Talk:Alvin Toffler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Presentation[edit]

I've been in a presentation of Alvin Toffler here in Campinas, Brazil, and he spoke about why the terms left-wing and right-wing are obsolete in the Third Wave, and the politics will be very different in Third Wave societies. It was very insighful. --200.228.158.130 15:45, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Link suggestions[edit]

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Alvin_Toffler article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Alvin_Toffler}} to this page. — LinkBot 10:39, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I see LinkBot suggested a link to John Brunner's novel, The Shockwave Rider. I agree, but I don't know where that link would fit in this article as currently written.

As for source, I believe Brunner is on record (somewhere) as stating that his novel was directly inspired by Future Shock. I notice the The Shockwave Rider novel article says that and links back here.

Cheers

Etbnc 16:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 14[edit]

The assertion made in this revision [1] has been reverted since it could not be confirmed by Google News search. Please provide a source for the claim. CQJ 17:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expertise - Powershift (thinkLet)[edit]

Expertise is a form of power; that is, experts have the ability to influence others. Alvin Toffler's Powershift argues that the three main kinds of social power are violence, wealth, and knowledge and, further, that these three kinds of power interact.

geoWIZard-Passports 00:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big in China[edit]

According to ALVIN TOFFLER NAMED AMONG CHINA'S MOST INFLUENTIAL FOREIGNERS at their own site, he has been very influential in China.

If someone can track the People's Daily article, it would be a meaningful addition. --84.20.17.84 11:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been in a presentation of Alvin Toffler here in Campinas, Brazil, and he spoke about why the terms left-wing and right-wing are obsolete in the Third Wave, and the politics will be very different in Third Wave societies. It was very insightful. --200.228.158.130 15:45, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Criticism[edit]

There should be a skeptical analysis of such a significant book as this. Being a bestseller indicates nothing about its validity. Futures studies is an intriguing idea but its ancestral origin, futurology, is a sort of philosophical proposal of a new science, which is always at risk of turning out to be hoaxery/pseudoscience. In his introduction/prologue to the book, Toffler points out many disclaimers that may be a means of allowing him to talk scientifically without being scientific. That is a tactic commonly used, such as in fallacious arguments for intelligent design. He was a popular editor of Forbes or something, but does he have grounds in the scientific community? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.4.178 (talk) 17:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest section on criticisms of Toffler, but am not expert.

Many scholars have found Future Shock to be overly alarmist in its predictions, while others have found The Third Wave and Powershift to be overly optimistic in their assessment of the impact of technology on the future of society. Some reviewers have questioned Toffler's predictions about the future, noting that retrospective examinations of his work invite varying assessments of the extent to which these predictions have proven accurate. Several critics have also commented that Toffler fails to examine his subjects in a broader global and historical context. While many critics have faulted Toffler for overgeneralization and weak argumentation, most have conceded that his works are thought-provoking and raise important questions about the future.

from Toffler, Alvin Criticism and Essays, enotes.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeffschuler (talk • contribs) 16:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'd also like to see this as I've just learned about him a few moments ago after reading about Carlos Slim Helu of Mexico. Also, do any other "business authors" have a sub-cat for Mentors or Influences? If not, that may be an interesting addition. Maltiti2005 13:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

This article does not seem to be a biography at all. Rather it presents (and, yes, boosts) Tofflers work, theories, ideas, etc. I would like to see a real biography with a short main body about the man's life and works and ideas presented in sections.

This article is currently full of boosterism, and sounds like it was written by either the subject himself, or devoted fans. -- Beland 08:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm....yeah. Looks like kind of a rough draft. The Ideas section might benefit from some further organization, too.

Etbnc 16:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a fairly well articulated critique of this entire corpus, Dyer-Witherford "Cyber-Marx" chapter 2 is on point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.210.250.105 (talk) 01:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Ummm... Science fiction as an article category? Does WP usually classify work like this as science fiction? Somehow I doubt other writers in the science fiction genre would consider Toffler an SF writer.

Etbnc 16:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, Toffler definitely is not a SF writer, per se. However, he has been influential on that genre, as have most prominent futurists. As a proponent of broad inclusionism, I say let it stand, unless you intend to create yet another category, such as "Non-SF Writers Significantly Influential on SF". Shanoman 17:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self-Congratulatory or Accurate Reflection of Past Stature?[edit]

Did Toffler write the page himself? It certainly sounds like a fanboy piece or an ad. I read Future Shock years ago, and it was nothing but vague, popularized, forgettable fluff, the kind of thing that's written to be a best seller. I'm finding it hard to believe that serious people -- economists, scholars, whomever -- could possibly take this lightweight author as seriously as the page makes it sound. Or maybe all "futurism" is just a pile of crap. 

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.240.9 (talk) 23:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You find it "hard to believe" but Toffler was far more eminent than any social science bestseller now (cf "tipping point.") He coincided with the shift to computers, and the unexpected rise of American conservatism followed by collapse of socialism. The hippies were suddenly middle aged and out. The MBAs were fashionable, and going to rule the world. Many people turned to him to make sense of it all. Not defending his theories, you understand, just saying that yes, the article accurately reflects his fin de siecle stature. Profhum (talk) 17:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly certain that "all futurism is just a pile of crap," but some influential parties take it very seriously. It even made it onto a Society of Actuaries course from 2000-2007. Thankfully, it was dropped last year. Albertod4 (talk) 21:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I personally don't find the "pile of crap" reference helpful to the discussion and it certainly doesn't contribute to the airing of ideas or criticism on this or any article. I've found most of the labels of "biased" refect more the stance of the labellers than that of the piece in question. The wiki concept is being increasingly debased by rather partisanned bickering of who should say what about whom. --66.194.118.10 (talk) 21:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you and almost removed it, but discussions shouldn't be altered. It's also self revealing. Let the reader decide for him or herself. Profhum (talk) 17:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The future is not the past, never was and never will be.[edit]

I read Future Shock when it was new and recently re-read it.

It is not profound except to someone poised precisely at a crisis point in their belief that the past predicts the future. Anyone convinced beyond argument that the future is a linear, or other simple, projection from the present will remain unswayed. Likewise, it is unimpressive to anyone convinced that only 20-20 hindsight shows the actual connection of the future to the past.

I honestly don't remember whether I was unswayed or unimpressed when I first read it. I do remember that I dismissed it as buzz-think. Now, I am deeply in the camp of those who expect the long-term future to be different from, yet resonant with, the past. I still don't like it, but I have more respect for it. (Getting old does that in some cases, but not many.)

If, as Toffler proposes, the future relates to the past in a manner which cannot yet be known, any, possibly all, of his predictions should, in retrospect, turn out to be alarmist, overly optimistic, or even both. Like swinging a pencil at a breeze, you may hit some but you will miss most. Unlike that example, the ones that are hit will have, after the fact, perfectly obvious explanations, so that hitting any proves nothing.

Everything in the book other than the generalizations, the fluff, actually contradicts Toffler's premise. On the other hand, without some examples of what might be, it is difficult to convey the concept that the future won't be a carbon copy of, or a linear extrapolation from, or have some other pre-manageable relationship to, the past. But the reader has to be exactly at the state of crisis to be helped, or harmed depending on your viewpoint, by that understanding. Kdlneal (talk) 23:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms of specific books or futures studies methodology[edit]

If you must, please put criticisms of the book or futures studies here, so they can more easily be moved to the appropriate articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikip rhyre (talk • contribs) 17:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for a discussion to link these Futurists with peers/other Futurists?[edit]

Why isn't there a separate section on Heidi Toffler - perhaps she is not noteworthy enough, I dare say.

Suggestion: grouping Toffler together or cross-referencing with his peers and/or other Fururists? Just two off the top of my head: David Suzuki and um...Ray Kurzweil?

Oh, also, could there be a discussion/linkage to the Fourth Wave (even third) to Francis Fukuyama's work on the end of History?

Quote on 21st century illiteracy misattributed[edit]

"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.” Thought often cited as a quote from Toffler, it seems not to appear in any of his works. See: http://deangroom.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/to-quote-unquote-and-requote-21st-century-illiteracy/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Silas10961 (talk • contribs) 02:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1407891/The-End-of-History-and-the-Last-Man

If I'm talking out of my hat, apologies :-) twitter.com/jontycampbell 19:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

quote[edit]

"You've got to think about big things while you're doing small things, so that all the small things go in the right direction."— Alvin Toffler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.184.26 (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alvin Toffler. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The emphasis of the article is very strange. Like the fact that the politics of the United States are formed by spin doctors from Poland and other Eastern European countries, or their children. When did these weird things start? Since Ronald Reagan held Milton Friedman's book in his hand? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noise Superimposed (talk • contribs) 19:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Knopfler's striking reference to Toffler[edit]

The Mark Knopfler reference to Toffler(s) in the album Privateering song Bluebird is a striking one. It is done using the ''Alvin and the Chipmunks''. The words "Weevils" is one space away "We evils". The word "hay" with capitol H refers to Armenian people. This raises the question: if Toffler's parents were Polish Jews, how about his grandparents? Part of the explanation for the Knopfler lines, especially with "Yes, I got", seems to be that Mark Knopfler information tells that his father was Hungarian Jew.

The connection Mark Knopfler has made between him and Toffler(s) is related to Knopfler's Sailing to Philadelpia album. This album carries information about September 11, 2001 attacks and it is published prior the event in 2000. The song Sailing to Philadelphia has a line with "make my mark upon the earth" and a line with "Geordie and the baker's boy". This refers to Bush and Baker families and continues "In the forests of the Iroquois...". James A. Baker was a leading figures of George H. W. Bush administration and the Gulf War. The words "make my mark upon the earth" are striking since the word "upon" is one space away from 'up on' leading to 'make my mark up on the earth'. The lines seem to refer to two George Bush administrations, H. W. and W. and two James Bakers, III and IV. The information about James Baker IV tells that his daughter drowned. This leads to the other song in this Mark Knopfler album, Silvertown Blues.

This song, Silvertown Blues, has lines "A big silver dome rising up into the dawn" and "A silver dawn steals over the docks". Since the first of these lines joins words "dome" and "dawn", replacing the word "dawn" in in the latter in these lines produces 'A silver dome steals over the docks'. Now the Naomi Klein book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism deals with New Orleans flood 2005 containing the claim that some people related to this catastrophe are evil. This seems to reflected in the Mark Knopfler's song Bluebird which was released after Klein's book. Thus the song Silvertown Blues carries information about an event five years before it happened. Now, the "silver dome" refers to the Mercedes-Benz Superdome in New Orleans:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/NOLA_Header.jpg/350px-NOLA_Header.jpg.

Here is a picture showing how the higher portions of the roads look like docks.

The "silver dome" and "silver dawn" refer to Toffler's work The Futurists as well, since the cover picture of the book is a picture of a face with a silver dome on front of the left eye:

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/413bv0h0fkL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Tofflers' book Revolutionary Wealth deals with the time socialization of the civilization they and Friedrich von Hayek (among others) write of, which is different than the time socialization in modern civilizations where time is thought being linear. Herbert A. Simon has actually written articles about reversing the causality using expectations about future as the cause of current behavior. There is also an interesting connection to Armen Alchian.

The time socialization of Toffler(s) writings is based on the needs of the capitalism they write of. So this connection Mark Knopler has made is a strong one. Notice that the song Silvertown Blues refers to the WTC complex and it's ownership, Silverstein Properties. The song Bluebird where this link to Toffler(s) is made has also a connection to Iran since there is information that Hay is a place there.

The ''Sailing to Philadelpia'' album cover is a picture of an airplane mixed with zeppelin, and this mixing refers to the Hindenburg disaster.

The book "War and Anti-War" is dedicated to Betty and Karen. If Karen was Tofflers' only child, who is Betty? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancing Mickey Mouse (talk • contribs) 20:42, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All of those personal observations, conclusions and opinions would be great in a blog, but not in WP. Either find reliable sources to support statements or leave them off. --Light show (talk) 21:42, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It might be a great blog in a time cube sort of way. Here it's gibberish. Jonathunder (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It might also be useful in a textbook as an example of schizophrenic, associative word salad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 (talk) 10:05, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alvin Toffler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alvin Toffler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:48, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Label[edit]

I've added the POV template to this page, as per several comments on this Talk page in the past. Ideally, someone should go through and make the tone less congratulatory, and perhaps add some dissenting views to the "Critical assessment" section (for instance, David Graeber wrote in The Utopia of Rules "The fact that Toffler turned out to be wrong about almost everything had no deleterious effects on his own career. Charismatic prophets rarely suffer much when their prophecies fail to materialize." I don't know if that's the best bit of criticism to include, but it seems worth finding views of his work that aren't exclusively breathlessly positive for that section).

Wesleyac (talk) 09:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alvin_Toffler&oldid=1207230922"