Truncated means a shortened version of something. We are not talking life expectancy or longevity here.  A truncated lifestyle is about getting something quicker out of our lifestyle. Currently, every part of modern living is looking for a shortcut. Texting has gone from thank you to TY. Our icons on our computer are the shortcuts to getting where we want to go online more rapidly.

Every part of our current existence is designed to speed things up. It used to be just our cars and our love life needed to be faster, now it is everything. How is this truncated lifestyle changing who we are? Like a marriage vow, are we accepting that change is for better or for worse?

“Instant gratification takes too long.” –Carrie Fisher

We’ve Got an App for That

We are demanding more and more from our smart devices. Apps for banking, music, shopping, gambling, gambling addiction—the list goes on ad infinitum. We appear to be insatiable when it comes to new technology, which is all designed to get us someplace faster. We are in the midst of creating more and more time on screens and less and less time for face-to-face interaction with our human colleagues.  “Unfortunately, we will never entirely prevent people downloading unsafe apps in the same way that we won’t stop people clicking on links in emails and accidentally allowing hackers access to our corporate machines and networks.” ⁽²⁾

Expectations

What are the expectations of our newfound technology prowess? Can technology provide a better life? Will AI and analytics convert into a more meaningful and satisfactory human existence?

Interestingly, social scientists are believed to be necessary after the implementation of technology and not in its planning phases ⁽¹⁾. This sounds very familiar. Isn’t this the same situation we find ourselves in with mobile phones and other screen devices in the hands of two-year-olds now? And over time, what we have learned is that it's creating a population that is more distracted, compulsive, lonely, depressed, and anxious.

The time to incorporate knowledge about the social impacts of technology on society is in the pre-implementation phase, not post-implementation. The history of technology to date is all about: “Because we can, we should.” Social scientists will be expected to be part of the clean-up for the techno-bias that pushed society into this place too early.  Is this truncated lifestyle always better? Have you ever been disappointed by fast food?

Creating the flesh of technology, machines, is the easy part. Alongside such efforts, designers and researchers from a range of disciplines need to conduct what we call a social-systems analysis of AI. They need to assess the impact of technologies on their social, cultural, and political settings ⁽¹⁾.  

We need to qualify and quantify the spirit of AI. How will AI affect the spirit of being human in a world that relies on superhuman machines? Will the human psyche adapt, as the engineers suggest? Or is there some aspect of human adaptability the engineers have not considered? We need that information before, not after.

“Future shock is the shattering stress and disorientation that we induce in individuals by subjecting them to too much change in too short a time.” - Alvin Toffler

Back to the Future Shock ⁽³⁾

Almost 50 years ago, Alvin Toffler disturbed and challenged the world with his classic work Future Shock. Toffler predicted that the biggest issue facing future generations would be our ability to adapt to the accelerating pace of change. Does the modern world embody many of Toffler’s ideas? Toffler predicted that environmental overstimulation would not only impact our physical and social worlds, but also our psyche.

We have seen the results of overstimulation in survivors of war and natural disasters like earthquakes and floods. The psychologically overwhelmed are marked by confusion, anxiety, irritability, and withdrawal into apathy. Today, anxiety disorders are the most common mental illness in the United States, affecting some 40 million adults. Toffler predicted that people will attempt to cope with accelerated change through denial, specialism, reversion, and simplification.

Outright denial blocks out an unwelcome reality. Today’s examples for some might include climate change, artificial intelligence, self-driving cars, and genomics. The person in denial is not able to accept changes and believes that all evidence of change is incomplete and superficial. The denier, according to Toffler, sets themselves up for personal catastrophe because they will ultimately be forced to adapt to the denied change, which may be in the form of a massive life crisis.

Toffler described the specialist as someone who avoids change by becoming very insular within their profession or social passion. Ultra-conservative political advocates continue to lobby for the fossil fuel industry despite newer technology that appears to be a much better option. The specialist is rigid and closed to change, which makes them especially vulnerable in an accelerated world.

Revisionists are attempting to cope with change by seeking out past modes of action that may no longer be appropriate. Returning to the glories of yesteryear is the way they respond to rapid change. Authoritarian regimes, terrorist groups, white supremacists, and some religious groups are examples of revisionist thinking, according to Toffler.

The super-simplifier, according to Toffler, is someone who copes with change by oversimplifying anything perceived as too complex. Individuals who turn to addictive pastimes or violence may be subject to this type of coping mechanism.

“The speed of communications is wondrous to behold. It is also true that speed can multiply the distribution of information that we know to be untrue.” –Edward R. Murrow

We are living in a world of social media that allows like-minded thinking to perpetuate permutations of truth very easily. This like-minded feel is comforted by having camaraderie with little regard for the accuracy of the misinformation they purvey—especially when the information simplifies the complex.  Besides, a simpler message is easier to pass along.

Are we experiencing similar styles in coping with change in today’s supercharged technological boom? Are we witnessing a world obsessed with increased novelty and accelerated change?

Many of the psychological issues that we see people facing today appear to be  related to this shift to a more truncated lifestyle.  What’s the rush?

^References

^{1-Crawford, K. & Calo, R. (2016). There is a blind spot in AI research. Nature 538, 311-313, Oct. 13, 2016.}

^{2-Paterson, A. (2017). We’ve Got an App for That. Huffpost, August 30, 2017.}

^{3-Wilson, B. (2019). Back to the ‘Future Shock.' The Psychologist (UK), March 12, 2019.}