It has come to no surprise that technology has simplified human life as we know it today. “The Future of Work and Death” is a documentary that takes a look at the ascending progression of technological inventions. Directors, Sean Blacknell and Wayne Walsh not only consider how technological development has modified our modern living situations but also takes into account how the normality of human life may change in the near future due to the ever-growing rate of advancing technology, especially within the most important aspects of our lives.
The content of the documentary “The Future of Work and Death” mostly consists of the use of ethos persuasion, considering that the vast majority of the film footage is made up of interviews featuring credible individuals in their fields of study, voicing their predictions regarding the future of technology development. The film follows with the evolution of technology in its beginnings from stone to automation, while also considering a historical event, which is called the Industrial Revolution. It also uses historical and animated clips throughout the film to help support the context of the film, and the image it attempts to make.
The documentary is split into two parts, each focusing on one of the two certain aspects that define human life. The first part of the documentary focuses on the future of work, whereas the second part of the documentary focuses on the future of death. The filmmakers consider these two aspects to be the most important regarding technological development as well as being the two aspects which will be greatly impacted by these futuristic changes. Although it is impossible to tell exactly what the future of technology has in store for us, predictions can still be made regarding the fast speed at which technology is advancing.
127 our experts are availableright now
It is predicted that more jobs will be at risk of being replaced by automated machinery in the near future. Being a more adequate and low-cost alternative to a human worker, it is said that one-third of most jobs have the possibility of being replaced by automated technology by the year 2025, leaving numerous people unemployed (Scott, The Future of Life and Death). Professions within fast food, manufacturing, transportation, customer service, healthcare, and finances are said to be the most susceptible to being replaced by complete automation (Armstrong, The Future of Life and Death).
The jobs which are least susceptible to automation are jobs that require creativity and social skills (Armstrong, The Future of Life and Death). However, even though this idea may seem terrifying or unbelievable, there are beneficial outcomes as a result of such a new way of life. With automation, we are able to get rid of dangerous jobs which pose threats to human life (Scott, The Future of Life and Death), and have the opportunity to focus on basic human needs (Wadhwa, The Future of Life and Death). Although the film mentions how we may find ourselves struggling to adapt to this new way of life due to how fast this change is happening, we will be able to explore what humanity is truly about (Pearson, The Future of Life and Death).
As the documentary continues, it looks at the ways technological development may affect the other important aspect of human life, which is death. As a result of modernized technology, the average human life expectancy rate has increased significantly in just a short amount of time and has recently discovered the reversal of biological aging within mice known as parabiosis. Although current technology has made it to where parabiosis is possible, and humans are now expected to live longer than ever before, is there a possibility of being able to live even longer than what is presently expected with the aid of developing technology? Is immortality possible?
The film introduces what is called “longevity”, which is the idea of being able to reverse the biological aging process and overcoming human limitations with the use of technology. The idea of longevity comes from the international transhumanist movement who considers the aging process to be a disease. Aubrey De Grey, a biomedical gerontologist is one who believes in a cure for the aging process. “Ultimately, when people get the hang of the idea that aging is a medical problem and that everybody’s got it, then it’s not going to be the way it is today”.
In contrast to the idea of longevity, others believe that our attention needs to be put towards solving other things before we can accomplish longevity. Our aging process is completely determined by genetic factors, which will be the basis in determining when or if you will get an age-related disease, such as Alzheimer’s and cancer (Tanzi, The Future of Life and Death).
Another topic which is mentioned in the documentary are the predictions of Ray Kurzweil, “something is going on in the human brain, and there is nothing that prevents these biological processes from being reverse engineered and replicated in non-biological entities.”. His statement suggests a form of immortality by which the human mind is uploaded to a computer, allowing us the opportunity to “live forever”, by the year 2045. In contrast, others oppose this view, “I’m not convinced that uploading my consciousness to a computer is a form of immortality”, says professor John Harris, “I would like to live forever but I’m not sure I would like to live forever as some digi-bytes of memory in a computer”.
The two film reviews that I have chosen to analyze are written by Victor Fraga and Darcy Staniforth. I will start with Victor Fraga, who reviewed the documentary as worthy of watching. Throughout Victor’s film review, he summarizes most of the points which arose throughout the documentary. Victor claims within his review that it seems as if transhumanism embraces some beliefs of Marxism because of the similar assumption that age-reversing technology is only available to rich people. He also considered the documentary to be “well crafted” and also mentions a good point in conclusion to his documentary review, where he says the cinema industry is not at risk for automation, which is not mentioned in the film (Fraga, dmovies.org).
The film review written by Darcy Staniforth rejects the idea of “The Future of Life and Death” as a worthy watch. Darcy begins her documentary review, by questioning the credentials of the interviewees throughout the film, asserting that many of the “experts” made “faulty arguments”. Darcy also claimed that the film “feels like one big pro-white propaganda film trying to inform the world about how white people in power can stay in power”, and that the interviewee’s throughout the documentary “are mostly selfish people who only care about the privilege they want to hold on to.”. While I agree with Darcy that the film lacks people of color in the expertise, I cannot accept her overall conclusion that the film was primarily made in regards to maintaining their privilege.
Although Victor and Darcy took a different stance in their reviews regarding their feelings towards the film, I can agree that both reviews did well at arguing their positions. However, I think Victor has the strongest argument, because he was able to back his argument up with factual evidence, whereas Darcy’s review mainly consisted of personal opinions as to why she did not enjoy the film.
In conclusion, I think “The Future of Work and Death” is a remarkable documentary that puts technological development and the rate at which it continues to rise, in perspective. I think the directors succeeded in their attempt to raise awareness regarding the future of technology.
