The hard-to-face truths
-
In the history of humankind, man has always been divided along 3 major lines.
1) Wealth and Status
2) Political systems and States
3) Race and Religion
1) Wealth and Status.
Clear examples would be caste systems ( aristocrats > clergy > commoners etc), exclusive institutions (private health care, expensive schools, clubs), social groups (millionaires, socialites, car-owners, elites in SG etc).
2) Political Systems and States
This is easy to see. We have communists, socialists, republicans, democrats, libertarians, etc. We have Russians, Chinese, Iraqis, Armenians, New Zealands, etc. Results in things like Cold War, Vietnam War, Korean War; where opposing parties are socially, culturally and historically similar but separated by "countries" or "political systems"
3) race and religion
Not much to elaborate on. Results in things like the Christian crusades of the Middle ages, Nazi purging on Jews, even Muslims killing Muslims ( sunni vs shia in middle east), racial riots in Singapore in the 50s etc.
My hypothesis: Men cannot survive as long as there exist any differences within them. I don't know how man can eliminate all these social constructions that divide us, but we have to do it (Heck it's not enough to be blind to skin colour, trust me men will still find faults with each other; we must all have the same skin colour but it seems impossible?). I believe only a utopian socialistic world build on common interests, universal brotherhood and scientific advancement will survive into the 22nd century.
The major challenges facing Man, which requires us to band together to solve:
1) population explosion. The earth cannot support the 9 billion projected population that will be reached by 2050.
2) extensive ecological damage. Endangered species, formation of growing dead zones in the oceans where nothing can survive because overfishing has destroyed the food chain, etc.
3) climate change
4) world hunger. 750 million go hungry everyday. Doesn't include the millions whose families get by with just a few dollars a day.
5) depletion of natural resources
Will we do it? I think man will never learn; will never give up his god, his car, his human rights, his country, his family, his money. I predict at least a major war by the end of my life.
-
I know these views are extreme.
-
in before PAP bashing
-
yes i admit im fat
-
youyayu hijack thread? haha
anyway i dont expect to change anyone's views or hope to change to the world. I created the topic just for discussion
-
Men cannot survive as long as there exist any differences within them.
I don't see why men can't survive their differences.
If you are interested in topics such as these, then you might enjoy below book:
The Evolution of Civilizations - An Introduction to Historical Analysis
http://www.archive.org/details/CarrollQuigley-TheEvolution
-
......
-
This thread reminds of the Georgia Guidestone.
-
if it is hard to face, dun face it lah, u can alway walk away from it, why go and face it.
sometime not knowing is better than knowing, as long as yr below can remain harden, dun worry, you are still ok to face the world.
-
I cant survive being the same as others ...
I was taught that this is proven from gene selection too. Children produced from incest are rumored to be less intelligent as there is no mix of genes. I rather see lots of people with different capabilities than a uniform level of intelligence.
-
Originally posted by Ice Dive:
I cant survive being the same as others ...
I was taught that this is proven from gene selection too. Children produced from incest are rumored to be less intelligent as there is no mix of genes. I rather see lots of people with different capabilities than a uniform level of intelligence.
Not to mention that children who are mixed blood are generally more pretty and also intelligent. -
who are mixed blood are generally more pretty and also intelligent.
Wonder whether that is a myth.
Any scientific studies on that?
-
Originally posted by Vaum:
Not to mention that children who are mixed blood are generally more pretty and also intelligent.
Ali Baba again -
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
Wonder whether that is a myth.
Any scientific studies on that?
Sorry.. it's based on personal observation. Anyway beauty is in the eye of the beholder. -
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
Wonder whether that is a myth.
Any scientific studies on that?
Got the Hakka tribes that when into Anglo education, came back more smarter than those status quo ones, wonder is there a blood tranfusion going on...i also want to mix my blood up. Uncle, got lobang bo?
-
all your projected major challenges exists only if you assume technology will remain what it is for the next 40 years, which will hardly be the case unless something severe enough to move mankind backwards a couple centuries happens.
frankly speaking, people should be focusing on the problems now instead of clamouring over projected problems; if you can't solve your problems now, don't count on solving anything in the future.
-
Originally posted by vulpes macrotis mutica:
all your projected major challenges exists only if you assume technology will remain what it is for the next 40 years, which will hardly be the case unless something severe enough to move mankind backwards a couple centuries happens.
frankly speaking, people should be focusing on the problems now instead of clamouring over projected problems; if you can't solve your problems now, don't count on solving anything in the future.
umm..you dont believe that climate change, world hunger and depletion of natural resources are already very, very serious problems?
to me it seems that technology will never solve any problems =p like you know, energy saving aircons merely encourage us to turn it on more often
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
if it is hard to face, dun face it lah, u can alway walk away from it, why go and face it.
sometime not knowing is better than knowing, as long as yr below can remain harden, dun worry, you are still ok to face the world.
true, not knowing is better for one-self. but I already know...so i choose to not care/worry. heh
-
Originally posted by crimson soldier:
true, not knowing is better for one-self. but I already know...so i choose to not care/worry. heh
Clever guy, clap clap clap...i love smart guy!! -
Originally posted by Ice Dive:
I cant survive being the same as others ...
I was taught that this is proven from gene selection too. Children produced from incest are rumored to be less intelligent as there is no mix of genes. I rather see lots of people with different capabilities than a uniform level of intelligence.
im just saying that the majority of social constructs should be given up. not your hobbies or passions or sex. feel free to go wild heh. cant a man define himself by his achievements or interests other than race or age? :p
see wikipedia for a definition on social constructs. i think in a laymen definition, they refer to things that only exist because of mens' definitions and beliefs. religion is an obvious example. other more subtle and useful human constructs are things like the definitions of magnetic susceptibility and electric permittivity of a vacuum etc
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Clever guy, clap clap clap...i love smart guy!!anyway angel what course are you studying
-
Originally posted by crimson soldier:
umm..you dont believe that climate change, world hunger and depletion of natural resources are already very, very serious problems?
to me it seems that technology will never solve any problems =p like you know, energy saving aircons merely encourage us to turn it on more often
actually i think technology can save us...its a matter of whether we wanna use it or not...a matter of whether man wants to use technologies that could potentially harm the economy but save the planet or stick to technologies that make them money...
-
religion is an obvious example.
The next is the religious. It became fashionable in Western Civilization, particularly in the last hundred years, to be scornful of religion. But it is a fact that human beings have religious needs. They have a need for a feeling of certitude in their minds about things they cannot control and they do not fully understand, and with humility, they will admit they do not understand them. When you destroy people's religious expression, they will establish secularised religions like Marxism.
The very idea that there is some kind of conflict between science and religion is completely mistaken. Science is a method for investigating experience, and religion is something quite different. Religion is the fundamental, necessary internalisation of our system of more permanent values.
-
Originally posted by crimson soldier:
umm..you dont believe that climate change, world hunger and depletion of natural resources are already very, very serious problems?
to me it seems that technology will never solve any problems =p like you know, energy saving aircons merely encourage us to turn it on more often
your problem of depletion of resources ->> the same way thomas malthus predicted that since food increases at an arithmetic rate and population growth increases at a geometric rate, the world will starve itself to death (n.b this was in the 18th century)
your problem of world hungry ->> maybe you haven't heard of the green revolution, but it's introduction to developing countries have help elevated part of the problem
your problem of climate change ->> climate change remains a very dismal science and there's a lot of conflicting evidences. as such it wouldn't validate your statement as it being a very very serious problem at least until it can be proven without a doubt that climate change is really really a bad thing
the underlying point is that technology is, and can be improved, to solve, if not elevate, these major problems that worries you. at the end of the day, a benefit here is a cost there so think about what you'd be willing to give up if you really want to save the world.
-
true, technology can save us. but it might kill us along the way too.
anyway cold fusion the next big thing, could potentially bring us almost limitless energy from the fusion of hydrogen nuclei to heavier nuclei. but only the biggest countries can achieve it. then what? first world, developing world, third world wont be enough to describe all the countries le...the gap will just grow
I'm not discrediting religion, political systems and all that totally btw. i think they served us well but as earth is getting more packed and globalisation eats into everyones' personal space...conflicts will be more frequent and massive.
theres some value in religion at the personal level, no doubt