There is, however, a more troubling and a far more complex issue at hand. The fear that we as a modern civilisation have lost our historical anchor, our historical narrative is affecting us in many, often adverse, ways. If we settle on the fact that the Bible used to be (in the west) our cultural framework, our narrative and that this narrative has over the centuries been supplemented and amended as humanity reached conclusions that were in effect contradictory to it; it can also be concluded that our sum of knowledge is the sum of our findings. Be it from philosophy to history and over to the natural sciences. Every culture needs a book of creation and every culture, be it east or west, has one. Note that it doesn’t need to be an issue of religion, which is essentially a mediator between you and the narrative (and as you reach higher levels of knowledge in history and science, usually a useless one at that). Do not make the mistake of confusing the practice of the narrative with its task, i.e explaining why we’re here in the first place.

In the west, we have demolished our faith in the narrative without ever really replacing it with a sound alternative. Quite simply, we as people are far less sure about who we are and where we came from – then we ever used to be. Couple this with the (often faulty) onslaught of information that the Internet (amongst others) brings us and we are truly at risk of severing all ties to whatever history and science could teach us. For lack of a joint belief or consensus, we create our own stories, our own narrative. Even if the results are nothing short of catastrophic. See, for example, of how media has drained what used to be the symbols of our civilisation of any real meaning. Everything can and will be a joke in AD-land. Satan being used to sell soft drinks? No problem. Newton on a pack of chewing gum? Hey, why not, maybe someone actually heard of the guy?

What has in essence happened is that we no longer live in a culture, we live in an economy. It is evident in the way that we percieve values and transmit them. Just about anything has an economical value and if it hasn’t it is either inconsequential or worse, threatening. Culture is looked upon with much suspicion and what everyone seems to know about it is that it usually “does’nt pay off much”, sneering at its practitioners that at best can hope to perform like dancing bears in the pinnacle of Economys own translation of culture: TV (and, the Net).

When reviving culture – or practising it classically, one is often assaulted with the clever, but essentially faulty argument of: “Why should we listen to dead white males?”, thus putting a gender and class obfuscation on the whole matter. It is a rethoric of the masses and quite alarming as it puts the core of the matter out of focus. Why? Because, class and gender aside (there are ways to explain it, naturally, but that is not the aim of this short text) – we used to have a civilisation built on the best minds that mankind could muster (never mind how these minds were selected!). The fact that these minds are no longer interesting or worse, labeled as “boring” (because a well brought up citizen consumes and wishes to be amused, not taught) has tipped the whole discussion into a sidestreet where those  Judeo-Christian symbols have lost the power to unite.

And thus, each person, each cluster of people, each clan in fact, has to find their own symbols and icons. Sometimes in faux religion, sometimes in pop culture and sometimes in nothing at all. The ball is out there for grabs and it’s up to anyone’s prowess as salesperson to convince the audience as to their particular brand of “truth”.

This, however, is nothing new and we’ve been living with the effects of this ever since Mcluhan first wrote his groundbreaking work. The process has been further described by Postman. The latter also offered a sort of solution for the modern mind.

What IS new, is that the explosion of social media has transferred from being a simple buzz to becoming an accepted form of learning. Social media is educative media in as much as it is a new way of learning: Tribal learning. We trust our tribe to tell us the truth, however vague, unresearched and bland this truth might be. And however cultureless.

This is what happens when you cut a civilisation adrift, far from any narrative that could hold it together or perhaps explain matters more clearly. We, citizens of the Net, find our symbols or make them up from haphazard and superficial result from a search engine. We believe what others say and purchase goods that others believe in. It is a vicious circle that erodes away on the foundation of why and what a little each time we choose to believe (or purchase) something “new”. Economical growth is what defines our existence and the illuminati are those that purchase and consume in the finest of ways.

There is essentially, nothing wrong in consumption. There is essentially nothing wrong with (true) freedom or financial growth for that matter either. It enables us wonderful things. There is however, something terribly wrong with not bothering to understand, on a deep, human level, what it is we are consuming, for what purpose and better still: That we did not come from buying things, we came from a line of ancestors who carried with them the idea of humanity. Not humanity as a function of economy alone, but as a product of history, science, culture AND economy.

I recently visited Rome, Italy. Having high hopes for the Italians as the cradle of European (however bloodthirsty) industry and civilisation both historically and thereafter, I was much disappointed of the state of affairs in old Rome. I recall that after WWII, the Italians, however poor, drew on the fact that they were, historically, a rich country. Culture, again. They knew that they had the works of Raphael in the Sistine chapel and they knew that they were from a country that gave birth to both Da Vinci and Vasari as well as countless other giants of that calibre. It did not matter much that poverty was everywhere because they had a form a dignity that allowed them a slow rebuild without lament.

It turns out however, that culture, has lost its meaning when finally wrung through the mill of television. And what’s even more apalling, Berlusconi-controlled television. Their icons and symbols have been replaced by cheap, mindnumbing propaganda and TV-shows with lightly clad women in place of debate and insight. Geographically, dead centre in that once proud capital, stands a fascist monstrosity called the parliament building. Drawing on the power and repute of old Rome it looks like something Walt Disney would have designed in spiteful caricature of an ancient culture. Berlusconi continues – applauded, and unhindered whatever tradition any fascist ever came up with.

Italy, and the Italians of today struggle with the same societal myopia that pervades much of the west. Once again, cut adrift from a cultural, narrative framework – we’re left with nothing but economy and no means to interpret it properly. Or go beyond the simple transaction of sale and purchase.

And so, it seems that the benefits of an updated, albeit classical education, are once again important. Perhaps more important than ever. In order to consume, citizen, you should really take it upon yourself to answer the question: “Where did you come from?”

In his excellent book, Technopoly, Postman stresses the fact that we cannot view any one single new technology as an isolated event. Meaning you really have to view the media landscape as a sort of ecosystem. You cannot introduce or remove one single organism in an ecosystem without altering the entire structure. The whole ecosystem changes, reboots. This has consequences for all the remaining, or new, inhabitants. This is the way that media, in the sense of acquistion of information, exists. All new formats declare a total war on the established ones. The process of transition often goes unnoticed and unquestioned.

For example; the process of print upheaved the primordial way of learning – by memorizing, group teaching and hands-on instruction. Knowledge became something of a simulation and wisdom (which is a function of experience) took the back seat. After print came television that by its very nature stresses quick observation, emotions and singular effects over logic, reason and slow, individual and often difficult acquisition of knowledge. These last decades has seen an unholy fusion of all of these previous technologies into a midway solution: The computer. The computer however differs in one important respect. It is all these things at once: Individual, emotional, logical, massconceptual, both slow and infinately quick.

Changes in the media landscape can however be quicker than the odd 300 years of evolution described above. Media formats change almost yearly and each new format is indeed a soldier that wages war on the media battlefield; the extinction of one will have far-reaching effects on the others. These changes are perceptible because they happen often while the structural changes in how we learn are not as acutely felt as they creep through decades and centuries.

The printing process, has been remarkably resilient to changes, however. The printed word has been much the same in the last odd century or two although the speed of distribution certainly has accelerated. It is in this respect that the e-book reader is an interesting machine: because it targets that very principle of learning by way of print and infuses it with the accelerated, interrupted, shortcut learning of the computer. Any information, readily available, whenever. Cross-referenced, rated and itemized to a fault. My point is that even if printed knowledge has nothing to do with wisdom – used prudently, with consciousness, it can certainly lay the foundation for it. Wisdom precurses knowledge while knowledge precurses nothing. It simply is. It is an indifferent, amoral tool.

An e-book reader, while claiming to shorten your way to wisdom, runs the very real risk of in fact elongating it considerably. Too brash conclusions and too many shortcuts work against the afterthought needed for acquiring information, sorting through it. Especially in a world where one is constantly assaulted by an amount of information that leaves little room for process or a deeper afterthought. Too much energy is wasted on being everywhere, constantly having to reach decisions and at a lightning pace evaluate situations. Many of our timesaving devices are in fact time vampires.

Technology is a friend that we need to keep under close inspection. It is too good a friend to let fly without asking question. Scepsis is healthy. But more importantly, we need to put our charming, overzealous, technological prophets up against the wall; ask them if they have given any thought not only what inventions do, but also, what they undo – and how this affects us on a deeper level. This is prudent, moral and responsible. Anything else is moronic, selfdestructing blindness. We cannot end up being the tools of our tools. Worse yet, we are at risk of becoming tools who have all but ceased asking questions.