Might “The Ruins of Trantor” (art by Angus McKie) look like the remains of our society some far-flung day millennia away from now?
Isaac Asimov was ahead of his time. Learning from the genius and crazy ideas of psychohistory and apply them to our time.
In the famous sci-fi series Foundation by Isaac Asimov, the fictional discipline of psychohistory is used to predict and plan human events thousands of years into the future after the collapse of a large and powerful galactic empire. Psychohistory works by accounting for inevitable social trends and allowing timelines to play out naturally, aided by the hands of wise leaders who choose peace over conflict and abandon tried and true methods of action only once it becomes clear that people have become too dependent on those methods.
“What business of mine is the future?” asks Hober Mallow, the legendary merchant prince and eventual political pioneer who occupies but one short generational link in the eons-long chain of distinguished heroes that make up the Foundation’s formative history. “There will be other crises in the time to come when money power has become as dead a force as religion is now.”
His point, of course, is not to disparage the influence of commerce or religion, but to acknowledge them as tools that function only in their appropriate time and place. Neither are panaceas to all of society’s ills. Put even more simply, we cannot count on today’s solutions to solve tomorrow’s problems.
The Foundation books are filled with stories of consequential events in which the central figure or figures must make choices that will affect the entire future of human civilization. Results of these choices can mean the difference between prosperity or generations of dark ages. As in real life, choosing correctly often requires going against the grain.
This futurist concept is perhaps even more fascinating to contemplate today, 75 years after the publication of the first Foundation story. Asimov’s 1940s-era imagination of future technologies serves as the perfect meta-backdrop to the themes of psychohistory. What milestones of our own history have shaped the world we live in today?
It’s often said that there’s a fine line between genius and crazy. After all, some of humanity’s most intrepid explorers, inventors and change agents were driven by a decidedly non-mainstream vision. Titans of discovery like Einstein, Galileo and Mendel were mocked and derided as wackos during their heyday. Other pioneers such as Nicolai Tesla and Pythagoras probably were insane. But all of these men contributed to human progress in ways too immense to quantify. And their success was rooted in taking the unconventional road.
“The public is wonderfully tolerant,” said Oscar Wilde. “It forgives everything except genius.” This common lament of brilliant artists has its basis in reality. Too many of our best and brightest, Wilde himself included, have died in infamy or obscurity.
But for as much as we celebrate the underdog stories of outcasts and dreamers who changed the world on the fringes of social acceptance, we also forget that these movers and shakers were marginalized for a reason. Most of the time, that reason was failure (or at the very least failure to adequately communicate their successes).
Ever heard of the Apple Lisa, the ROKR or the G4 Cube? You can be forgiven if not. These devices make up a small sampling of the many failed products launched by the inimitable Steve Jobs. While we marvel at the revolutionary origins of the PC, iPhone and Pixar technology, we tend to overlook the fact that the same driving creative force behind such game changers was also the propellant of countless bad ideas and poorly executed master plans.
“The public is wonderfully tolerant. It forgives everything except genius.” — Oscar Wilde
So what separates the good ideas from the bad ones? And what lessons can we take away from both the luminaries of real history and the trailblazers of psychohistory? I’d say there are two above others: don’t be afraid and don’t give up.
First, remember that no good idea is going to be met with absolute acceptance. If it is, that should be a sign to reevaluate it. In fact, original thinking is positively correlated with public resistance. Why? Maybe for the same reason most people don’t like to sit in the front row of a standup comedy show. They don’t like putting themselves out on a limb, and they like shaking that limb even less.
Even if the idea is something small and seemingly insignificant, when people’s first reaction is to dismiss it out of hand, that should be a sign to take it seriously and think about it even further. This is my simple litmus test for the validity of fresh ideas.
Second, regardless of success or failure, when you believe strongly in a potential solution to a problem, keep pursuing it until you’re satisfied that you’ve fully explored its implications. If you’re particularly bright, this idea may be too profound to ever truly fulfill. That’s a rare and wonderful problem to have. But for most of us, we cannot expect to change the world. We can only make a difference in the lives of those around us by being persistent in our passions.
It takes vision, courage and perseverance to overthrow policies that Asimov called “outdated, dangerous or impossible.” Put more succinctly, this is how we make a better future.