“I think, therefore I am” appears to have been replaced with “I think, therefore it must be true.” The first statement contains a conclusion which is self-evident. The second contains a conclusion which though technologically correct awaits further information in order to be freed.
The “subject” that I am suggesting was implied in a lecture I attended at Arizona State University during the late Eighties, the speaker a researcher and professor of The History and Subsequent Survival of International Religious Thought, of interest to me primarily as a set of clues explaining the art of language as perceived by those who regard the study of Linguistics as a Behavioral Science devoted to the study of Design.
From my notes I would eventually come to expect robotic software which would exist with the intention to outline and ultimately create complete story lines, novels and novellas which would be recognized as having been written in the style of famous authors. Within minutes of this awareness I realized that in order for this to be possible then the same could be said for the creation of technical manuals and information sources informing scholars and scholars-to-be, lecturing and pontificating on every known subject of human curiosity.
Within a few more minutes of imagination-free-fall, I realized that in order for such technical growth to occur the mechanical means for acquiring these skills would depend on truth and accuracy to be derived not from evidence but from imagined data. The quality of information would be judged not on the evidence derived from scientific experimentation but upon popularity.
That day I believe, is already hard at work. The Internet Explorer is not just the name of a browser but the investigator who makes use of it, the most valuable information being the trail left by the Seeker of Truth rather than the fruit of the Information Stronghold at the end of the Statistical Rainbow; Patterson, the Author who offers to teach would-be writers of fanciful formulae is not Patterson at all but rather the Assimovian Approximation of Patterson who will have the capability of entertaining and informing the masses of the millennia to come, the question now being whether scientific growth will continue forward; will it follow the group-think example and grind such growth into a grandiose accumulation of grandfatherly memoirs or will such survival be detectable only as the smirk of the grinless grump those skills being passed on to a thankless few?