Civilizations and value １8 ( the gap between social force and technological efficiency )

Due to the influence of external forces, modern Japan has not been able to clarify its cultural ideas to the same extent as it was during the Edo period * 1 , and today's new academic studies are similar to what Western studies were during the Edo period. This is probably a situation that has not yet been clarified . Therefore, it may be fair to say that modern Japan has fought back in a state of cultural and academic uncertainty and ambiguity, even compared to the Edo period *2 . The tools for fighting back have not yet been determined, and this may be why Japan appears to be drifting adrift .

 

 *1 Modern Japan has not been able to clarify its cultural ideas to the same extent as in the Edo period .

During the Edo period, cultural ideas seem to have changed in relatively simple or indigenous forms, partly due to the effects of national isolation. In contrast, cultural ideas have changed in complex and ideological ways due to the influence of Europe in the period before World War II and the United States and the Soviet Union in the period after World War II . For this reason, cultural ideas were not as clear as they were in the Edo period, and even today we can say that we are drifting adrift without being able to navigate. This is one of the reasons why modern Japan has not become like it was during the Meiji Restoration. This may lead us to expect that modern Japan will undergo reforms in a form different from that of the Meiji Restoration.

 

*2 Modern Japan is fighting back in a state of cultural and academic uncertainty, even compared to the Edo period.

At the end of the Edo period, Western science was a new and distinct methodology both culturally and academically. In terms of culture, it will later recede, but while the usefulness of science and technology is relatively easy to clearly identify, the usefulness of culture and social sciences is not clearly obvious. Despite this , it seems that even in modern times there are many places that rely too much on Western methods.

 

Japan's drifting is likely to be deeply connected to the next question of ``what is the essence of the Fourth Industrial Revolution?'' Although there are new values brought about by AI and new energy, the most important significance of the upcoming Fourth Industrial Revolution lies in ``bridging the gap between social structural strength and technological efficiency.' ' This is because there is a possibility that new value will be created.

 

Bridging the gap between social structural strength and technological efficiency

Social structural power is the power to improve life through the development of social organization based on certain values, and technological efficiency is the power to improve life through the development of technology based on certain values. It refers to the power to move. And value has an expanse, or value space. The premise of technological efficiency is natural science, and the methodology for understanding natural phenomena has made steady progress . Information science, physics, biology, and other fields have made progress, and it seems that we are reaching a stage where they are crossing over. But what was the basis of this development of natural science? I think it was mechanics (physics). By expressing power in numbers and using it, it can be said that the ability to produce and move has greatly increased, or is still in the process of increasing. This was also called ``physics imperialism.'' Can it really be said that social structural power has kept pace with such rapid developments in technological efficiency? The fields covered by social structural power may include politics, public administration, and business organizations. One of the reasons why social structural power is inferior to technical efficiency power is that it is considered a field that is not suitable for mechanical expression, and it may be because it has not necessarily been constructed in that way. It seems to me.

 

Max Weber's concepts of modernization included capitalism for the economy and democracy and bureaucracy for politics and administration. However, in a sense, capitalism has been quantified, and to a large extent dynamicalized (interest rates, prices, and economic growth rates are also expressed in quantities, if these can be considered as a kind of force) . On the other hand, it has been difficult to quantify democracy and bureaucracy , so they have not made much progress. Furthermore, democracy and bureaucracy have often clashed, and still do (perhaps especially in terms of the degree of vertical division). Under these circumstances, we are now beginning to see the possibility that democracy and bureaucracy can be quantified and dynamicized from a technical perspective as well. This is because informatization and AI are making this possible.

All rights reseved to M Ariake