onlooker wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk3QsGzAjKI
Basically, postulating that both our advanced abstract cognitive skills along with our primitive urges are what has led us astray. Solution?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
onlooker wrote:Okay. Yes, the three elements mentioned did have positive productive utility for us at different points in the past. However, I submit that they are mostly counterproductive to the threats and challenges we face together as a species now. First Tribalism. We now all face common threats as a species that require unprecented cooperation among everyone. Climate change, nuclear war and pandemics as well as general environmental deterioration all overlap any boundaries and threaten everyone everywhere. They are international problems and thus they require tribalism to cede to a one human species and one planet paradigm. Now, as for short term thinking that in fact has already led us down the road to Collapse. So, we did not heed the evolving and worsening problems with overpopulation and resources attrition among others nor of course greenhouse gas warming the Earth. Finally, wishful thinking while it has some useful aspects to it is counterproductive to humans understanding the full extent of the daunting reality which they confront. We cannot wishful think our way out of this. We must endeavor to empirically and logically find what solutions they're are and adopt them. No amount of wishful thinking ever solved a difficult problem. It can be counterproductive also by ascribing to our technological prowess Godlike capabilities. Rather practical, logical and honest forethought. Well that is it for now.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Cog wrote:Ya'll be a morose group. Be of good cheer. We are going to be around to see what happens. If anything.
pstarr wrote:
Ecology is a scary subject. Never taught in primary or secondary schools. It would allow the masses to cut through the bullshit.
If you’re reading these words and comprehending their meaning, it’s too late for my premier bit of advice: do not use written language. It’s temptingly beautiful, like a flower with thorns or a venomous invertebrate. But using language, like using thorns or venom, is a short-term proposition. And death can result from a single contact with any of the three.
If you come across anything flammable, run away. Somebody in your group is bound to harness the fire, at least for a while. Shortly thereafter, you’ll all discover fire cannot be harnessed for long. This white-hot lesson will come after the exam.
Language and fire are the two major forces leading to destruction of habitat. Without them, you’ll last long. With them, you’ll soon be gone.
Squilliam wrote:Civilization itself is self perpetuating. If there is a means to preserve the centre at the expense of the periphery it will be taken.
DesuMaiden wrote:The truth is, the survivors of this wretched civilization will most likely repeat the mistakes of their ancestors (which would include us and our ancestors). I don't think there will ever be an ecologically sustainable civilization...
Ibon wrote:
It's really about population control. If we had a small human population the consumption per capita could be quite high and we could be ecologically sustainable.
This civilization is only wretched because of the indolence of abundance.
Ibon wrote:DesuMaiden wrote:The truth is, the survivors of this wretched civilization will most likely repeat the mistakes of their ancestors (which would include us and our ancestors). I don't think there will ever be an ecologically sustainable civilization...
It's really about population control. If we had a small human population the consumption per capita could be quite high and we could be ecologically sustainable.
This civilization is only wretched because of the indolence of abundance.
Return to Open Topic Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests