“ …the future is not what it used to be.” Paul Valéry’s (1988): 192
Philosophers, theologians, and scientists have pondered humanity’s destiny for centuries. Yet futurism or futurology – the systematic study of possible futures using scientific and analytical methods – only truly emerged under the geopolitical pressures of the Cold War. The constant military rivalry and lingering fear of nuclear war have prompted the development of systematic approaches to study and understand what the future may hold. Since then these practices have remained an integral part of the social sciences and started to gain new momentum in the past decades.
Futurists in the 20th century were present across multiple fields; from nuclear scientists, via peace activists to journalists. Their thinking gave rise to methodologies still widely used today, such as the Delphi method, developed by the RAND corporation to prepare forecasts on future military capabilities or the cost-benefit scenarios championed by Herman Kann an American physicist and a founding member of the Hudson Institute.
The ultimate goal was to collect and examine hypothetical data in order to better understand and prepare for the possible futureS. Given its rapid development, some have described the era of the 1960s and 1970s in the USA, as the golden age of futurology. While thinking about the future is not unique to that period, it seems that our preoccupation with it intensifies when the future feels most precarious.
What has changed since then?
The Anthropocene has reshaped not only the physical world around us but the very concept of the future itself. It has transformed the future from something we can exert our control over, into something governed by intertwined natural and human forces – where the fate of both determines what lies ahead. Our historical understanding of the forces shaping our future has fundamentally shifted.
It is perhaps no surprise then, that in the past decade, interest in futures literacy has been booming again. We crave to understand how to tame it once more, how to regain some stability in the face of the modern challenges. Yet this may be precisely why we should remain cautious of those who promise certainty or short-term solutions.
As Dr. Stuart Candy a USC Berggruen Fellow and Associate Professor of Design at Carnegie Mellon University framed it “It is also apparent when policymakers, technologists, pundits, and other public figures issue a constant stream of authoritative-sounding forecasts, but no one checks back later to see how they fared, or asks how this diet of images of the future might be exerting influence and serving some interests more than others.”
Therefore engaging with the future might be one of the most important cognitive exercises of our times. Only by reclaiming the narrative from short-termist decision-makers can we keep our eyes open to alternative futures that truly reflect our shared, long-term interests.
So who owns the future?
Those who have a clear understanding of the implications of our choices. Those who face the trade offs to better navigate among the political choices. Who look at the future through the lens of science and dare to ask the question – in plural – what futures might lie ahead. If the future is ever more precarious, looking it straight to the eye might be a better strategy than promising a false sense of certainty and hoping that people will not wake up to its unfoundedness.
References:
Tolon, Kaya. ‘Futures Studies: A New Social Science Rooted in Cold War Strategic Thinking’. Cold War Social Science: Knowledge Production, Liberal Democracy, and Human Nature, edited by Mark Solovey and Hamilton Cravens, Palgrave Macmillan US, 2012, pp. 45–62. Springer Link, https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137013224_3.
Savransky, Martin. ‘Regimes of Futurity: Progress, Catastrophe, and Historicity in the Anthropocene’. Futures, vol. 173, Oct. 2025, p. 103682. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2025.103682.
Okoli, Chitu, and Suzanne D. Pawlowski. ‘The Delphi Method as a Research Tool: An Example, Design Considerations and Applications’. Information & Management, vol. 42, no. 1, Dec. 2004, pp. 15–29. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002.
Chugh, Abhinav. “What Is ‘Futures Studies’ and How Can It Improve Our World?” World Economic Forum, 26 Oct. 2021, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/10/what-is-futures-studies-and-how-can-it-improve-our-world/