June 5, 2008
-
The Most Desirable Future
Socrates_Cafe asks What is the most desirable future of the world?
A utopian answer would, of course be one providing the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number and that probably would be attainable only under certain conditions:
1. A viable world human population. That is one where population pressures on food and resources is acceptable to the humans concerned. Everyone (or almost everyone) must find their basic quality of living acceptable.
2. A world where there is no psychological stress on the population. That is one where there is no struggle for space, resources, or dominance.
3. A world where there is little or no pressure on the "Natural" non-human part of the world - which is the vast majority of the planet (all those seas, oceans, rain forests, and arctic wastes).
Achieving these goals would be extremely difficult but is, I think, within the realm of possibility. Science, however, is divided on the relationship of the human psyche and the almost unending struggles of mankind against himself.
If man is not inherently the "Killer Ape", but yearns for peace and tranquility; perhaps we are gradually moving toward Utopia. If we are the "Killer Ape", than perhaps Homo Sapiens is wise enough to eventually correct the killer genes.
What would be the first steps toward Utopia? Have we, with our increased concerns about pollution and resource depletion, begun to take them?
Comments (10)
Probably interestingly unobtainable.
I've linked you
LOL. "Noting to kill or die for" eh? Funny how your moral supremacy is centered around your "holier than thou" concern for the earth and therapy sessions.
"I think, within the realm of possibility" = "You may say that I'm dreamer but I'm not the only, Maybe someday you'll [be guilted/taxed/re-educated forcably for your own good to] join us and the [Brave New] world will be as one".
"Homo Sapiens is wise enough to eventually correct the killer genes." I giggle when I read that "Homo Sapiens" ...LOL ...latin seems a bit arrogant here. I guess the PC word would be "Humanity" , which makes me laugh too. You scientifically dub "us" like we are something under the microsope, a cell with out a soul, mind or spirit. Maybe we can get the "killer gene" our of our abortion clinics too?
This "concern for the earth" mantra is rooted in the hatred of "homo sapiens" ...thinking they are a cancer on the earth and inconvenient in the womb. Of the attitudes that would bring us close to Utopia, self hatred won't be in Utopia's ball park.
As long as there is liberty on earth ...there will be trouble among "homo sapiens".
I believe a future engineered by your type will look like this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ_2cBs6iis ...this is not a joke but a thought provoking piece to one of my favorite movies.
Actually, I think Wells had Allen's concept of humanity more in mind than mine when he wrote The Time Machine. His time traveller found man preying on man no matter how far into the future he traveled. The work is profoundly pessimistic.
This "concern for the earth" mantra is rooted in the hatred of "homo sapiens" ...thinking they are a cancer on the earth and inconvenient in the womb. Of the attitudes that would bring us close to Utopia, self hatred won't be in Utopia's ball park.
I did not intend to regard mankind as a cancer. Rather I intended to express a final asumption of resposibility by humans for care of their habitat - stopping messing the place up
Why does the idea of Liberty carry with it the idea of trouble among homo sapiens,? I don't think humans are by nature trouble-makers or that they really want to make trouble. You can surely swing your fist without aiming it at someone's nose; or do you believe that "Free Will" is the root of mankind's evil nature?
Allen, what is your concept of the most desirable future?
Anyone else?
Dear Dick,
I still intend to write an essay about the most desirable future. You seem to gloss over the details here, and that is what I've always found interesting about utopian concepts. Great as a concept, not so easy to figure out how the concept is actually going to be implemented in society. Most utopian literature is usually distopian in nature, and the utopia is usually more totalitarian than utopian.
This is an essay about the most desirable future and your third condition is that this would be a world with "little or no pressure on the "Natural" non-human part of the world" The natural world exerts it's own pressure and doesn't care about man, as I stated in my own essay on probably future history. Do you think that with current protractions of our current situation, that man will ever be able to come to relatively "harmonious" terms with nature?
One could argue that a place where there is no psychological stress might be a world populated by lobotomized drones. How are the disparate needs of man going to be placated "psychologically"?
If man is not the "killer ape", then he sure doesn't know how to get past the mindset. It looks to me like we're headed the other way, not towards utopia. If we could be antlike enough in our nature then perhaps we could structure a utopian society, but as long as a sense of freedom of will exists in humanity, coupled with the sense of tradition and history, man won't stoop to any form of domination, even if it's a "pax".
Michael F. Nyiri, poet, philosopher, fool
Mike, if you look at the history of mankind - at least that we have - you can argue that the evidence is a stumbling stagger toward a better life for most humans. The old victorian adage that life before our time was "Nasty, Brutish, and Short" has more than a grain of truth.
We have improved life conditions so much that over-population and the attendant problems of too many people on too small a planet has begun to raise a whole new set of stumbling blocks. In overcoming disease, hunger, and physical danger, we have made our lives easier but we are still a long way from Utopia.
I think we are moving in the right direction - in that we are at least talking about improving our lot as well as the lot of the entire world. How many people were concerned about the future of the world and problems humans cause the world two hundred years ago?
I assume the majority of decisions freely made (that Free Will you mention) have been and will be positive in nature. I know of no culture that has existed that has not included moral rules designed to allow members to live peaceably and that almost all members subscribe to.
You are correct in that most Utopian writers have predicated an organized society where everyone obeys the rules and lives happily ever after. Perhaps such societies will only work with obedient members; but it's surprising how many have been tried and how many have lasted very long times. The most obvious being religious-based communities - some of which have remained intact for millennia.
Over thirty years ago, back in the Hippy ages, many universities spent a lot of effort encouraging their students to imagine and research the Utopian concept. I know my students back then were all for it and were sure that the "Age of Aquarius" was at hand. The Boston University College of Basic Studies had a very good syllabus which BU used at that time.
Required reading for a HS seminar I taught included such authors as Skinner, Rimmer, Huxley, and Bellamy (among others) as summer reading to inspire discussion about utopias. Discussions were lively - these were very bright kids.
The birds are very interesting it was so great to watch! I didn't want it to end I love animals so I love watching things like that! I hope your wife is feeling good.
I have another take on the possible/desirable future posted here. It's a long review of a controversial new book and movement. Take a look as tell me what you think.
Awesome blog.Much thanks again. Cool.