Declare the agenda of tools for human better than ICT(Information & Communication Technology) that we shouted
We humans can't even hear our own sound, and yet we have been trying — and still are — to hear the voice of unseen beings.
We humans can't communicate even with the creatures around us (puppies, birds, bees, fish), and yet we try to converse with the inanimate things we have manufactured (computers).
We humans can't even communicate with the humans right in front of us, and yet we try to communicate through the tools we have made.
Such humans launch rockets, explore space, and try to communicate with beings outside Earth, outside the solar system, outside the galaxy.
I wonder whether — like the siblings who went on a long journey to find the bluebird and, in the end, discovered it back home — we are overlooking what is already right around us.
The word "IoT (Internet of Things)" is slowly becoming common.
Going beyond dialogue with visible inanimate things (computers) that we made, humans are now attempting to converse with invisible inanimate things (the internet) they have made.
* Some may take issue with calling the internet inanimate in the first place. Of course. Accepted. You have a point too. Let's not flatly deny each other. It's just regrettable.
The word "big data" is also steadily becoming common.
To forecast weather and prevent crime, humans gather vast data collected from all over the world through conversations with their own artificial satellites, understand the phenomenal meaning the data holds, analyze the various ripple effects those phenomena can cause, and then reprocess the results into material for predicting the future.
In truth, wouldn't it be faster to understand phenomenal meaning by talking with people who are struggling under social pressure and the burden of their role as members of society, and to work out alternatives by analyzing the ripple issues those phenomena could cause?
In truth, rather than predicting the movements of the cosmos and nature, wouldn't it be faster to gain information that can predict the future by conversing with birds or with frogs, understanding their phenomenal meaning?
I leave behind this thought — one that, to some, may look like the writing of someone who doesn't know any better.
Humans don't converse with the human (a living being) standing in front of them,
and instead analyze the phenomenon (the human or the object) through the inanimate (tangible tools) they made, or through the common sense that only their group defines (intangible tools), and then judge on that basis.
Plants have their own communication, animals have theirs, and so do we humans.
My hope is that the Communication Technology we keep improving will not, in the end, be a platform that collects and analyzes the resulting Information and hands it out,
but a Communication Technology that is grounded in the exchange with the phenomenon (the human or the object) that produces and provides that Information.
