davideisinger.com

My personal website
Log | Files | Refs | README

theconvivialsociety-substack-com-h1t0g7.txt (21515B)


      1 [1]
      2 The Convivial Society
      3 
      4 [2]The Convivial Society
      5 
      6 SubscribeSign in
      7 
      8 Share this post
      9 
     10 [8]
     11 [https]
     12 The Convivial Society
     13 The Convivial Society
     14 Life Cannot Be Delegated
     15 Copy link
     16 Facebook
     17 Email
     18 Notes
     19 More
     20 
     21 Life Cannot Be Delegated
     22 
     23 The Convivial Society: Vol. 5, No. 15
     24 
     25 [9]
     26 L. M. Sacasas's avatar
     27 [10]L. M. Sacasas
     28 Dec 29, 2024
     29 321
     30 
     31 Share this post
     32 
     33 [12]
     34 [https]
     35 The Convivial Society
     36 The Convivial Society
     37 Life Cannot Be Delegated
     38 Copy link
     39 Facebook
     40 Email
     41 Notes
     42 More
     43 [13]
     44 7
     45 83
     46 [14]
     47 Share
     48 
     49 Welcome to the last installment of the Convivial Society for 2024. Come
     50 January, this iteration of the newsletter will celebrate its fifth year. It’s
     51 been a joy to write, and a pleasure to connect with readers over the past five
     52 years. Thank you all. In this short installment, I offer you a principle which
     53 might guide our thinking about technology in the coming year, along with a
     54 couple of year-end traditions tagged on at the end.
     55 
     56 Cheers and happy new year,
     57 
     58 Michael
     59 
     60 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
     61 
     62 A few weeks ago, I posted about how certain lines or quotations can function as
     63 verbal amulets that we carry with us to ward off the deleterious spirits of the
     64 age. Such words, I suggested, “might somehow shield or guide or console or
     65 sustain the one who held them close to mind and heart.”
     66 
     67 One such line for me, which I did not include in that earlier post, comes from
     68 a rather well-known 1964 essay by historian and cultural critic Lewis Mumford, 
     69 [15]“Authoritarian and Democratic Technics.”[16]1 Of course, to say it is
     70 “well-known” is a relative statement. I mean something like “well-known within
     71 that tiny subset of people who are interested in technology and culture and who
     72 also happen to care about what older sources might teach us about such
     73 matters.” So, you know, not “well-known” in the sense that most people would
     74 mean the phrase.
     75 
     76 That said, the essay should be more widely read. Sixty years later, Mumford’s
     77 counsel and warnings appear all the more urgent. It is in this essay that
     78 Mumford warned about the “magnificent bribe” that accounts for why “our age
     79 surrendered so easily to the controllers, the manipulators, the conditioners of
     80 an authoritarian technics.”
     81 
     82 Here’s how Mumford describes the bargain. Forgive the lengthy quotation, but I
     83 think it will be worth your time if you’ve not encountered it before.
     84 
     85     The bargain we are being asked to ratify takes the form of a magnificent
     86     bribe. Under the democratic-authoritarian social contract, each member of
     87     the community may claim every material advantage, every intellectual and
     88     emotional stimulus he may desire, in quantities hardly available hitherto
     89     even for a restricted minority: food, housing, swift transportation,
     90     instantaneous communication, medical care, entertainment, education. But on
     91     one condition: that one must not merely ask for nothing that the system
     92     does not provide, but likewise agree to take everything offered, duly
     93     processed and fabricated, homogenized and equalized, in the precise
     94     quantities that the system, rather than the person, requires. Once one opts
     95     for the system no further choice remains. In a word, if one surrenders
     96     one’s life at source, authoritarian technics will give back as much of it
     97     as can be mechanically graded, quantitatively multiplied, collectively
     98     manipulated and magnified.
     99 
    100 There’s a lot to think about in those few lines. For my money, that paragraph,
    101 written sixty years ago, tells us more about the current state of affairs than
    102 a thousand takes we might stumble across as we browse our timelines today.
    103 There is, for instance, just below the surface of Mumford’s analysis, a
    104 profound insight into the nature of human desire in late modern societies that
    105 is worth teasing out at length, but I’ll pass on that for the time being.[17]2
    106 
    107 A little further on, nearing the close of the essay, Mumford tells readers that
    108 they should not mistake his meaning. “This is not a prediction of what will
    109 happen,” he clarifies, “but a warning against what may happen.” More than half
    110 a century later, I’m tempted to say that the warning has come perilously close
    111 to reality and the only question now might be what comes next.
    112 
    113 But all of this, patient reader, is prelude to sharing the line to which I’ve
    114 been alluding.
    115 
    116 It is this: “Life cannot be delegated.”
    117 
    118 Simply stated. Decisive. Memorable.
    119 
    120 Here’s a bit more of the immediate context:
    121 
    122     “What I wish to do is to persuade those who are concerned with maintaining
    123     democratic institutions to see that their constructive efforts must include
    124     technology itself. There, too, we must return to the human center. We must
    125     challenge this authoritarian system that has given to an under-dimensioned
    126     ideology and technology the authority that belongs to the human
    127     personality. I repeat: life cannot be delegated.”
    128 
    129 I say it is simply stated, but it also invites clarifying questions. Chief
    130 among them might be “What exactly is meant by ‘life’?” Or, “Why exactly can it
    131 not be delegated?” And, “What counts as delegation anyway?” So let’s start
    132 there.
    133 
    134 Whatever we take life to mean, we should immediately recognize that we are
    135 speaking qualitatively. Mumford is telling us something about an ideal form of
    136 life, not mere existence.[18]3 Earlier, for example, he had spoken about life
    137 in its “fullness and wholeness.”
    138 
    139 Mumford’s claim is a provocation for us to consider what might be essential to
    140 a life that is full and whole, one in which we might find meaning, purpose,
    141 satisfaction, and an experience of personal integrity. This form of life cannot
    142 be delegated because by its very nature it requires our whole-person
    143 involvement. And by delegation, I take Mumford to mean the outsourcing of such
    144 involvement to a technological device or system, or, alternatively, the embrace
    145 of technologically mediated distraction and escapism in the place of such
    146 involvement.
    147 
    148 I also tend to read Mumford’s claim through Ivan Illich’s concept of thresholds
    149 . Illich invited us to evaluate technologies and institutions by identifying
    150 relevant thresholds, which, when crossed, rendered the technology or
    151 institution counterproductive. This means that rather than declare a technology
    152 or institution either good or bad by its nature, we recognize instead the
    153 possibility that a technology or institution might serve useful ends until it
    154 crosses certain thresholds of scale, volume, or intensity, after which it stops
    155 serving the ends for which it was created and become, first, counterproductive
    156 and then eventually destructive.
    157 
    158 So, with regard to the principle that life cannot be delegated, we might
    159 helpfully ask, “What are the thresholds of delegation beyond which what we are
    160 left with is no longer life in its fullness and wholeness?”
    161 
    162 This seems to be an especially relevant question as we navigate the
    163 ever-widening field of technologies which invite us to delegate an increasing
    164 range of tasks, activities, roles, and responsibilities. We are told, for
    165 instance, that we are entering an age of LLM-based AI agents, which will be
    166 able to streamline our work and simplify our lives across a wide array of
    167 domains.
    168 
    169 [19]
    170 [https]
    171 
    172 Perhaps. My point is not to rule out any such possibility.[20]4 Rather, I am
    173 inviting us to critically consider at the outset where the thresholds of
    174 delegation might be for each of us. And these will, in fact, vary person to
    175 person, which is why I tend to traffic in questions rather than prescriptions.
    176 I am convinced that these are matters of practical wisdom. No one can set out a
    177 list of precise and universal rules applicable to every person under all
    178 circumstances. Indeed, the temptation to wish for such is likely a symptom of
    179 the general malaise. We must all think for ourselves, and in conversation with
    180 each other, so that we can arrive at sound judgments under our particular
    181 circumstances and given our particular aims.
    182 
    183 The principle “Life cannot be delegated” is simply a guidepost.[21]5 It keeps
    184 before us the possibility that we might, if we are not careful, delegate away a
    185 form of life that is full and whole, rewarding and meaningful. We ought to be
    186 especially careful in the cases where what we delegate to a device, app, agent,
    187 or system is an aspect of how we express care, cultivate skill, relate to one
    188 another, make moral judgments, or assume responsibility for our actions in the
    189 world—the very things, in other words, that make life meaningful.
    190 
    191 Perhaps we are tempted to think that care, skill, judgment, and responsibility
    192 are only of consequence when the circumstances are grave, momentous, or
    193 otherwise obviously consequential, which means that we might miss how, in fact,
    194 even our mundane everyday work might be exactly how we care, develop skill,
    195 exercise judgment, and embrace responsibility. (It occurs to me just now, that
    196 the etymology of mundane, usually given a pejorative sense in English, suggests
    197 something that is “of this world.” It is the stuff our world is made of, to
    198 take flight from the mundane is to take flight from the world.)
    199 
    200 If you’ve been reading for a while, you know this is something I’ve sought to
    201 articulate at various points in the last few years ([22]for example). So I’m
    202 always glad to encounter someone else trying to say the same thing and saying
    203 it well. Recently, I stumbled across this bit of wisdom from Gary Snyder[23]6:
    204 
    205     “All of us are apprenticed to the same teacher that the religious
    206     institutions originally worked with: reality. Reality-insight says … master
    207     the twenty-four hours. Do it well, without self-pity. It is as hard to get
    208     the children herded into the car pool and down the road to the bus as it is
    209     to chant sutras in the Buddha-hall on a cold morning. One move is not
    210     better than another, each can be quite boring, and they both have the
    211     virtuous quality of repetition. Repetition and ritual and their good
    212     results come in many forms. Changing the filter, wiping noses, going to
    213     meetings, picking up around the house, washing dishes, checking the
    214     dipstick—don't let yourself think these are distracting you from your more
    215     serious pursuits. Such a round of chores is not a set of difficulties we
    216     hope to escape from so that we may do our ‘practice’ which will put us on a
    217     ‘path’—it is our path.”
    218 
    219 I’ll conclude by offering you a complementary principle to Mumford’s: To live
    220 is to be implicated.
    221 
    222 I take the language of implication, with its rich connotations, from Steven
    223 Garber, who writes about work and vocation from a religious perspective.
    224 Drawing on Wendell Berry and Václav Havel, Garber argues that we should seek to
    225 live in a manner that implicates us, for love’s sake, in the way the world is
    226 and ought to be. In my view, Garber’s exhortation echoes Mumford’s warning but
    227 in another key. To say that life cannot be delegated is to say that life, lived
    228 consciously and well, will necessarily implicate us in the world. May we have
    229 the courage to be so implicated.
    230 
    231 [24]Share
    232 
    233 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
    234 
    235 This newsletter is reader-supported and a crucial part of how I make a living.
    236 You’ll notice there are no paywalls, though. The writing is public and
    237 supported by those who are able and willing to do so. If that’s you, you can
    238 subscribe at the usual rate of $5/month or $45/year. If that seems a bit steep,
    239 you could use the second button below to support my writing at about $3.50/
    240 month or $31/year. Which, as they say, just amounts to a cup of coffee a month.
    241 
    242 [35][                    ]
    243 Subscribe
    244 [37]Get 30% off for 1 year
    245 
    246 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
    247 
    248 Year’s End
    249 
    250 It is customary for me to share Richard Wilbur’s poem [39]“Year’s End” in the
    251 last installment of the year. Enjoy.
    252 
    253 Now winter downs the dying of the year,
    254 And night is all a settlement of snow;
    255 From the soft street the rooms of houses show
    256 A gathered light, a shapen atmosphere,
    257 Like frozen-over lakes whose ice is thin
    258 And still allows some stirring down within.
    259 
    260 I’ve known the wind by water banks to shake
    261 The late leaves down, which frozen where they fell
    262 And held in ice as dancers in a spell
    263 Fluttered all winter long into a lake;
    264 Graved on the dark in gestures of descent,
    265 They seemed their own most perfect monument.
    266 
    267 There was perfection in the death of ferns
    268 Which laid their fragile cheeks against the stone
    269 A million years. Great mammoths overthrown
    270 Composedly have made their long sojourns,
    271 Like palaces of patience, in the gray
    272 And changeless lands of ice. And at Pompeii
    273 
    274 The little dog lay curled and did not rise
    275 But slept the deeper as the ashes rose
    276 And found the people incomplete, and froze
    277 The random hands, the loose unready eyes
    278 Of men expecting yet another sun
    279 To do the shapely thing they had not done.
    280 
    281 These sudden ends of time must give us pause.
    282 We fray into the future, rarely wrought
    283 Save in the tapestries of afterthought.
    284 More time, more time. Barrages of applause
    285 Come muffled from a buried radio.
    286 The New-year bells are wrangling with the snow.
    287 
    288 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
    289 [40]
    290 [https]
    291 “The Hunters in the Snow,” Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1565)
    292 [41]1
    293 
    294 For a more extensive consideration of this essay, see this excellent discussion
    295 by Zachary Loeb: [42]“Authoritarian and Democratic Technics, revisited.”
    296 
    297 [43]2
    298 
    299 Here’s another paragraph that remains timely: “The inventors of nuclear bombs,
    300 space rockets, and computers are the pyramid builders of our own age:
    301 psychologically inflated by a similar myth of unqualified power, boasting
    302 through their science of their increasing omnipotence, if not omniscience,
    303 moved by obsessions and compulsions no less irrational than those of earlier
    304 absolute systems: particularly the notion that the system itself must be
    305 expanded, at whatever eventual cost to life.”
    306 
    307 [44]3
    308 
    309 Although I am immediately tempted to add that there is no such thing as mere
    310 existence. Existence itself is a miracle, and the recognition of this fact the
    311 beginning of wonder and thus thought.
    312 
    313 [45]4
    314 
    315 Although I commend to you Rob Horning’s [46]analysis: “Generative AI, [Ben]
    316 Recht argues, ‘always seems to provide the minimal effort path to a passing but
    317 shitty solution,’ which actually seems like a fairly charitable assessment. But
    318 it is obviously something that worker-users would employ when they don’t care
    319 about what they are asking for or how it is presented, for optimized producers
    320 who see research as an obstacle to understanding rather than the essence of it,
    321 for people conditioned to be absent at any presumed moment of communion.
    322 Generative AI is the quintessence of incuriosity, perfect for those who hate
    323 the idea of having to be interested in anything.”
    324 
    325 [47]5
    326 
    327 I’m tentatively planning on following up with two additional posts on related
    328 principles: Life cannot be simulated, and life cannot be accelerated. We’ll
    329 see!
    330 
    331 [48]6
    332 
    333 In the original post, I wrote “the late Gary Snyder,” which, as more than one
    334 attentive reader pointed out, was a grave mistake. Snyder is still with us, and
    335 I’m not sure how I got it in my head that he had passed. Snyder was the subject
    336 of a recent [49]episode of the wonderful
    337 [50]The Lost Prophets Podcast
    338 . Also, I think the most recent [51]episode with
    339 [52]Dougald Hine
    340 is quite pertinent to the content of this post, and well worth your time.
    341 
    342 321
    343 
    344 Share this post
    345 
    346 [54]
    347 [https]
    348 The Convivial Society
    349 The Convivial Society
    350 Life Cannot Be Delegated
    351 Copy link
    352 Facebook
    353 Email
    354 Notes
    355 More
    356 [55]
    357 7
    358 83
    359 [56]
    360 Share
    361 PreviousNext
    362 
    363 Discussion about this post
    364 
    365 CommentsRestacks
    366 User's avatar
    367 [                    ]
    368 [                    ]
    369 [                    ]
    370 [                    ]
    371 [63]
    372 Annie Gottlieb's avatar
    373 [64]Annie Gottlieb
    374 [65]Dec 30
    375 
    376 Gary Snyder is still alive!! Please take out that “late!”
    377 
    378 Expand full comment
    379 Reply
    380 Share
    381 [67]2 replies by L. M. Sacasas and others
    382 [68]
    383 Melba's avatar
    384 [69]Melba
    385 [70]Dec 30
    386 
    387 Re your 5th footnote, I would love to read those two pieces soon!
    388 
    389 Expand full comment
    390 Reply
    391 Share
    392 [72]5 more comments...
    393 TopLatestDiscussions
    394 
    395 No posts
    396 
    397 Ready for more?
    398 
    399 [88][                    ]
    400 Subscribe
    401 © 2025 L. M. Sacasas
    402 [90]Privacy ∙ [91]Terms ∙ [92]Collection notice
    403 [93] Start writing[94]Get the app
    404 [95]Substack is the home for great culture
    405 
    406 Share
    407 
    408 Copy link
    409 Facebook
    410 Email
    411 Notes
    412 More
    413 This site requires JavaScript to run correctly. Please [97]turn on JavaScript
    414 or unblock scripts
    415 
    416 References:
    417 
    418 [1] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/
    419 [2] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/
    420 [8] https://substack.com/home/post/p-153663623?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
    421 [9] https://substack.com/@theconvivialsociety
    422 [10] https://substack.com/@theconvivialsociety
    423 [12] https://substack.com/home/post/p-153663623?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
    424 [13] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comments
    425 [14] javascript:void(0)
    426 [15] http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/mom/02_babel/textos/mumford_authoritarian.pdf
    427 [16] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-1-153663623
    428 [17] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-2-153663623
    429 [18] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-3-153663623
    430 [19] https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F125537b6-a31e-44fa-9bff-51d9143ae9f0_1506x1006.png
    431 [20] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-4-153663623
    432 [21] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-5-153663623
    433 [22] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/why-an-easier-life-is-not-necessarily
    434 [23] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-6-153663623
    435 [24] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&action=share
    436 [37] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/subscribe?coupon=528379b7&utm_content=153663623
    437 [39] https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43052/years-end-56d221b9e6bd8
    438 [40] https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe635e3a6-0485-4cef-a1f1-29bba1e2ba35_1518x1080.png
    439 [41] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-1-153663623
    440 [42] https://librarianshipwreck.wordpress.com/2021/01/13/authoritarian-and-democratic-technics-revisited/
    441 [43] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-2-153663623
    442 [44] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-3-153663623
    443 [45] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-4-153663623
    444 [46] https://robhorning.substack.com/p/commodified-incuriosity
    445 [47] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-5-153663623
    446 [48] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated#footnote-anchor-6-153663623
    447 [49] https://www.lostprophets.org/p/8-gary-snyder-ft-peter-coyote
    448 [50] https://open.substack.com/pub/lostprophets
    449 [51] https://www.lostprophets.org/p/9-dougald-hine-on-work-in-the-ruins
    450 [52] https://open.substack.com/users/1997022-dougald-hine?utm_source=mentions
    451 [54] https://substack.com/home/post/p-153663623?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
    452 [55] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comments
    453 [56] javascript:void(0)
    454 [63] https://substack.com/profile/1981039-annie-gottlieb?utm_source=comment
    455 [64] https://substack.com/profile/1981039-annie-gottlieb?utm_source=substack-feed-item
    456 [65] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comment/83598899
    457 [67] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comment/83598899
    458 [68] https://substack.com/profile/5737507-melba?utm_source=comment
    459 [69] https://substack.com/profile/5737507-melba?utm_source=substack-feed-item
    460 [70] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comment/83583349
    461 [72] https://theconvivialsociety.substack.com/p/life-cannot-be-delegated/comments
    462 [90] https://substack.com/privacy
    463 [91] https://substack.com/tos
    464 [92] https://substack.com/ccpa#personal-data-collected
    465 [93] https://substack.com/signup?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=web&utm_content=footer
    466 [94] https://substack.com/app/app-store-redirect?utm_campaign=app-marketing&utm_content=web-footer-button
    467 [95] https://substack.com/
    468 [97] https://enable-javascript.com/