This article examines the negative effects of the closed environment in Le Papillon des étoiles on technology and civilization by comparing it to Korean society, and warns that such an environment can lead to resource depletion and restricted thinking, which can lead to technological regression and cultural isolation.
‘Le Papillon des étoiles’ is the title of a novel by Bernard Werber. Le Papillon des étoiles is also the name of a spacecraft that travels to other planets to select the right people with different talents and settle them for generations. This book is about the journey of humanity to leave Earth and dream of a new beginning, and in the process, it deeply explores human nature and the structure of society. In particular, I was most interested in the idea of 144,000 humans living for generations in a single spaceship, cut off from the outside world. It’s not just about space exploration, it’s about how humans evolve and change in a closed society.
Even if the animals on the Galapagos are the same species as those in other parts of the world, some characteristics are different. In places like the African bush or the Amazonian jungle, people have developed distinct cultures that are not connected to the rest of the world. These examples illustrate how environmental isolation can have a powerful effect on organisms and societies. I will focus on some of the negative features of closed environments and discuss how I believe these social environments cause technological and civilizational regression. I will also compare this phenomenon to the case of South Korea.
First of all, I think that the first closed environment is likely to have a scarcity of resources, so it will be difficult to utilize those resources and the technology related to them will decline. ‘Le Papillon des étoiles’ was created with the idea that it would take 1000 years to reach a new planet suitable for human life. Inside the spacecraft, there is gravity, an artificial sun, lakes, and a variety of flora and fauna, and a self-sufficient and balanced ecosystem. However, no matter how harmonious the environment, without interaction with the outside world, we would become dependent on certain plants and animals, and would be at great risk if they became extinct. In fact, in the 19th century, Ireland relied on potatoes for most of its food, and the varieties of potatoes were almost identical. However, an epidemic of disease against that variety and the resulting shortage of food led to a famine, and many people starved to death.
As these examples illustrate, disruption of exchange makes it difficult to diversify the varieties of a resource. We can assume that this increases the likelihood that some resources will be depleted due to culling. Furthermore, the depletion of a resource may disrupt the ecological balance associated with that resource, which in turn may promote the depletion of other resources. In the book, we can see that the ecosystem was initially well organized and balanced, but after many generations, many resources were depleted, and people were living in many ways less abundant lives. The depletion of these resources is not just a material problem, but a potentially dangerous one that can lead to social conflict and threats to survival. Even near the end, just before reaching the new planet, only six people survive. Their staple foods are berries, fruit, and glow-in-the-dark rabbits, and they have extremely limited resources. This is why I think closed environments are detrimental to technology in the long run from a resource perspective.
Secondly, I believe that closed environments prevent technological progress because of the manneristic thinking that is imposed by the consistent environment. Self-sufficient societies that are cut off from the outside world often develop their own unique cultures, which are often shaped by their environment. These cultures are often deeply reflective of the local environment and, in some cases, strictly controlled for survival or social maintenance. The problem is that this culture itself is difficult to change in the absence of external interaction, and members of society tend to think according to that framework. In addition, it is easy to be ostracized from the group if you think in a new way, so it is difficult to develop technology. Basically, technology is developed by thinking and considering from various perspectives, and creativity or imagination is the basis for technological development, and it is the unconscious and experience that affects imagination.
Since humans start thinking about things they are not aware of based on experience and knowledge, various knowledge and experiences are essential for technological development. In the case of books, the occupants of the first Le Papillon des étoiles were all born on Earth, so they were aware of various cultures and environments. However, later generations born inside Le Papillon des étoiles have only been exposed to the environment inside Le Papillon des étoiles and think that’s all they know. They have no knowledge outside of the environment they have been given, such as an elephant that they have never seen, but can only imagine it because it is described as being very large. I believe that this kind of isolated environment limits the ability to come up with new ideas because its members always have the same experiences. This can lead to a vicious circle where society is stuck in stereotypes and closedness, unable to accept new ideas.
So far, we have seen the negative effects of closed environments on technological progress in terms of resource depletion and limited thinking due to limited experience. In fact, in the book, even the most complete environment is a very small ecosystem with a population of no more than 150,000 people, so I think the degeneration of civilization and technology over time is depicted more seriously, and this perspective may not be considered important from the perspective of the planet that is currently undergoing globalization. However, as I mentioned at the beginning, there are still areas of the world where people are building their own environments, cut off from the outside world. It’s obvious that these regions are far behind the rest of the world in terms of technology compared to more modernized countries.
In order to organize exchanges with other parts of the world, we need to understand these ecosystems, and I think research from this perspective would be very helpful. In addition, the long-term effects of these closed environments on society may extend beyond technology and resources to issues of social integration and cultural diversity. Just as the creatures of the Galapagos Islands have evolved in response to their environment, closed societies form their own unique characteristics, but at the risk of missing out on larger changes and developments.
The negative effects of closed environments are a good topic to revisit in the case of South Korea. At first glance, it’s easy to think that South Korea is already engaged in globalization and interacting with many countries. However, given that Korea is not unified, it is very isolated geographically and has limited resources. Korea’s high level of income despite its resource constraints is due to its technological prowess, and it has been able to survive the competition among nations because it has been able to dominate in products such as semiconductors through its technological prowess based on its talented workforce. South Korea has no choice but to focus on technological advancement, as technological regression is closely related to the economic crisis. However, things are not looking good for South Korea right now, with China’s Xiaomi increasing its share of the cell phone market and South Korea’s shipbuilding industry in decline after the failure of an offshore plant.
There is a lot of concern that Korea’s technological competitiveness is starting to fall behind other countries, and I think this phenomenon can be linked to the country’s cultural closedness. No matter how much we talk about globalization and the global era, Koreans still tend to think only about their position in Korea. Korea still lacks inclusiveness in a multicultural society and often clings to deeply rooted ethnic habits. Many people still suffer from xenophobia, and the country’s Confucian culture has left many people passive and passive-aggressive. According to the WEF tourism competitiveness statistics, South Korea ranks 25th out of 140 countries, but ranks at the bottom of the list in terms of friendliness, including attitudes toward foreign tourists, at 129th. Another example is that when President Obama visited South Korea in the past, he gave Korean reporters the right to ask questions, but when none of them asked, a Chinese reporter took over, which is an embarrassing incident that shows the lack of proactivity of South Koreans.
I think the fact that Koreans are still hesitant and reluctant to interact with foreign countries in the age of globalization shows that Korea has not completely broken out of its closed environment. To overcome this situation, a more open and proactive attitude is needed, which will play an important role in changing the overall mindset of Korean society beyond just economic and technological development. This will allow Korea to achieve more colorful and creative development.
