In today’s society, it is common to hear expressions that encapsulate widely accepted ideas, often without much thought given to their true meaning. These analogical or metaphorical expressions can be true, false, misleading, or even meaningless. One such expression that is frequently used, especially by experts in the exact sciences when discussing social, political, or economic issues, is “we as a society.”
Recently, computer scientist Dennis Hassabis made a statement at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, where he emphasized the importance of AI and its impact on the future of humanity. He stated, “There’s much more at stake here than just companies or products. [It’s] the future of humanity, the human condition and where we want to go as a society.” While this statement may seem profound, it raises the question of whether a society can collectively decide where it wants to go.
In reality, a society is not a sentient being with the ability to make decisions or set goals. It is simply a collection of individuals who may have their own opinions, intentions, and preferences. Friedrich Hayek, a prominent economist, emphasized this point by highlighting that individuals within a society have their own desires and motivations, which may not align with the collective “we.”
The idea of “we as a society” can be problematic when it implies a uniformity of preferences or goals among individuals. In a truly free society, each individual should have the freedom to pursue their own objectives without imposing their will on others. The concept of common preferences can only be achieved through unanimously agreed rules or voluntary contracts, rather than through authoritarian dictates.
While some may argue that using the expression “we as a society” is simply a linguistic convention and does not carry any significant meaning, language often reflects underlying beliefs and attitudes. Historically, ideas of social organicism and anthropomorphism have been associated with authoritarian or totalitarian ideologies, where the collective “we” is used to justify oppressive actions.
Ultimately, it is important to recognize that society is a complex and dynamic system driven by individual interactions and choices. Even in situations where leaders claim to know where “we as a society” should go, it is often their own self-interests that guide their decisions, rather than a genuine concern for the collective well-being.
In conclusion, the expression “we as a society” should be used with caution, as it can mask the diversity of opinions and interests within a community. By acknowledging the autonomy and agency of individuals, we can foster a more inclusive and democratic society where different perspectives are valued and respected.
