Most people tend to believe that they have at least some semblance of understanding of their needs and demands in regard to their future and the relevant opportunities. To some extent, the specified assertion is shaped by the manner in which people’s perception of their future path is shaped since their childhood. Indeed, the question of whom one aspires to become is often regarded as one of the most common and innocuous questions to be asked to children. However, judging by the answers that not only the younger demographic, but also the older one provides, people have very little idea about what they expect from their future. A recent Ted Talk by Shankar Vedantam confirms the specified supposition, outlining that the future path is an uncharted territory of which very few people have at least somewhat definitive idea. Nonetheless, by making decisions presently, people shape their future selves to a significant extent, which is why Vedantam’s argument, while admittedly interesting to consider, appears to fail to inform decision-making.
On the surface, the statement that Vedantam makes in his speech appears to be quite legitimate. Indeed, the argument that he puts forward concerns the unpredictability of the future and one’s personal progress. In the context of the present-day environment, where the levels of uncertainty are currently at their highest due to the global political and economic tension, the identified assertion seems rather legitimate. Indeed, at any point in one’s development, one is unlikely to be fully aware of the course of events that will transpire in the future, as well as the full range of influences to which one will be exposed therefore, one remains completely uncertain about one’s future image and mind frame, let alone the circumstances in which one will find oneself in the next several years.
However, while Vedantam’s assumption concerning the mistakes and miscalculations that people make not only on personal but also on international levels when making decisions that will affect their future is reasonable, it seems to fail to recognize that the specified knowledge will not allow producing informed decisions. Indeed, ultimately, our perception of ourselves and the world is constantly changing, which is why determining the needs of our future selves is impossible. In fact, Vedantam subverts its own argument by examining the notion of the Ship of Theseus. Though being a clever logical puzzle rather than a massive statement on the human nature and the perception of reality, the Ship of Theseus still illustrates the complexity of determining the connection between the present and the past self. Specifically, marking a specific point at which the past concept of the ship, i.e., the self, starts transforming into the future one, appears to be impossible to map in the specified context (Vedantam). Transferring the described problem into the context of sociocultural interactions and the realm of personal development will indicate that people are in a constant state of change, being infused with new ideas and concepts every day. The described process of personal development and the expansion of one’s knowledge, abilities, and competencies has been exacerbated by the process of globalization and the associated cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary knowledge sharing (Vedantam). Therefore, the process of change that one has been undergoing represents an unending cycle of personal progress.
Furthermore, the idea of the unpredictability of one’s future and the inability to construct an image of one’s future self entails significant repercussions. Specifically, the specified stance alleviates one from a substantial range of responsibilities and restrictions due to the ostensible inability to make forecasts and ensure that the set expectations for one’s future image and accomplishments are met. Therefore, the proposed idea of perceiving one’s future as entirely malleable and unpredictable also conceals certain dangers.
In addition, Vedantam argues that the idea of unpredictability in the changes in one’s ideas and perceptions could also be viewed as the argument against developing massive conflicts, both in personal and international contexts. However, what the specified idea seems to fail to grasp is that the possibility of developing a perspective similar or identical to that one of one’s opponents in the future does not imply that the conflict of interests between the opposing sides is resolved. Consequently, the following suggestion that Vedantam makes: “Spend time with people who are not just your friends and family” becomes a particularly naïve, albeit rather heartfelt, piece of advice (Vedantam 00:11:25). The possibility of switching from one ideological perspective to another as a possible future development does not suggest that the conflict is resolved. Instead, it indicates that the underlying causes of the conflict are significantly more powerful and complex.
Though the described phenomenon might seem as being supportive of Vedantam’s position, it also indicates that predicting the needs of one’s future self is entirely possible due to the continuity within the change process. More specifically, one can track down the progression of one’s needs and desires’ evolution as one experiences the influence of external factors and the impact of cross-cultural communication.
Work Cited
Vedantam, Shankar. “ You Don’t Actually Know What Your Future Self Wants.” TED Talk, 2022, Web.