Hating on futurists
There was a great interaction on Twitter this weekend I just happened to overhear regarding the following question:
"What is more pompous, calling yourself a 'guru' or a 'futurist?'"
It's a great question. That the quip came originally from a member of the mainstream business media, opinioneers not known for their humility, makes the debate all the more interesting. I think the question isn't complete until you include the title "innovation expert" into the arrogance gumbo. If you're a guru futurist innovation expert...ooh, you're probably a douche.
"Futurist" is a self-granted title that many people invest themselves with, like Napoleon crowning himself emperor of France. Ideally, it should mean that you take a logical methodology to strategic intelligence as opposed to just guessing. Too often, it just means some eminence grise up on stage opining about endless economic booms, enhanced virtual shopping, and the potential for immortality. The complete lack of quality control has led the term futurist to become a prime target for mockery. The mockery is well deserved, as far as I can tell.
But guess what? Many, many titles in our world provide the opposite value than what they promise.
- Judges don't guarantee justice
- Lawyers don't necessarily follow the law
- Insurance doesn't mean you shouldn't worry
- Consultants steal your watch and tell you what time it is
- Reporters are often handmaidens for the public relations efforts of the powerful
- Customer service is there to deflect companies from complaints, not solve problems
- Social media expert means you have a Facebook AND a Twitter account
This doesn't mean I want a world without law, insurance or customer service. It means we need to live up to our promises. That the term futurist sounds funny is no reason to subject it to standards any higher - or lower - than the rest of the job descriptions in our modern economies.
Digg
Facebook
Google
LinkedIn
Twitter
Yahoo
Like us on Facebook
WorldFutureSoc on Twitter
Comments
Who/what is a futuris?
I agree, "I am a Futurist" does sound pompous;
"I am interested in running thought experiments about future possibilities" sounds less so. But it is also less catchy.
But I have a more interesting critique of Futurists:
Futurists have hitherto only speculated about various future scenarios; but the point is to bring about a better future.
That better future should start with a vision nurtured by the proper scientific understanding of deficiencies in the present.
The bottom line for all human enterprise is physical survival in a degree of comfort and security. Economics is one of social sciences that have the satisfaction this human need within its remit. So I think that a futurist would have a fair degree of economic literacy of a special kind---the kind which is exercised as a defense against the danger of being deceived by economists. This is important because mainstream economists are largely employed to protect the status quo and to justify the persistence of all manner of anachronistic practices.
All this is a preamble to my proposal here that the most urgent single step towards a viable social future is to break the tight link that exists between income and employment. The orderly achievement of a looser linkage of income to job holding is via the well researched policy of Universal Basic Income advocated by a worldwide movement.
Since such policy addresses the most basic of human rights---that of unconditional right to life and the means of life---it has a beneficial system-wide influence on the quality of social life by eradicating abject and involuntary poverty.
Here is the immediate step into a future whose origins go back to the beginning of the Industrial/Scientific revolutions.
Post new comment