....an except from a short essay I’ve been writing, inspired by the thinkers like Teillhard de Chardin, Nathan Gardels, Mike Medavoy and the good old existentialists:
It's a Small World After All?
“Small world”. It’s become a handy, totalizing little phrase used to explain away any globalized interaction that seems beyond the probable. All at once, this may be exactly why it’s not true; it doesn’t actually explain anything. The phrase tends to mystify the actual causality of one’s encounter. Is the world—a reference to the entirety of human peoples, societies, cultures and institutions—actually getting smaller? While the phrase may hold true in some senses—we can send a message across the world in a fraction of a second, travel to Timbuktu in a day and the fruits we eat may as well come from the other side of the globe—the way that it is used in everyday speech doesn’t refer this shrinking of time and space. The usage implies that our worlds are shrinking, that there is a distillation occurring, even a simplifying. Yet, the world has only become more complex. And with complexity comes magnitude, especially when talking about a concept rather than a physicality, such as ‘the world’.....