As I cited that article, I thought about how this rapid change is not reflected in academic documentation. Wikipedia is ever changing, so who is to say if that quote will exist tomorrow? Am I to cite some this moment in the Wikipedia archives instead of the page itself?
Anyway, Charles Darwin's Origin of Species says of dominant species, "each large group tends to become still larger, and at the same time more divergent in character. But as all groups cannot thus succeed in increasing in size, for the world would not hold them, the more dominant groups beat the less dominant."
The digital revolution displays natural selection in such ways as: blogs that are read and blogs that aren't, online and physical newspapers, and the fluid online battle of ideas in forums like Wikipedia, and the speed of digital evolution lends itself to future shock.
The public reaction to Darwin's claim was widespread doubt. Evolution challenged religious fundamentals, specifically the book Genesis. Darwin himself lost his Christian faith after training as a clergyman. We, too, live in a time of widespread doubt as the Victorian age. Perhaps we have lost some capacity for faith because of the future shock phenomenon. Because we now have the ideas of instant, accurate information, an overwhelming sea of internet, where is the place for a God we cannot see or friend on Facebook?
What effect does the digital renaissance have on Tibetan religion? How does the Dalai Lama manage the technological wave and his religious position? How do students deal with the onslaught of information? Do they experience future shock?