Techno-Social Dilemma

Scientists tell us that we as a species are in the middle of a major evolutionary transition, as technology is changing at a much faster pace than we are socially able to process. How can we evaluate and ensure real progress for our species and our planet?

One of the issues is the rise of misinformation and deepfakes. Discernment and caution are necessary with false narratives being spread on social media. Recently, the Club of Rome has introduced a Young Person's Guide to Storytelling.

The Human Energy Project "sees promise in exploring innovative technologies with a longer-term perspective and global, interdisciplinary collaboration. Only through universal alignment can we regain the agency lost to these runaway technologies." Human Energy is sponsoring academic research into the unforeseen consequences of innovation, from pollution and climate change to a youth mental health crisis.

Dr. Francis Heylighen and Dr. Shima Beigi define the Techno-Social Dilemma (TSD) as "the growing prevalence of anxiety, depression, and despair in technologically advanced nations." TSD is a loss of our “sense of coherence” in the Information Age, meaning that people no longer experience life as comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful.

Professor David Sloan Wilson is heading an ethics research project for Human Energy based on his Prosocial approach. Prosocial is based on the work of Nobel Prize-winning economist Elinor Ostrom and grounded in contextual behavioral science, evolutionary science, and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Sloan is co-author with Paul W.B. Atkins and Steven C. Hayes of the 2019 book: Using Evolutionary Science to Build Productive, Equitable, and Collaborative Groups.

"The spectacular growth of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has made the world more Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous (VUCA), while increasing the pressure to consume, produce, and distribute information."

In their 2025 book Navigating the Age of Chaos: A Sense-Making Guide to a BANI World That Doesn't Make Sense, Jamais Cascio, Bob Johansen, and Angela F Williams have updated VUCA to BANI (Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Inconprehensible).

---

IFTF researcher Mark Frauenfelder's article: Algorithmic Harm Isn't a Bug, It's the Business Model says "Automated decisions maximize profit by externalizing harm, and adoption is accelerating faster than accountability. The path to protect against the potential harm of AI's decision-making ability isn’t to ban algorithms; it’s to redesign economic incentives to make ethical algorithms profitable. Three pathways are emerging:

1. The enforcement pathway shows penalties can work.

2. The regulation pathway could ban the most harmful uses.

3. The ethical design pathway offers alternatives to inhumane algorithms. Organizations like Bard College's Wiháŋble S'a Center use Indigenous knowledge to center community values. The University of Groningen's Humane AI group aligns systems with public values. What if government contracts required certified ethical AI? What if public investment scaled these alternatives to compete with exploitative systems? Without viable alternatives, enforcement and regulation simply punish rather than redirect.