As We Know It

Recently the big political fight has been over the budget and spending. One of the talking points has to be the phrase "as we know it" as it has appeared in numerous media reports and press releases. This post isn't about politics but rather the phrase. Is changing something "as we know it" the big, fearful thing that some would have us believe?  Is the use of the phrase just another technique to paralyze public opinion?  Let's take a look at some examples.

When you got up this morning did you spend the first few minutes of your day trimming the wick on your oil lamp to light your way into your bathroom to prepare for the day or did you simply flick on the light? Those who opposed electricity certainly could have said that it would change lighting "as we know it" and they would have been right.  But was it bad?

When you left for work this morning did you go out to the stable and saddle up your horse or hitch it to the buggy or did you get into your car and drive to work?  I know at my large office complex there aren't any hitching posts but there are a lot of parking spaces so I think I know the answer. Certainly many in 1908 might have said that Henry Ford's Model T would change ground transportation "as we know it." Do you wish for a horse to ride to work or do you kind of like whizzing along the highway with the heater or air conditioner keeping you comfortable and the stereo playing?

When you plan a trip by air, do you try to maximize your use of small propeller driven planes that fly low and in the weather and get you to your destination with multiple hops and an overnight stay or do you try for a large new jet that can whisk you across the country in one hop of just a couple of hours?  It can be rightly claimed that the Boeing 707 changed air travel "as we know it" in the late 1950's and for me, that was a good thing.

Last, when sick with an infection such as strep, do you wait it out or see your doctor for an antibiotic? Few would argue that an open petri dish, a particle of mold and an observant researcher did, in 1928, change medicine "as we know it" with the discovery and documentation of penicillin. Millions of lives saved and tens of millions of suffering people will attest to that.

I get a little curious when someone tries to make me afraid of changing something "as we know it." I have to ask myself what do they have to gain?  Do they lose power?  Do they lose income? Are they just timid souls? People who sold coal oil lost out to the electric light.  Saddle and tack makers suffered with the rise of the automobile. Manufacturers of large rotary engines used in propeller-driven planes lost out to the jet engine. Who loses what when we talk about virtual learning technologies? Who gets upset when the role of an instructor changes or the skill set changes? How is the daily routine of the classroom instructional designer upended when word processing skills are simply not enough technologically?

I admit to being an optimist. Some might say overly so.  I get excited when I see that something --whether tool or idea -- might change something "as we know it."  While the "something" as we know it might be fine, the new something could easily be so much better.