IVIV (12): 195-197

[John Carvill]

> From: "Monte Davis" <montedavis@>
> John Carvill writes:
>
> My opinion is that Pynchon has pondered the phenomenon whereby scientists
> and engineering types tend to respond to a request for a technical solution
> by asking themselves, "How could we do that?", without first asking, "Why
> would we do that?", or "Should we do that?"
>
> - -------------
>
> Pretty much the way writer Winston Smith responded to the job opening for an
> editor of historical documents; pretty much as a large majority of
> non-scientists and non-engineering types responded to opportunities to make
> a living as functionaries, facilitators, apologists and mostly just
> non-boat-rocking get-alongers under Stalin, Hitler, Mao & co. Maybe even
> (gasp) the way young Tom Pynchon took a Boeing tech writing job, as a very
> small and tangential cog in the Cold War machine.

> It's fairly rare for anyone -- preacher, teacher, bus driver, scientist, or
> engineer -- to ask "should we do that?" when the paycheck, the behavior of
> everyone around him, and the cultural context are conducive...

Ah, so it's a non-issue then? Ok.

Functionaries, bus drivers, etc. don't use their creative skills to
come up with new technologies.

Anyway, I was trying to raise the question of why *some* technical
folk seem to let their fondness for technology blind them to what use
that technology might be put to. I think I see that question being
alluded to in Pynchon's books, notably GR and ATD. I may be wrong.

Anyway, Monte, it's good to see you chipping in, since I take you to
be pretty optimistic about teechnology, which, while I might be more
circumspect than you, is a perspective I welcome in terms of at least
providing a contrast to all the neo-Luddism.