One of the most used ways to make sense of something is to compare it with something else, to see how one fits with the other and the gap between them.
Sometimes, we get a better representation of historical trends simply by putting timelines side by side. Provided both periods or events share many core similarities, as in "history repeats itself but doesn't rhyme", then a wealth of information can be derived from that comparison to make better informed decisions.
For instance, the crypto space is sometimes compared with dot com era and the gold rush of the 19th century. And people tend to extrapolate how this space may turn out in the future based on that.
Similarly, when we compare our current standard of living to the standard of living from half a century or a century ago, we come away with the impression that people are generally more wealthier and healthier now, compared to before.
As an effect, we become grateful for having been around during such times despite the relative hardships we're all going through.
I wonder what it would be like if an experience pops up that can't be compared with anything in the past.
Perhaps, living in Space stations or other planets in the next century. How would we make sense of it?
Arguably, many new experiences are loosely tied to the past and carry an element of newness that makes it a bit hard to draw comparisons with the past, especially on an individual level of experience.
What I mean by that is that even though we can try to compare new experiences to the past, there are always some unique aspects that don't quite fit, which makes it really hard to fully understand them.
This got me thinking about the role of analogy and metaphor in our understanding of the world. Can we truly understand something new without referencing something old?
For the most part, I think analogies and metaphors are essential tools for making sense of complex concepts, but they can also be misleading or incomplete.
The 'internet as a highway' analogy was useful for explaining the concept to a broader audience, but it also limited our understanding of the internet's true potential at that time.
In this new age of rapid technological advancement, we're constantly facing new experiences that don't have direct analogues in the past.
What seems interesting to me is despite the pace of innovation accelerating across all these new technologies, our understanding of them is mostly rooted on a bit outdated comparisons, such as comparing AI to human intelligence or blockchain to traditional financial systems. To me, this is more like comparing a house in Manhattan with the whole of Sweden.
Of course, this is not bad as a start but we definitely need to develop more nuanced and dynamic frameworks for understanding these technologies, frameworks that aren't necessarily rooted our default and linear view of the world, such as thinking a + b = c, therefore c = a.
Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments.
