The Paradox of Creative Disruption

Imaged by ha11ok |

Written by Muhammad Natsir Tahar

No nation is technologically advanced without creative disruption, this has long been elaborated by Joseph Scumpeter as a condition for the flow of the economy to survive.

No nation has survived so long frozen from the technological innovations that have moved the times. If the disruption of innovation is still defined as something that interferes with the continuation of conventional industry, it is a sign to be called a ruin. But we will come to a time when creative disruption will become the common enemy of the human species.

Disruption is a term that was first popularized by Clayton Christensen, economist from Harvard Business School in 1995. This phenomenon is characterized by the emergence of various innovations, technologies, platforms, and new business models to meet public tastes that demand novelty and win superiority through little sacrifice.

Technology continues to accelerate to serve the market community. Then what about those who are served, when their own existence is being threatened. The future faces the biggest dilemma, on the one hand the excitement of innovation must be absorbed, on the other hand robotic algorithms increasingly strip the human brain and muscles.

The unemployed humans who were dumped by the automation industry will not be able to buy anything. While the economic system as a dynamic continuum will not be able to move away from the iron law of supply and demand.

We will be at a tipping point, will we win over our weak existence or continue the innovation project that is sure to threaten. Can philosophies tame and stifle innovation for the sake of the people they are meant to serve?

Let’s review through the formulation of the philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), an initiator of phenomenology. Technology, said Heidegger, is between humans and the world. Tools connect us to the world, connecting apparatus. Things define who we are.

According to him, all these objects are readiness to hand, their existence is intended for something, so technology can never be neutral, because there are motives and there are consequences. If technology is only understood as instrumental, then it has been deprived of its essence.

Speaking of cyborgs, world-class elites will appear who have transformed into superhumans who have implanted robotic superiority in their brains and muscles. They are amortals who scientifically don’t age and die of disease. But death will still pick them up with God’s intervention.

We hope that Heidegger will still be heard by end-time innovators: technology cannot be left neutral, it must side with humans, amid all the equipment that has been prepared to replace us. Super intelligent and powerful robots will stroll in the midst of humans. This will be the final act of creative disruption.

Don’t imagine them as they are now, like titanium skulls with glowing crystal eyes, they can even be more charming and gentle, also more soulful as a refinement of the cyborg (cybernetic organism): the result of the marriage of humans with robots. And someday humans will actually marry robots.

Speaking of cyborgs, world-class elites will appear who have transformed into superhumans who have implanted robotic superiority in their brains and muscles. They are amortals who scientifically don’t age and die of disease. But death will still pick them up with God’s intervention.

The ingenuity of the human brain was replaced by a data crunch that was started by the chess master Garry Kasparov who was powerless before the Deep Blue engine (1996) or the greatest French Bordeaux vineyard rating of fame since 1855, then lost to the predictions of Orley Ashenfelter using only statistical power.

All types of work almost without exception are slowly being automated, it’s only a matter of whether it will be absorbed or waiting for the right moment. Likewise with skilled hands such as Michelanggelo’s or Leonardo Davinci’s masterpieces that can be re-created by simply pressing a 3D printer button.

The best symphony at Beethoven’s level, the most beautiful prose and poetry of Kahlil Gibran or the unique allegories of Franz Kafka will be easily written robotically with a quality that makes humans unable to distinguish, not to say: beyond.

Even to remove the noise and waste by the rituals of the democratic party, the best robot president can be created that far exceeds all the presidents that have ever existed. In a futuristic autopilot state, a human president and his line of leadership may still be only needed as symbols.

Then what are our steps? technology 4.0, for example, is a symptom of the latest trends in automation and data exchange in factory technology which actually indicates the phase that is worrying about is approaching. The term industry 4.0 includes cyber-physical systems, internet of things, cloud computing, and cognitive computing.

We seem to only focus on the emergence of novice businessmen or startups but still hope that their output will be absorbed by the threatened human market. Technology 4.0 only provides clues for adaptation, not solutions. Not much different when we replace manual cars with automatic gear. Even smart factories in 4.0 will try to reduce humans according to their original nature: computerization.

Anticipating the threat of a digital apocalypse with big data algorithms is our biggest homework, in addition to still having to deal with the nation’s current problems which are handled banally, the noise of democracy, cultural and systematic corruption, economic bubbles, demographic bonuses, and the decline of essential dialectics as a civilized nation due to a literacy deficit.

So creative disruption in the future becomes a paradox, even a threat to human existence that currently has not been found a way to anticipate it. ~