133 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

mousestalker wrote...

The world has gotten better, objectively better, every decade of my life. What has also gotten better is the media's ability to report on, incessantly, disaster, catastrophe and woe.

The same wonderful tools that allow me to discuss roses with enthusiasts around the world also aids those who wish to trumpet misfortune. And since they have the money and desire to propagate their information, it goes everywhere.

Meanwhile, while there are more people in the world, fewer starve. For most of my life both India and China were economic basket cases, the subjects of derision and scorn. Most of the people of India and China are still poor, but almost all of them are better off than they were thirty years ago. That is two-fifths of the world's population.

There are far more literate people then there were fifty years ago. Globally, people are better housed, nourished and clothed than ever before. Even political repression has eased somewhat.

If what is troubling you is the recent shooting at the elementary school, even there things haven't really grown worse. The U.S. has regressed in our treatment of the mentally ill, but we did it for the best of intentions. Both in the U.S. and globally, mass shootings have remained fairly level. They decline over time as long as they are not publicized and spike when the media promotes them and so encourages copy cats.

Why would the media do this? Bad news of a spectacular nature, involving sympathetic victims drives ratings. Ratings brings in advertisements. Advertisements mean the opportunity for more revenue. The personnel involved even get to feel like they are doing something important as people who would otherwise ignore them start paying them attention.

That by listing the numbers of dead and wounded as a score, by obsessing over the story and by giving the malefactor's name prominence they are encouraging others to emulate him is less relevant as that occurs further down the road, is somewhat ephemeral and may never actually come about. There's an old song about it. It is still true.

/pontification

This.

Stop romanticizing the past folks.

I can say, as a student of history, that it was always worse.  Much, much worse.

termokanden wrote...

However, we're still headed for disaster. The planet can't sustain our population much longer and yet people keep breeding like mad. 

Well, except for this.

But "it might end if we keep doing what we're doing" isn't the same as advocating that it should end.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 17 décembre 2012 - 06:41 .

[rjshae]

Legatus Arianus wrote...

rjshae wrote...

RedArmyShogun wrote...

*ModEdit: Let's leave social-political discusson out of this topic*

Humanity in General I'ld like to see survive. But the Snow Flake Big Money Shinny coin on the floor mentality, not so much. If that means massive hardships so be it.

Meh, the "consumerist" model is merely a technological expression of predatory resource acquisition in the wild. It's a perfectly valid evolutionary model, and nature will eventually induce a cyclical population pattern as a result. The question is what replaces it? I'm expecting that the information age will require new economic adaptations; perhaps finally resulting in the singularity.

As for whether the world should end: the answer is that it inevitably will end.

Consumerism is failure to see how important are natural resources and turning them to garbage, so some can benefit and most of the people buy the cheap quality stuff every year or two.

At the end, I prefer the RedArmyShogun's attitude.

"Important" how? I'm taking the very long-term view here. In a hundred million years it won't matter in the slightest whether we've "exhausted" the resources. Resource management is useful if you want to minimize population boom and bust, but for that to matter you also need to manage the population growth.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 17 décembre 2012 - 11:35 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Legatus Arianus wrote...

rjshae wrote...

RedArmyShogun wrote...

*ModEdit: Let's leave social-political discusson out of this topic*

Humanity in General I'ld like to see survive. But the Snow Flake Big Money Shinny coin on the floor mentality, not so much. If that means massive hardships so be it.

Meh, the "consumerist" model is merely a technological expression of predatory resource acquisition in the wild. It's a perfectly valid evolutionary model, and nature will eventually induce a cyclical population pattern as a result. The question is what replaces it? I'm expecting that the information age will require new economic adaptations; perhaps finally resulting in the singularity.

As for whether the world should end: the answer is that it inevitably will end.

Consumerism is failure to see how important are natural resources and turning them to garbage, so some can benefit and most of the people buy the cheap quality stuff every year or two.

At the end, I prefer the RedArmyShogun's attitude.

Attitude is not a solution it merely creates problems and I also bet your as much a high consumer as everyone else. I expect most of the content of your home is a luxury not an essential many of which I am sure contain resources that have limited supply. Personally I do not believe alternatives are being developed fast enough to cope with the reduction of those natural resources.

The human population is stretching the limit of the worlds resources already and it will only continue to grow. Even minimalistic approach to resource usage cannot change this. So eventually it would end up as a totalitarian society  with select group or individual deciding the allocation of those resources else what you will have is an ever increasing death rate as the idea of the population balancing out with resources available is not possible without someone deciding who lives and who dies in order to keep the numbers down within each regions allocation. Population does not simply stop increasing meaning babies will not stop being born just because there are less tree's, oil, gas, food or water. Population control would not be a natural event, it would have to be a decision by mankind to culling the aged, limiting the births and allocate limited resources all of which will control how many live and die and who.

That could be you and your family they decide to cull, limit or not give enough resources to survive if reached that breaking point population vs resources wise so saying hardships are acceptable to you is kind of moot since you have the privilege of already being born and have enough to eat, drink and live  of which I am sure you do to excess compared to essential needs but I doubt you would be quite so okay with it if hardship mean't the execution of your older relatives, the prevention of any brothers or sisters you might have being born of which if are born then killed because you did not have permission to extend your family or when they decide to allocate those limited resources to someone else if decide the population in your area is too high to maintain the balance.

Though pretty sure we will probably wipe out ourselves long before then with either chemical or biological invention of some sort. A super virus or wars. Maybe world itself will bring the end with natural event I don't know but I do not think being anti-consumerism will solve anything in the long run.

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 17 décembre 2012 - 11:35 .

[KBomb]

Today alone I have already had meetings with two students. One whose parents are religious and he has pent up fears about the end of the world and one who after some nudging, admits that his depression feels more severe in light of the tragedy in Connecticut. I think everyone is having some of these thoughts, atm.

When media is so saturated with images and stories of heartache, death, disease, etc., it's so easy to let yourself become soaked in it until it weighs you down with feelings of depression, helplessness and hopelessness. You begin to question the state and usefulness of mankind and if there is even a point in it all. It's normal, especially around the holidays and especially when tragedies are superimposed in every media outlet.

There are people out there every day striving to make this world a better place to live in. My suggestion to you is to do the same. Start by turning off the news. If you're depressed, it isn't a good idea to be around triggers, such as tragic images and news.  

Try volunteering in your community. One of the factors of depression is isolation, it may help to be around others and you'll feel good for contributing something. I often tell my students to volunteer at their local animal shelters or a local horse stable we have and the ones who do really get a lot from it.

If you aren't depressed, and it is just some soul searching; don't let the media or events sway you from enjoying all life has to offer. Ponder on it, but don't let it be an anchor that weighs you down.

Also, mousestalkers post. Good stuff.

[Dragoonlordz]

I consider myself a realist, the population growth is not sustainable, the resources are not infinite, a natural event if big enough magnitude could wipe us out. It is only a matter of time until a deadly virus becomes immune to any treatment and spreads. Wars will continue to exist forever for various reasons.

BUT I am an optimistic realist meaning I plan on living forever through all those things, I just haven't figured out how yet.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 17 décembre 2012 - 09:01 .

[LadyJaneGrey]

After the week I've had?  Sure. 

[C9316]

Why not? I'd love to find out what, if anything, comes after this life.

[NoForgiveness]

humans evil and such sure but there is beauty and goodness if you know how to look.. which i haven't recentjy but still

[Dragoonlordz]

C9316 wrote...

Why not? I'd love to find out what, if anything, comes after this life.

Rebirth as puddle of goo.

[Volus Warlord]

termokanden wrote...

*snip*

However, we're still headed for disaster. The planet can't sustain our population much longer and yet people keep breeding like mad. To make matters worse, nobody's really doing much about it because there are always "bigger concerns".

I sure hope I'm wrong, but I don't really think so.

I'm one of 8 children, and I plan to have at least 5 (if I find someone crazy enough). SUCK IT, BIRTH CONTROL! 

First off, it is mostly third worlders or those in poverty having all the babies. It's like reverse social darwinism. 

And there ARE always bigger concerns. 

[termokanden]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Well, except for this.

But "it might end if we keep doing what we're doing" isn't the same as advocating that it should end.

Oh not at all. I thought that way for many years because I was depressed and hated everything. Somehow it just sort of went away on its own as I got older.

So no, I don't think the world should end.

[Hainkpe]

The sooner mankind can and does embark on space exploration, the better. It is my belief that our future is in space.

This world and universe will end. If we want to continue, then we need to advance and advance sufficiently enough that we can survive and thrive in many different environments.

Personally, I hope we do.

[termokanden]

Oh I completely agree. I doubt the universe will end though, but the galaxy might.

Ah, you joined the day before me. How interesting. Well, maybe not. Ahem... excuse me

Modifié par termokanden, 17 décembre 2012 - 09:15 .

[Isichar]

C9316 wrote...

Why not? I'd love to find out what, if anything, comes after this life.

Yeah one state of being is just as good as the other lol.

[Isichar]

Ivandra Ceruden wrote...

As long as I got my family and beloved ones, I don't give a friggin' **** about this world. Those people are enough for me to keep on going through all the crap daily life throws at me.

Yeah friends and family... MLP helps too.

[TEWR]

Do I think it should end? No, not really, even if I find the world to be a depressingly ****ty place.

Would I really care if it started to end? On some level yes, and on another level no. I still want to live, of course, but if the world ends then maybe it was meant to be. Death is a part of life.

[Hainkpe]

termokanden wrote...
Oh I completely agree. I doubt the universe will end though, but the galaxy might.

It depends on which theory you want to support. Will the galaxy expand and expand, growing colder and colder? Or perhaps the universe will condense in on itself. It's all speculation and we need more knowledge to know but it's fun. 

Modifié par Belyn, 17 décembre 2012 - 09:23 .

[Naughty Bear]

C9316 wrote...

Why not? I'd love to find out what, if anything, comes after this life.

This. I've always been interested in what happens next. I like to believe reincarnation happens.

EDIT: That string theory creepy pasta is very interesting.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 17 décembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[Isichar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Do I think it should end? No, not really, even if I find the world to be a depressingly ****ty place.

Would I really care if it started to end? On some level yes, and on another level no. I still want to live, of course, but if the world ends then maybe it was meant to be. Death is a part of life.

well at least you would not have to care for long, seeing as how you would be dead 

Modifié par Isichar, 17 décembre 2012 - 09:27 .

[Obeded the 2nd]

It best end because I didn't buy any Christmas gifts.