Introduction
Undoubtedly, the evolution of industries has led to improved living standards, which is a sweeping goal for all, if not most, of humanity. However, the benefits of this occurrence have simultaneously been at the detriment of society regarding the erosion of human values. The stages of the industrial revolution (IR) characterised by mechanisation (1IR), electrification (2IR), automation (3IR), and digitisation (4IR) (Raja Santhi and Muthuswamy, 2023) have all had unique effects on human values. The culmination of these effects over the years makes it necessary to reflect on our position today (4IR) and what that means for the future of humanity. For this reason, this essay is an opinion piece presenting a reflection on the issue mentioned above with reference to past cultures covered in the module.
The Future Of Humans And Our Success As A Species
Overall, our success as a species can be seen in the tangibles of today’s world, which feature digital and computing technologies integrated into the different aspects of the physical world. This highlights the fourth industrial revolution (4IR), which, according to McKinsey & Company (2022), is the current era of connectivity propelled by advanced engineering, human-machine interaction, connectivity, computational power, and data and analytics and intelligence. While many advantages can be associated with implementing these technologies in various sectors and industries, it is essential to note that technology is just one part of the 4IR equation. The other part is the human aspect, which 4IR reportedly alienates, exacerbating social issues such as unemployment, loss of craftsmanship, and income inequality (Raja Santhi and Muthuswamy, 2023). From this point of view, the success of the human species is questionable, especially when premised on Marxism developed by Karl Max, whereby a capitalist system whereby economic and social change is driven by class struggle (Marx, 2000); 41R and future industrial revolutions, which are backed by capitalism promote a struggle between humanity and capital.
More specifically, Fuchs (2018) notes that the capitalist culture brought about by such evolutions produces issues such as security threats associated with cyber terrorism and hacking in the event of industrial espionage and also ethical issues of customer and employee privacy and data collection, such as more surveillance to optimise processes increases. Additionally, the culture leads to adverse environmental effects in the production and use phases of digital technologies and innovations (Duporte, 2022), more risks of accidents and disasters associated with these technologies, and more monopolisation and, hence, global inequalities (Fusch, 2018). These issues erode human values such as the common good, human dignity that involves fairness and respect for human rights, and stewardship for future generations and the planet (Malan, 2016). Still, despite these downfalls, capitalism, especially modern capitalism, offers an opportunity for prosperity if stewarded well (IESE Insight, 2021). This highlights the backbone of the projected future industrial revolution, known as Industry 5.0, and what could potentially be the future of humans.
According to Raja Santhi and Muthuswamy (2023), industry 5.0 (5IR) is expected to remedy the shortcomings of 4IR. Unlike 4IR, which ignores the contributions of the human aspect and the impact of digitisation on society and the environment and solely focuses on technology-enabled efficiencies, 5IR is expected to promote sustainable and inclusive growth. Noble et al. (2022) note that it will bring harmony between humans and machines while focusing on the best possible outcomes for all stakeholders. This outlook can be likened to a move from the past culture of the high renaissance, characterised by widespread explorations and exceptional achievements in various areas, including science (Hall, 2005), in this case, technology and innovation, to a culture of liberalism.
The past culture of liberalism, as put forth by philosopher John Locke, can be defined as a political philosophy that argues against absolutism and instead champions the position that people are naturally equal and free (Locke, 1947). It further states that the government exists to serve the needs of people and promote the public good as enabled by a social contract that transfers some of the individual’s rights to the government (Kraynak, 1980). This means that according to classical liberalism doctrines from the mid-17th century and modern liberalism doctrines of the late 90s and early 2000s, the role of the government in the functioning of society and the need for a system that similarly prevents the government from abusing the power given to them by individuals is greatly acknowledged. In context, it means that the government would equally be charged with eliminating hindrances to individual freedom (sustainability) upon further industrial revolution, that is the adoption of industry 5.0 technologies such as 6G and beyond, edge, fog, and cognitive computing, internet of everything (IoT), collaborative robots (cobots), digital twins and holography. Important to note, however, is that achieving this may not be as seamless as theory has it. This brings about my point of reflection presented below.
Conclusion and Reflection
I think humans will eventually realise that the costs of preceding industrial revolutions are likely to outweigh the benefits if not properly governed to promote the concepts put forth by Locke (1947). Having governance that ensures collaboration between humans and robots, for instance, as opposed to the complete elimination of human labour in manufacturing in promotion of capitalist ideals, would significantly promote the sustainability trilemma: environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Still, while this type of governance is ideal for the evolving world as suggested in the liberalism culture, the question of whether it is feasible for the collective given the diversities of the VUCA world is rife, leaving the success of humans as a species in general questionable.
References
Raja Santhi, A. and Muthuswamy, P. (2023) Industry 5.0 or industry 4.0 S? Introduction to industry 4.0 and a peek into the prospective industry 5.0 technologies. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 17(2), pp.947-979.
Locke, J. (1947) Two Treatises of Government: With a Supplement, Patriarcha, by Robert Filmer (No. 2). Simon and Schuster.
Kraynak, R.P. (1980) John Locke: from absolutism to toleration. American Political Science Review, 74(1), pp.53-69.
Hall, M.B. (2005) The High Renaissance, 1503-1534. Italian Renaissance: Rome, pp.107-183.
IESE Insight (2021) The future of capitalism. How the next generation of business leaders can fix capitalism to have a more positive impact for all. Available At: https://www.iese.edu/media/research/pdfs/75529.pdf [Accessed 15 February 2024].
Duporte, A. (2022) Environmental impacts of digitalisation: what to bear in mind. October 17, AEIDL. Available At: https://www.aeidl.eu/news/opinions/environmental-impacts-ofdigitalisation-what-to-bear-in-mind/ [Accessed 15 February 2024].
Noble, S.M., Mende, M., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (2022) The Fifth Industrial Revolution: How harmonious human–machine collaboration is triggering a retail and service [r] evolution. Journal of Retailing, 98(2), pp.199-208.
Malan, D. (2016, September) Values and the fourth industrial revolution: Connecting the dots between value, values, profit and purpose. In World Economic Forum.
Marx, K. (2000) Karl Marx: selected writings. Oxford University Press, USA.
Fuchs, C. (2018) Industry 4.0: the digital German ideology. Triplec: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 16(1), pp.280-289.
McKinsey & Company (2022) What are Industry 4.0, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and 4IR? Available At: https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-are-industry-4-0-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-and-4ir [Accessed 15 February 2024].
write