Wendell Berry argues against buying a computer in 1987, believing it offers no improvement to his writing process and presents several societal downsides. He emphasizes the value of his physical tools and the importance of resisting consumerism. He sees the computer as an unnecessary expense, especially given its potential to become obsolete quickly. He further criticizes the environmental impact of computer manufacturing and fears computers will contribute to job displacement, corporate centralization, and the erosion of community life. Ultimately, he values human connection and careful consideration over technological advancement and efficiency.
In his 1987 essay, "Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer," Wendell Berry articulates a deeply considered and multifaceted resistance to adopting personal computer technology. His argument transcends mere Luddism and delves into the complex interplay of technology, economics, and human values. Berry begins by establishing his criteria for evaluating any new tool or technology: it must be cheaper than the tool it replaces, small and repairable, and subservient to human needs rather than dictating them. He also emphasizes the importance of local provenance and the ability to understand and control the technology's impact on his life and community.
Berry then systematically dismantles the purported benefits of personal computers, particularly word processors, within the context of his life as a writer and farmer. He argues that the cost of a computer, printer, and software, along with the associated maintenance and inevitable upgrades, far outweighs the cost of his existing typewriter, pencils, and paper. He questions the supposed increase in efficiency offered by word processing, asserting that the time saved in revising drafts is negated by the temptation to endlessly tinker and the distractions inherent in the technology itself. Furthermore, he expresses concern over the ephemeral nature of digital documents and the potential for data loss.
Beyond the practical considerations, Berry raises deeper philosophical objections. He worries about the potential for computers to erode essential skills like handwriting and careful composition, leading to a decline in the quality of writing and thought. He also critiques the consumerist culture surrounding technology, which encourages constant upgrades and fosters a sense of dissatisfaction with existing tools. He views this cycle of consumption as detrimental to both the environment and human well-being.
Berry's concerns extend to the broader societal implications of computer technology. He anticipates the rise of a digital divide, where access to information and opportunity becomes stratified based on economic status. He also foresees the potential for computers to further isolate individuals and communities, replacing face-to-face interaction with mediated communication. Finally, he expresses apprehension about the increasing reliance on experts and centralized systems for information and repair, diminishing individual self-sufficiency and control.
In conclusion, Berry's refusal to buy a computer is not a rejection of technology per se, but rather a thoughtful and principled stance against the uncritical adoption of a technology he believes will ultimately be detrimental to his work, his community, and his values. He advocates for a more discerning approach to technological advancement, one that prioritizes human needs, local autonomy, and the preservation of essential skills and traditions. He challenges readers to consider the full spectrum of a technology's impact, extending beyond mere convenience and efficiency to encompass the broader social, economic, and environmental consequences.
Summary of Comments ( 87 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43882809
HN commenters largely agree with Wendell Berry's skepticism of computers, particularly his concerns about their societal impact. Several highlight the prescience of his observations about the potential for computers to centralize power, erode community, and create dependence. Some find his outright rejection of computers too extreme, suggesting a more nuanced approach is possible. Others discuss the irony of reading his essay online, while appreciating his call for careful consideration of technology's consequences. A few point out that Berry's agrarian lifestyle allows him a perspective unavailable to most. The top comment notes the essay is less a critique of computers themselves, and more a critique of the structures and systems they empower.
The Hacker News post linking to Wendell Berry's essay, "Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer," generated a substantial discussion with a variety of perspectives on Berry's arguments. Several commenters found his points resonant, particularly his concerns about the potential for computers to exacerbate existing societal problems and further centralize power. They appreciated his emphasis on localism, craft, and human connection. Some highlighted his prescience in foreseeing the potential for technology to create echo chambers and filter bubbles, isolating individuals and communities.
Others pushed back against what they perceived as Berry's overly romanticized view of the past and his dismissal of the potential benefits of technology. Some argued that his concerns about the centralization of power were misplaced, pointing out that the internet has also enabled decentralized movements and empowered individuals in ways he may not have anticipated. They also noted the practical benefits of computers for tasks like writing and communication, suggesting that Berry's rejection of them was impractical and perhaps even hypocritical, given that his essay was likely typed on a typewriter, a technology he seemingly accepted.
A few commenters delved into the philosophical underpinnings of Berry's argument, discussing his agrarian philosophy and his critique of industrialism. They explored the tension between embracing technological progress and preserving traditional values and practices. Some suggested that Berry's perspective, while perhaps extreme, offers a valuable counterpoint to the often uncritical embrace of new technologies.
Several commenters also discussed the irony of Berry's essay being shared on the internet, a technology he explicitly rejects. This irony sparked a discussion about the complexities of engaging with ideas that challenge our own practices and the potential for hypocrisy in navigating the modern world. Some suggested that this irony shouldn't invalidate Berry's points, while others saw it as undermining his credibility.
Finally, some commenters offered personal anecdotes about their own relationships with technology, reflecting on their attempts to find a balance between the benefits and drawbacks of digital tools. Some discussed their efforts to limit their screen time or to use technology in ways that align with their values.