Can humanity improve itself

[rahmota]

We've been talkign here about how poverty and social class and all affect people. About how people's attitudes are better in some ways and worse in others. I've had an interesting conversationon a role playing board with an individual about the way humanity will go over the next 50 or so years.

So do you think humanity has the ability to get its act together and stop being so asinine and violent to its itself? Maybe not jumpstart the age of aquarious with everyone living in total peace love and harmony but at least maybe not blowing each other up over which bush to pray over or struggle for resources sufficient to have basic needs?

f so what do you think it would take? Time, money effort, the second coming or some great apocalypse, first contact with EBEs??

Personally I think humanity does have the capacity to develop into a peaceful coexistence with each other but it will take time, effort and be painful. Look at the progress that was being made up until recently when we've had a bit of a set back but still nothign really insurmountable yet.

[Greenday]

I see a lot of chaos in the world's future. I believe things are going to get a lot worse before they can get a lot better. The flash clip "End of the World" pretty much sums it up.

[AFPheonix]

I don't think humanity will ever be capable of a prolonged period of peace. There's just too many stupid, selfish people out there, and they're breeding.

[ArenaBoy]

I think it can work both ways. I've noticed that there are often time periods where certain things happen and I think that there's a time for everything. Is there too many stupid people out there? Good god yes but do most of them get into positions of power? In our current case yes but most of them don't.

I've noticed that there seems to be a certain time for everything. A time for war, peace, or some significant event to occur. Humanity cannot improve itself but it can even out itself. For the stupidity we witness there seems to be a person who has that effect to put it into a balance. Right now IMO we are going through a period of idiocy and stupidity but I think in the near future we will see improvements by a genius who will even it out.

[Greenday]

Is there too many stupid people out there? Good god yes but do most of them get into positions of power? In our current case yes but most of them don't.

Stupid people may not always get into high positions but a lot of corrupt people do. And since they aren't stupid, they can do even more damage.

[rahmota]

True but without the large masses of stupid people those corrupt smart people wouldnt have as easy a time manipulating society. Think of it this way the great mass of humanity is a field of dominos. Set the right one in place and knock it down and you have a wildfire event which can eventually move a great many people with the ones at the far end maybe not even knowing why they moved.

This sort of power could be used for good or evil. I do think humanity has the capacity to rise above the great mass though and stand up. Unfortunately modern society is partly at fault for this by encouraging dumb entertainment, lazy politics and ignorant science.

[Will-Mun]

I saw this thread a while ago, I hemmed and hawed over reading and posting in it... cause I thought the title and topic was a rather cynical and just... dreary topic. "Can humanity improve itself"


Yes. We have been since the dawn of our species.

It wasn't all that long ago, from a relative aspect, that women were thought of as nothing but mothers and trophies, men swung swords into other's heads for entertainment and to settle who was 'right' in an argument, and the people believed 'blood' was something that could be used to determine leadership.

The medieval age people improved into the renaissance, the renaissance improved to become the victoreans, and so on and so forth until the modern era. Social evolution like biological evolution is slow moving, and sometimes takes a few steps backwards before leaping forward.

But I suppose I can lend my opinion on how to improve ourselves TODAY, though it seems to already be moving into this direction...

Remove the strongly religious people from leadership. Many many MANY years of proof show that leadership based on ancient books, scrolls, and an adult imaginary friend has never actually WORKED. Religion is faith, faith is absolute, and when people QUESTION the absolute, they question your deity. This leads to conflict and eventually war.

Thats not to say only Athiests should lead. If a leader is religious? Good on him/her! But keep it in their PRIVATE life... Keep it away from policy... Once we can move away from "My God could beat up your God" I think we can start hashing out the rest of the worlds problems.

But I again say that this is just the next step of social evolution... Humanity can and IS always improving itself... With each generation the prejudice and hate from the last fades just THAT much more...

[Boozy]

Humanity can and IS always improving itself... With each generation the prejudice and hate from the last fades just THAT much more...

Well said, Will-Mun. You said exactly what I was going to.

I don't think people realize how far we have come as a species. The idyllic vision of a peaceful pre-historic hunter-gatherer society is false. Warfare was a constant state of affairs for these tribes. Your odds of a violent death were pretty good.

The middle ages saw totalitarian religious extremism the world over; it was not the exception, it was the norm. Things like torture, capital punishment for stealing a loaf of bread, and rape were not discussed in terms of their morality, they were just accepted as facts of life.

About 150 years ago, slavery was legal in America. 80 years ago, women didn't have the vote. 65 years ago, the most advanced "civilized" nations on earth were engaged in a vicious war with each other. 20 years ago, there was virtually nowhere in the country that a homosexual could live openly as themselves.

Problems like racism, homophobia, war, and greed are not solved by any means. But things are changing. And in the greater context of world history and anthropology, we have made unprecedented progress in the 20th century.

[rahmota]

Sorry it took me a bit to get back to this but yeah wil-mun has got the points.

its taken hundreds and thousands of years to develop society into what it is today. And looking around sayign this is an improvement may be a bit cynical but still realtively speaking it is.

The problem is do we still have the momentum to go forward? There has been a lot of movement over the past 8 years with the rise of religious extremism and the various political issues going on. Society has moved backwards on several key issues (homosexual marriage and censorship to name two) from the domino effect I mentioned earlier. Science has been attacked by religious groups and generally thigns seem to be getting more and more difficult to sort out if its good or bad overall or if there is any real change going on.

Is it because the changes are happening at a slower rate? Are we in a temporary backslide or what?

Anyway you look at it though the struggle to improve both ourselves and the world in general is going to be a bitter and contentious struggle that will take time.

[Boozy]

Society has moved backwards on several key issues (homosexual marriage and censorship to name two) from the domino effect I mentioned earlier. Science has been attacked by religious groups and generally thigns seem to be getting more and more difficult to sort out if its good or bad overall or if there is any real change going on.

But I think that's just the US and the Middle East for the the most part. The rest of the world is embracing science, achieving advancements in things like stem cell research, accepting homosexuality as a natural part of society, and attempting to deal with differences in a civil manner.

So many Americans I've spoken to lately are either pessimistic and resigned or just downright frightened. I suppose its hard to be optimistic when you're living through the last days of an empire. It would seem like everything around you is crumbling.

This might explain the recent surge in Christian nationalism in the south. The fall of the Roman empire saw a rise in religious extremism, too. Its a very human way of dealing with instability and uncertainty.

[Seshat]

The problem is do we still have the momentum to go forward? There has been a lot of movement over the past 8 years with the rise of religious extremism and the various political issues going on. Society has moved backwards on several key issues (homosexual marriage and censorship to name two) from the domino effect I mentioned earlier. Science has been attacked by religious groups and generally thigns seem to be getting more and more difficult to sort out if its good or bad overall or if there is any real change going on.


Humanity tends to take a step backwards every so often, especially when the movement forwards has been faster than the more conservative members of society can tolerate.

Another thing to consider: everything is a continuum. I've read a theory about human behaviour which makes sense. Look at this lovely ASCII art:

<1----------------------------------2---------------------------------------3>

1 represents one point of view - say, homophobia.
2 represents the attitude of the 'norm'.
3 represents the opposing point of view. Say, gay acceptance.

When the norm attitude is square in the middle, both ends of the spectrum tend to be equally loud. However, when the norm attitude changes, the people at the extremes become more or less vocal in an attempt to change the norm.

<1--------------------2------------------------------------------------------3>

In this situation, the gay acceptance people tend to be louder.

<1------------------------------------------2--------------------------------3>

And in this situation, the homophobes are louder.

However, once the norm swings even further into one direction or other, the social consequences for showing the opposing attitude become too great to be worth speaking up for most people.

<1---2-----------------------------------------------------------------------3>

This would silence most gays - they'd be afraid of being hurt or killed, unless they were of sufficiently high status to get away with it, or were in a 'gay ghetto' of only their own people.

<1----------------------------------------------------------------------2---3>

This would silence most homophobes. They're aware they're going to suffer social ostracism or be mocked for their beliefs, unless they're among other homophobes.


In situations which have more than two 'poles' of belief, the same general rules apply - the ascii art just gets much more complicated.

Now, this is just a theory - but it explains to my satisfaction why, as the world gets more accepting of women's rights, gay rights, etc, there is a minority which gets really loud about how horrible these things are.

Anyway you look at it though the struggle to improve both ourselves and the world in general is going to be a bitter and contentious struggle that will take time.

Generations.

But my grandmother was only able to move out of her father's house when she was married, and her husband handled all the bill paying. Her role was solely to tend the house and raise the children, and to handle social interactions with other women.

My niece might become a brain surgeon, rocket scientist, prime minister, or - if she so chooses - a homemaking mother of three. As she chooses.

I wouldn't be too surprised if Australia had a gay disabled female prime minister of a non-Christian religion, within my lifetime. Okay, I'd be surprised if we had one PM that ticked all those boxes. ;) But a set of prime ministers that covered all of those is doable, within my lifetime, I believe.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I will also state that altho society has improved in some ways, in others we have also take steps backwards.

In the Victorian era, for example, there was little to no sex crime the way there is today. There were rapes true, and degenerates attacking children, but cuz a guy could persuade a poor girl to consent to sex in return for a few coins, there was none of the viciousness that sex crime has nowadays. When Jack the Ripper started his crimes, the main reason for all the major shock and horror was that nothing like this had ever happened before. No-one could pin down the reason for a guy to go around ripping prostitutes up; they made statements such as "It's obviously a deranged midwife" or "It's a loony trying to clean the streets". No-one came to the obvious conclusion, that is that this was a sex crime.

Nowadays tho, the moment a Ripper like crime occurs, the immediate assumption is that this is a sex killer. We've lost that innocence where we don't have a clue, cuz sex crime is rampant now. Maybe it doesn't happen as often as the media would have you believe, but it's been steadily increasing since the days of Jack the Ripper. He was the first real sex criminal... and he was never caught.

[AFPheonix]

I imagine there were sickos in other historical times, and we've just never really heard about it.
Perhaps Jack the Ripper was just the first during an era with a more modern press?

[rahmota]

Boozy: You know something I have had those very same thoughts myself. I voiced them on another site and they ran me off and was probably one of the reasons I'm not welcome back there. Every empire falls eventually. One way or another either from its own weight or from external influences or some combination of both. Maybe they dont fall all the way down like the romans but more like the british empire and still be a country and all just a lot smaller (sorry raps and any other brits)

I guess I'll agree that humanity as a whole is moving along pretty okay. And like Seshat shows in her art it makes sense. You just wind up with some regional blips in the whole spectrum thing.

Lace/AFP: I'll say that you're both right and reality is somewhere in the middle. From what I've read of history Sex has been used as a medium of exchange, business transaction or religious experience throughout history. I mean for the most part prostitutes have been available in one form or another in just about every culture. Either full out legal ones like pompeii and the rest of the roman empire or the whole wink wink nudge nudge thing of the victorian era.

And yeah there have been "sex crimes" throughout history too but those where more of a business type crime where somebody did somebody without proper payment or permissions. The concept of rape as we know it today was not quite the same as it was a long time ago (one of the modern world's improvements for the most part) and for many women "rape" was a normal part of victorian marriage as the man was supposed to enjoy and and not her. (at least from what all I've studied)

But Jack did several things that got the major attention as they where violent crimes. Not just violent as london of the period had plenty of death from various means but gory/sick crimes with the dismemberment of the victims. Which coupled with the lurid tales told in the newspapers of the time trying to outdo each other to sell papers (hmm maybe thigns havent moved that far foreward) made for some unpleasant tales and nervous moods.

[Seshat]

In the Victorian era, for example, there was little to no sex crime the way there is today. There were rapes true, and degenerates attacking children, but cuz a guy could persuade a poor girl to consent to sex in return for a few coins, there was none of the viciousness that sex crime has nowadays.

I don't know about the Victorian era, but I do know that in the early decades of the 20th Century there were rapes, pedophilia and battered wives (and occasionally husbands) - but these things were kept quiet and not talked about. Rarely prosecuted, or brought to official attention.

Even though it's produced a whole new set of problems - including false reports and over-zealous protective services - I prefer the new way of handling it. I expect that the incidence of false reports and over-zealousness will fade as we improve our methods of handling this sort of thing. We're still novices at dealing with this sort of thing through the judicial system.

[Boozy]

In the Victorian era, for example, there was little to no sex crime the way there is today. There were rapes true, and degenerates attacking children...

What is a sex crime if not rape or molestation of minors?

[tendomentis]

I suppose a more to the point question would be if humanity has the desire or ability to evolve to whatever the next step is.

For the record, I have no problem with homosexuality. One of my friends is bi, and I have no problem with that. But from a strictly evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality would always be a dead end as the couple would be unable to procreate with each other.

And that's fine. To that couple, being happy together out-weighs the biological desire for procreation (not the act, but the end result anyway). And homosexual couples can always adopt a child or use in vitro to produce a child that is at least 1/2 a genetic offspring of the couple.

I think to evolve to the next level, humanity would need to shed sexuality altogether. It's a vestigial, instinctual drive predating human sapience. Our ancestor's alpha males once killed off any potential rivals and then would mate with that competitor's mate....we don't do that anymore either. Sure, the drive is still there, and exists in some form in our psyche, but overall we evolved past that.

Obviouisly, as long as humanity is a biological species, breeding still needs to happen, but humanity's preocupation (yes, preocupation as that topic dominates our media) with coupling/mating is something that would likely need to be evolved beyond if we were to truly go to the next level.

Some would argue, what would be the point without that, but I would argue that if we understood the point of evolving past that, we would already be there.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I guess I didn't explain it well. What I was trying to say is that serial killers like the whole Bundy/Dahmer perversion didn't exist back then. Most serious crimes were against property or to get money, cuz there was a far bigger divide between the rich and poor than now. Also, there was none of the rampant sexalisation of everyone and everything that there is now, and yes, there were sex killers, but not like Bundy, Dahmer et all. Jack the Ripper was considered the first, cuz he had no recognisable motive, he seemed to attack randomly, and there was no way of finding out where and when he'd strike next. Dunno if that's any clearer.

[rahmota]

Seshat: I sincerely hope the forces doing al that get better at it. the rate of false positives and the overreaction some of the agencies do is almost as bad as the things they are supposed to prevent.

Tendo: I'm not really sure I understand or agree with your point about sexuality needing to be evolved past. I'll agree the obsession with whose zooming who is a bit excessive in modern society and especially for those who are uptight and say it has to be the proper type of relations. So I'd say its the bad attitudes that need to be evolved past.

Boozy: Yeah I would agree those are definately archtypical sex crimes.

Lace: its a bit clearer I think. By comparison to modern crime statistics there where more property crimes. But is that a result of there being more of those sort of crimes or the perception that it is a crime changing?

Jack was a special case yes. There where several other violent mass murderers in the similar period and before hand. Jack was not caught and he was the first the media sensationalized. Mass murder has been around for quite some time in singular or organized forms.

[Seshat]

Seshat: I sincerely hope the forces doing al that get better at it. the rate of false positives and the overreaction some of the agencies do is almost as bad as the things they are supposed to prevent.

I know someone who was accused, and later cleared. I watched how much it devastated his life. We as a species HAVE to get better at handling these problems!

There are a lot of things we're novices at handling, still. Mental disorders, some forms of illness - heck, even just living in mega-cities. We'll get there, but it'll take us a time.