Published on July 13, 2018: The Denki Shimbun (The Electric Daily News)
Shojiro Matsuura
Advisor

In my work since the Fukushima accident, the top priority has been reducing risks that might affect the safe operation of nuclear power plants. Risks pose a dilemma. Even when they are assessed with an optimal approach and fundamental information, results only indicate possibilities (in other words, risk assessments merely produce hypothetical results). No fact can be established until an envisaged event actually occurs, but it is too late once an event happens. Moreover, risks are also weighed against social risks, so we need to be concerned about non-nuclear related risks as well.

A recent concern, which has arisen, is the assessment of social risks associated with widespread use of smartphones. Looking back across the history of humankind when we have found great benefit in and come to widely use something that did not exist in previous generations, there has been a tremendous positive effect for society which is also accompanied concurrently by a quite significant negative impact. In other words, great misfortunes have occurred. Over time, society has taken account of the advantages and disadvantages and made decisions on the pros and cons of continuing and expanding the use of such items.

The advancement of human knowledge and the rise and prosperity of civilizations have dispatched a steady stream of novelties for society. The speed at which society has been transformed has further accelerated since the beginning of the 20th century. Eventually, military technology reached the point where it poses the ultimate risk in that inappropriate use of the latest technology may bring about the destruction of humankind.

Although smartphones have been used for peaceful purposes more than anything else, it is difficult to contain feelings of malaise at the extent to which people busy themselves with their smartphones during commutes on the morning and evening trains. News reports offer us vivid images of how common smartphones are all around the world. The convenience they offer is an extraordinary match for our modern temperament. Yet, how should we analyze and assess future global risks if inappropriate concepts or innovations intrude on our lives through such technologies?

Smartphones, SNS, AI, big data, cloud, news-delivery systems and other cutting-edge technologies are inescapably linked to the latest neuroscience knowledge available. Is it truly next to impossible that these technologies might unconsciously affect the way the general public thinks? This brings to mind incidents of the inappropriate use of subliminal messaging, which has occasionally been reported since the mid-20th century.

In our perceptual recognition, all information signals reaching the ears and eyes is instantaneously analyzed and processed unconsciously within the brain. Only the information that an individual determines to be useful is selected to reach the level of consciousness. Here at this level, we consciously perceive and behave as if this is all the information that has been acquired. In short, we see only what we want to see and we hear only what we want to hear.

In reality, however, although not rising to a level at which we are consciously aware of it, there is quite a large amount of information that we acquire and treat as unnecessary. A subliminal effect is experienced when very short packets of information of a certain significance creep into an unconscious region of the receiver’s brain, together with unrelated information of a different context. These packets then affect the unconscious region, prompting the receiver to act as if he or she has made a conscious determination. This effect was initially pointed out by psychologists at the end of the 19th century. Even today, this effect has not been irrefutably concluded as fact. That is to say, the risks posed by subliminal stimuli have not been negated.

We must always be vigilant about our current situation. World affairs are increasingly chaotic and signs are present that powerful autocratic countries, posing as democratic republics, are beginning to influence global trends. It is a matter of concern that prudent preliminary investigations and reviews, into which great care has been put, are an inescapable fact of life.

We should establish a system that generates and steadfastly maintains, throughout all social activities, the three most important elements of our nuclear safety culture: “a questioning attitude” “a rigorous and prudent approach” and “communication.”

End