Legendary folk singer Pete Seeger recalled the pessimistic view of novelist Kurt Vonnegut and offered his own variation on it: there might be only a “snowball’s chance in hell” that the human race would still be here in 100 years.
Embedded Files
Snowball’s Chance in Hell
Snowball’s Chance in Hell
In 2006, Pete Seeger looked a century into the future and did not like what he saw.
The legendary folk singer was discussing his song *Quite Early Morning*, a song that carries an unmistakably hopeful message about starting over and building a better world. But Seeger’s conversation soon turned darker.
He recalled the pessimistic view of novelist Kurt Vonnegut and offered his own variation on it: there might be only a “snowball’s chance in hell” that the human race would still be here in 100 years.
Seeger was not making a prediction in the conventional sense. He was expressing a warning.
What troubled him was not simply nuclear weapons, environmental destruction, or any particular technology. It was something more fundamental: the possibility that the very qualities that made human beings extraordinarily successful could eventually destroy them.
“I do tend to agree,” Seeger said, “that a technological society tends to self destruct.”
His reasoning was striking. Human beings are curious. They are ambitious. They invent things. They seek ways to control their environment. They pride themselves on being logical.
Those qualities have produced antibiotics, airplanes, computers, space travel and extraordinary increases in human wealth and longevity.
But Seeger wondered whether the same qualities could become a trap.
“Probably anywhere in the entire universe,” he mused, “where there’s a technological society, probably has a limited lifetime.”
The idea is unsettling precisely because it does not depend on humanity becoming stupid or irrational. Perhaps the danger is that we remain clever enough to create technologies faster than we develop the wisdom to control them.
The more powerful the technology, the greater the consequences of a mistake.
A species capable of splitting the atom can produce enormous amounts of energy—and nuclear weapons. A species capable of altering the atmosphere can transform the climate. A species capable of creating machines that imitate human intelligence may eventually create systems whose consequences it does not fully understand.
Seeger’s argument was not that technology itself is evil. He had spent his life embracing technology when it served human purposes. His beloved banjo and guitar were technologies. So were the recording devices, microphones and television cameras that helped spread his music around the world.
The question was what happens when technological power outruns human judgment.
To Seeger, the missing ingredient was something older than science.
He found it in an unlikely place: a famous essay about education by the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead.
Near the end of Whitehead’s *The Aims of Education*, Seeger recalled, Whitehead declares that education “must be religious.” That might sound surprising coming from a thinker deeply associated with mathematics and science.
But Whitehead was not talking primarily about religious doctrine. He was talking about the development of a sense of duty and reverence.
Duty, Whitehead argued, comes from recognizing that human beings have some control over the course of events. If we can change the world, we have a responsibility for what we do with that power.
Reverence comes from recognizing something equally important: that we are part of something vastly larger than ourselves.
That idea seems to have resonated deeply with Seeger.
It offers an answer to his fear of technological self-destruction. The problem may not be that humanity knows too much. It may be that humanity has acquired enormous power without acquiring an equally powerful sense of responsibility.
Seeger spent much of his life trying to cultivate that responsibility through music.
His songs rarely offered easy answers. Instead, they asked people to participate—to sing, to listen, to remember, to act. *Where Have All the Flowers Gone?* turned war into a question. *If I Had a Hammer* turned social responsibility into a chorus that millions could sing. *Turn! Turn! Turn!* reminded listeners that human history moves through cycles.
And *Quite Early Morning* offered hope even in the face of uncertainty.
That may be the paradox at the heart of Seeger’s “snowball’s chance in hell” remark.
A man who feared that technological civilization might destroy itself nevertheless spent his life singing songs about the possibility of changing course.
He did not seem to believe that optimism meant assuming everything would turn out well. Optimism meant recognizing that the future was still unfinished.
The “snowball” might have only a tiny chance.
But as long as there was a chance, there was work to be done.
Seeger’s warning, spoken two decades ago, now sounds less like an eccentric thought from an aging folk singer and more like a question addressed to the present:
**Can a species become powerful enough to transform its world—and wise enough not to destroy it?**
Perhaps that is what Seeger meant by duty and reverence.
We have inherited the power to shape the future.
The question is whether we have learned how to live with that power.
~ By Chat GPT prompted by Al Zagofsky
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse