Inductive reasoning is not a good explanation. If a subset of humans have adapted to change, then it is possible to adapt.
The fact that newer generations are remarkably better at adapting to new tech (social media, and AI), proves this always slow theory as false.
human cultures are not able to metabolize this amount of change this quickly. when you zoom back out to a big picture of history, it’s remarkable how glacially slow everything is. the first industrial revolutions took 80 years (very fast by the standards of previous revolutions), and the writings of Marx happen at the very end as working class politics arises. it takes about another 150 years after that for the great ideological struggles of post-industrial times to be completed in the 90s in what fukuyama called the “end of history”
today you see a compression of decades of technological change into a matter of months or years. there’s no wonder yann lecun (the respected inventor of the ConvNet and ex-chief scientist of Meta) wonder whether the hugging face incident was staged, and mathematicians whose minds are far more powerful than my own are nonetheless coping about training on their data or something while models begin to display superhuman mathematical capability
it would take a century or more to fully metabolize and legitimize the level of changes that have happened even in the past 20 years, to say less of the remarkable scientific revolution we will get over the next five should we avoid the doom of misalignment. I do not suspect any current form of science academia, or even political order will survive without great transformation, except through the course of slow evolution over decades - and of course, technology will keep moving too