Created 28/8/2011 08:28:AM

If someone asks me the definition of the word "futurist", I prefer to respond him/her by using these two simple words: "Change Engineer". The greatest art of a futurist is to engineer the change in the preferred course, so that desired implications appear as much as possible according to our preferred images of the future. Yes, the futurists can be considered as social engineers.

It is historically well-established that preferences, norms and values underlie changes over the years, a fact which complicates predictions of this kind even further (Bibel, 2004). A contemporary philosopher once said: "The futurists have only interpreted the world in various ways! The point, however, is to change it." (Kapoor, 2001). Richard Slaughter writes, “…futurists are not, by and large, interested in describing problems, but in exploring solutions” (Slaughter, 1999). Despite this, however, few futurists are also social engineers. The contrary, in fact, is perhaps more likely to be true: many a successful social engineer is a visionary. It may be argued, of course, that the futurist does not him/herself has to be an engineer, but that his/her ideas have strongly influenced the direction of thinking and the course of events in society.

I think that one of the reasons that the futurists have been always looking for social recognition is their shortcoming in taking social responsibilities. A futurist can be a responsible social influencer or activists. Now, my question is: "To what extent can some futurists and future studies in general be credited with such influences in society?"

References:

Bibel, W. (2004). Converging Technologies and the Natural, Social and Cultural World, Special Interest Group Report for the European Commission via an Expert Group on Foresighting the New Technology Wave, p. 8.

Kapoor, R. (2001). Future as fantasy: forgetting the flaws, Futures 33, pp. 161–170.  

Slaughter, R.A. (1999). Future for the Third Millennium: Enabling the Forward View. St Leonards: Prospect Media.