not going to school, you're not serving a purpose.
There are two major problems with this statement (the scope of the "wide acknowledgement" being a minor one).
First, if there is a purpose to anyone's life, it's not, and cannot be, defined by human parameters, especially not in utilitary terms.
Second, the implication seems to be that a being has to serve a purpose in order to merit survival on this Earth, on which it/she/he has been born without asking for it.
Is that so?
Not in my opinion.
Originally posted by imherejusttoread
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Throughout history, man has developed a system of going to work and getting paid. But with the emergence of new technology, the need for human work is going down the drain. One thing we're not going to do, as humans, is lose a purpose for existing. The new way of distribution of wealth will be wealth distributed to those who go to school.
Interesting, but..
1. The history of man is one of migration and innovation. We started in the middle east and we wound up all over the globe, thanks to advancing technology.
2. This will never stop. This constant to migrate is what established space exploration. The Earth is not humanity's eternal home.
Originally posted by Cecilofs
reply to post by smithjustinb
I like your idea OP, my only question is why would we still need money? Why would we need to work?
Originally posted by hawkiye
Any society where government distributes the wealth sounds like hell to me... I do see a leap forward coming however needless to say I do not see it playing out the way you do.
Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by smithjustinb
All of this progression happens while our body seems to remain unchanged.