[HN Gopher] Buckminster Fuller's greatest invention was his own ...
___________________________________________________________________
Buckminster Fuller's greatest invention was his own image
Author : conanxin
Score : 55 points
Date : 2022-09-01 15:12 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (newrepublic.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (newrepublic.com)
| swayvil wrote:
| Step 1 : create your mythology.
|
| Step 2 : live it
|
| It's an effective algorithm. Maybe even better than "invent a
| bunch of stuff".
|
| The face and memes live for a thousand years. The _Dymaxion_
| fades pretty fast.
|
| Ironically, though we are obsessed with machinery and endlessly
| discuss it, study it and work at it, it is only a tiny corner of
| our world.
| [deleted]
| hooverd wrote:
| I will remember the Dymaxion car. A cross between "the Homer"
| and an Airstream.
| michaelwww wrote:
| Inventing a public persona for fun and profit is a tradition in
| America (I can't speak for other countries.) I read a really good
| book on the topic many years ago: "Inventing Mark Twain: The
| Lives of Samuel Langhorne Clemens." I should read it again,
| because it was very interesting. Ben Franklin was another one
| from humble beginnings that turned himself into a world renown
| Parisian diplomat and inventor, among many other things.
|
| Edit: my favorite story of self-reinvention is the story of Korla
| Pandit. I love it because it's something I would have done.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korla_Pandit
| causality0 wrote:
| I had a lot more respect for Fuller before I learned about his
| "don't try to change behavior, technology will fix the problem"
| approach to nearly every societal ill including climate change.
| [deleted]
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| I don't think that's a fair characterization of his concept
| (which he called ephemeralization), e.g. "to do more and more
| with less and less until eventually you can do everything with
| nothing." He was critical of the lack of effectiveness of
| politics, arguing that energy put into it is unlikely to result
| in any real change. He showed that one could promote a radical
| new technological idea, and be seen as a non-threatening 'out
| of touch nerd' to all sides of a contentious political issue
| like climate change. This allows you to build cultural momentum
| and funding towards a solution and avoid the polarizing
| gridlock of politics.
|
| He absolutely intended to radically change behavior, by
| replacing our current way of doing things with a very different
| better way, that uses less resources. Not just the same thing
| somehow miraculously not problematic.
|
| Summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization
|
| This is a different idea than blind technological optimism,
| although they seem similar on the surface.
| mandmandam wrote:
| Am I wrong to think that there's a very strong, quiet,
| deliberate push against anything 'idealist' or 'utopian',
| more and more?
|
| It feels like I'm seeing a lot of articles lately that get
| deep thinkers quite wrong, or which use their personal
| character flaws to invalidate their ideas.
|
| Nuance as a concept seems to be dying more now even than
| under Trump, and it feels _artificial_. Deliberately
| instigated.
|
| ... Am I being overly paro here?
| rglover wrote:
| It's an extremely reasonable POV considering that he doesn't
| exclude human behavior as a variable. Unfortunately, most CC
| extremists do this to such a degree that their arguments are
| laughable/psychologically concerning.
|
| People aren't going to (and frankly, shouldn't have to if
| there's an option/solution) dial back their lifestyle unless
| they're forced at the barrel of a gun or it happens by
| circumstance. That it's even possible to rely on technology as
| a solution is a good thing and makes sense.
|
| Why make life miserable if you don't have to? And to be clear:
| we absolutely don't. Any miserable outcome is redirecting
| technology away from a solution (e.g., safe, abundant nuclear
| energy) towards technocratic authoritariaism (digital IDs,
| CBDCs, etc) and other psychopathic control systems that rely on
| extreme subjugation of human beings.
| Retric wrote:
| Seems like a reasonable argument.
|
| Technology _is_ doing vastly more for climate change than
| behavior.
| analog31 wrote:
| Also, technology is changing behavior.
| Retric wrote:
| In what way?
|
| An end user can't tell if electricity came from a wind farm
| or a coal power plant.
| Rekksu wrote:
| This article isn't really about Bucky Fuller so much as it is
| about a 21st century skeptic's view of technological optimism.
| The criticisms feel weak unless you are predisposed against his
| philosophy.
|
| In so far as the critique has any merit, it comes from
| comparisons to him and others who make careers out of commentary
| and punditry (inherently self-aggrandizing professions). I think
| that type of work is actually legitimate, though it is a)
| basically what publications like Slate and TNR are for and b) not
| really a complete summary of Fuller's work, which succeeded in
| genuine contributions to architecture.
| djmips wrote:
| You said what I was trying to say in my comment but way better.
| ;-)
| djmips wrote:
| When they disparage Fuller being in a line-up in an Apple
| Commercial that includes Dylan, Einstein, Muhammad Ali - my first
| thought is that it's not that he doesn't fit in because he's not
| actually notable but that he does fit in - those people
| notability are also a product of PR. Dylan in particular is in
| the business of 'image'. Ali for sure and even Einstein's fame
| was hugely out of proportion with his actual contributions. MLK's
| job was to grab minds (for a good cause). I used to hate sales
| and maybe most engineers do but it's really a fact of human
| existence.
| noir_lord wrote:
| > Einstein's fame was hugely out of proportion with his actual
| contributions
|
| Hugely?. I'd accept there was some variance (as you'd expect)
| but hugely made me stop and consider what you mean here.
| djmips wrote:
| Well I considered my wording and maybe it's the wrong word
| but for example, Maxwell isn't well known beyond people who
| are interested in science. So although Einstein's
| contributions were great there are many many others who don't
| have the PR.
|
| Remember we are talking about public fame.
| paulpauper wrote:
| He's sorta like a mix between Seth Godin and Elon Musk
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| Yet another post hating on Fuller without understanding his work
| or ideas. I would like to quote what I posted two weeks ago about
| this:
|
| > I think there is a lot of desire to 'cancel' historical tech
| visionaries like Fuller nowadays, because we are all burned out,
| depressed, and disengaged- feeling that our efforts have no real
| effect, and are pointless. It's easier to say people like Fuller
| didn't really do much, than to admit that we are capable of so
| much more.
|
| > Instead of thinking of him as a con-artist and self promoter,
| realize that his actions also fit someone that - well into his
| late 80s, still felt the joy, open mindedness, and limitless
| possibilities that young kids feel, and is usually burned out of
| us. He was so excited about what was possible!
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32513327
| Isamu wrote:
| Can we appreciate someone's contributions without idolizing
| them?
|
| I would agree, yes, he had some objectively interesting ideas
| and proposals.
|
| The idolizing masses surrounding him makes it impossible to
| critique things like his Synergetics textbook, which was ...
| not good to be generous.
| cxr wrote:
| The thing that this article mentioned and that your comment
| doesn't pick up on is that there is a new biography out on
| Fuller. This article is a quasi review, and the contents of the
| new book doesn't consist solely of uncritical praise. It's a
| proper biography and contains details that weren't widely
| discussed before. Unsurprising: not everything about a person's
| life will be good.
|
| Opining about why people are talking about the less rosy
| aspects of Fuller's life right now is like if you transported
| yourself back to the release of Isaacson's biography on Jobs
| and concerned yourself with why people were discussing the
| negative details regarding the incidents that Isaacson wrote
| about.
|
| The author worked with bfi.org to write the book. Calling this
| "hating on Fuller without understanding his work or ideas" or
| an attempt to cancel him is silly. (Not least of all because,
| you know, he's dead.)
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| Thanks for the context. I have been confused to see so many
| seemingly out of the blue critical posts about Fuller
| recently, and wasn't aware of this biography. I'm sure he's
| far from a perfect person... but his ideas have really had a
| positive impact on my life, and it would be a real shame if
| he was relabeled as a con artist that created nothing of
| value, thus discouraging others from benefiting form his
| books and ideas.
| [deleted]
| hooverd wrote:
| limitless possibilities?
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| yes, fixed
| kibwen wrote:
| These articles aren't "cancelling" Fuller, they're just
| dispelling some of his mythology. Indeed, there may be a modern
| trend towards disillusionment with self-proclaimed visionaries,
| but that's not necessarily any worse (or better) than what came
| before. We can evaluate Fuller's legacy with clear eyes and
| manage to conclude that, while his energy and enthusiasm was
| laudable, that idealism alone will not save the world.
|
| (And I say this as someone whose favorite map projection is, by
| far, the Dymaxion map.)
| paulpauper wrote:
| Agree. No one is trying to cancel him. It's just his legacy
| is greatly overinflated and his inventions had minimal or no
| impact on everyday life. It goes to show the power of
| marketing and perseverance if anything.
| hooverd wrote:
| And yet, the spirit of the Dymaxion Chronofile persists
| here.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-09-01 23:00 UTC)