Perhaps we should debate whether the technological advances of the last two (or three) decades are likely to expand human capabilities or not.
Here is how I think about this, fwiw.
If we say that it does, then we should probably admit too that the other advances you alluded to (transportation, electricity) have expanded human capabilities as well. We probably will get more capable, as a species, than we are now, just as we are probably more capable than we were before. That's the optimistic take.
The pessimistic one is that we have not become more capable, but that we can more easily outsource certain tasks to technology, freeing up time. What previously would have taken a day, a horse and plenty of straw can now be accomplished by in a few hours in a robotaxi. What changed is that the man who previously would have had hours to ruminate on horseback now has free time, free time that might even lead to innovation, creativity or a great new idea. The unfortunate truth about free time that anyone who has ever worked a nine-to-five job has to find out the hard way is that the fourty-eight hours left over at the weekend quickly dwindles to twenty-four, to twelve, and suddenly, the most of your to-do list now has to get carried over to next weekend, because you should probably catch a few extra hours of sleep to make up for a late night or two of unwinding, so that you can get a good start to your week. Potentiality do not necessarily equate to accomplishment.
I am not a pessimist, but I am quite familiar with being apathetic. I get the sense that is how many people of my generation feel. Of course, I would rather have the choice to take a robotaxi rather than a horse (personally, I might prefer the horse, but the choice is what's important here). But the obvious conclusion here is that the pessimist sees younger folk as lazy, apathetic and entitled, probably because that was how their progenitors saw them. I am not saying that you necessarily do. But I think yours and others' arguments on the subject can easily take for granted the feedback mechanism that humans always have had to new advances in technology.
What do you think is the main factor, coupled with new advances in technology, that will determines prosperity for generation z?
Here is how I think about this, fwiw.
If we say that it does, then we should probably admit too that the other advances you alluded to (transportation, electricity) have expanded human capabilities as well. We probably will get more capable, as a species, than we are now, just as we are probably more capable than we were before. That's the optimistic take.
The pessimistic one is that we have not become more capable, but that we can more easily outsource certain tasks to technology, freeing up time. What previously would have taken a day, a horse and plenty of straw can now be accomplished by in a few hours in a robotaxi. What changed is that the man who previously would have had hours to ruminate on horseback now has free time, free time that might even lead to innovation, creativity or a great new idea. The unfortunate truth about free time that anyone who has ever worked a nine-to-five job has to find out the hard way is that the fourty-eight hours left over at the weekend quickly dwindles to twenty-four, to twelve, and suddenly, the most of your to-do list now has to get carried over to next weekend, because you should probably catch a few extra hours of sleep to make up for a late night or two of unwinding, so that you can get a good start to your week. Potentiality do not necessarily equate to accomplishment.
I am not a pessimist, but I am quite familiar with being apathetic. I get the sense that is how many people of my generation feel. Of course, I would rather have the choice to take a robotaxi rather than a horse (personally, I might prefer the horse, but the choice is what's important here). But the obvious conclusion here is that the pessimist sees younger folk as lazy, apathetic and entitled, probably because that was how their progenitors saw them. I am not saying that you necessarily do. But I think yours and others' arguments on the subject can easily take for granted the feedback mechanism that humans always have had to new advances in technology.
What do you think is the main factor, coupled with new advances in technology, that will determines prosperity for generation z?