All those idiots protesting and pushing for nuclear disarmament for all those decades, screaming about how a nuclear war would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? No! Just more doomerism/alarmism.

We are fighting fire with fire and instead we should put out this fire of hatred in all of us by showing love,kindness and understanding and soon others will follow. — Ege

What on earth makes you think they'll follow??

Seriously. Can you explain why you think that "showing love, kindness, and understanding" can somehow overpower hatred and contempt? Where is there any evidence of "showing love, kindness, and understanding" having that kind of power?

"Climate change" is a platitude of a phrase, "anthropogenic climate change" is not; climate is undeniably changing, as it always has been. The only debate is how much has been caused by us,
— Lionino

Ok, I’ll bite. How much do you think has been caused by us? — Joshs

How exactly is this line of inquiry helpful? Can you explain?
(Leaving aside how such a calculation should even be possible.)

When would humans be off the hook? If only 10% of global heating is their fault? Where do you draw the line? And why there?

How exactly is this line of inquiry helpful? Can you explain?
(Leaving aside how such a calculation should even be possible.) — baker

It’s purely selfish. Im just trying to make a connection between Lionino’s reference to Hunter Binden as a ‘child toucher’ and his views on climate change.

*sigh*

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

All those idiots protesting and pushing for nuclear disarmament for all those decades, screaming about how a nuclear war would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? — Mikie

Not yet.
I wonder how many weapons have been invented through human history that were used as a deterrent only and never deployed.
The protesting idiots were unsuccessful in their plea for disarmament; the nuclear arsenals kept on proliferating, spreading to less stable small regimes even while the big ones attained increasingly deranged leadership, casting off pups, such as dirty bombs, gravity bombs, artillery shells, land mines, depth charges, and torpedoes and soon, portable nukes. Now, any old terrorist organization can have them. In a mere 80 years, the threat has grown from a conflict between two superpowers to a free-for-all.
But that's okay, because whatever hasn't happened can't possibly happen, ever....
I nearly got run over by a fire engine once. It didn't happen. Therefore I am immortal.
.... until it does.

feel like humanity needs to flourish in a way that they take each others ideas and beliefs more seriously and emphatize with them and instead find meaning in each other. — Ege

:up:

Cool. What is the foundation of your ethical system - how does one determine what the good is? When we say something 'needs to' happen is there more than self-interest at work?

prolonging the complacent okayhood of a prosperous minority for a few extra decades is not quite the same as "it didn't happen then, so it can't happen now" which is what I've been hearing more and more frequently since the 1960's. — Vera Mont

Not what I was arguing. I was just pointing out that existential dread for these reasons has been with us for many decades. And we don't really know when it all goes to shit. As no doubt it one day will.

Ok, I’ll bite. How much do you think has been caused by us? — Joshs

I don't have enough information so I suspend belief. For something, I have the feeling that at least in metropolitan areas, the climate has been noticeably changed, especially due to pollution.

Could be, but still does not explain how they had predicted the upcoming solar flares years in the future. — Ege

It must have had been some type of Astrological prediction they had. I don't know the details of the methods, but here is the Wiki article on it.

The mere action of kindness can bring a sense of euphoria to a person while hatred only brings more hatred towards each other tell me, would you prefer being loved or just hating on everyone and everything for the majority of your time here?

What is the foundation fo your ethical system - how does one determine what the good is? When we say something 'needs to' happen is there more than self-interest at work? — Tom Storm

I still haven't figured out what the ethical system could be as It is a bit hard finding a true balance between what we say is "good" or "bad"

Throughout history the perception of beauty was through how inbred royal families looked so maybe our understanding of "good" may not be the best one there is. Yet I still feel like helping each other in a way without harm would be a step towards the right direction, whereas crushing each other in a race that no one truly understands might be one of the "bad" things that we have done/doing in our current day and age.

I feel like a society intertwined with nature might be a way to go for example:
Stockholm wood city

The stockholm wooden city is what I think of a great example. As we do not need and deserve the dull,grey,doomerist and minimalist architecture that we have at most places we need to see colour in our lives yet the places that we live in only have a small color range compared to the wast beauty and color range of our planet.

And we don't really know when it all goes to shit. As no doubt it one day will. — Tom Storm

We can only work on prolonging the inevitable, but still who wouldn't want to see and give the resources for the human civilization venture into the stars one day?

I mean is it worth to have nuclear weapons in hand? one wrong, idiotic decision could lead to a mass destruction and killing innocent people,families,children just because some people wanted to push the big red button out of hatred for another person that rules the country.

All those idiots protesting and pushing for nuclear disarmament for all those decades, screaming about how a nuclear war would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? No! Just more doomerism/alarmism. — Mikie

Sorry Mikie, but I changed a few words in your statement.

All those idiots protesting and pushing for CO2 reduction for all those decades, screaming about how global warming would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? No! Just more doomerism/alarmism.

Yeah that was just a joke. Plenty of people actually think this way though. Of course nuclear disarmament was important and the anti-nuclear proliferation treaties were important— the entire movement was and is important.

Meanwhile you have evidence of climate catastrophe all over, and your an alarmist if you think it’s a problem because hey, people thought the world would end in 2012. It’s a stupid argument for ignorant people.



Case in point.

I’m quite looking forward to climate change. I’m not sure what all the doom and gloom is about, but anything that keeps us in the The Holocene is right by my book.

I predict those who are seeking to save us from some impending climate holocaust are going to kill us long before the sun does. My guess is they’ll try darken the skies or poison the atmosphere if they don’t tax us to death first.

Hello everyone!
This is my first post on this forum and I would like to debate about the hypothetical end of humanity and what would be possible scenarios that could happen. — Ege

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Putting our present in the widest possible context...

All life will be extinguished on this planet when the sun becomes a white dwarf billions of years from now.

Even IF there were no future threats to our species, we would still evolve and cease to exist as we now do. Into what we might evolve is beyond guessing

In the billions of years since life began on earth there have been five catastrophic extinctions that human beings had nothing to do with. A sixth extinction is in progress, and there will be more in the future, whether we cause them or not.

Hamlet calls humans "the paragon of animals". Shakespeare was as aware as we are how flawed our species is, but sure: in some ways we are paragons, but we are also deeply flawed in our inability to regularly and effectively act in the present to avoid somewhat distant or uncertain harms. What might be clear vision is clouded by emotions, misinformation, missing information, aspirations, hopes, greed, fear, wishful thinking, etc. Even love clouds our vision.

Actually, we are doing fairly well with global warming. Billions of flawed people recognize it and worry about it. Every day millions of individual minute actions are directed toward reducing waste. It is our misfortune that the problem of methane and CO2 in the atmosphere has reached high enough levels that we can't undo the damage by small actions. 99.9% of the world's population are not in a position to enact very big changes, and the 1/10th of 1% that could are greedy bastards, for the most part, that can't let go of opportunities to get even richer.

Will something happen that will persuade even the oil magnates around the globe--the auto manufacturers; the developers and builders; the big food companies, the manufacturers and retailers, etc. to stop driving us ever deeper into crisis? And what would that "something" be?

In any event, this species (us) will in all likelihood survive, barring some added disaster (like nuclear war, a big rock from space...) happening. We might be significantly reduced, we might be living a primitive life style, but we'd still be around.

I do think we are speeding way ahead of ourselves with our technology and invention. We have things we have no idea how to use yet - we're like little toddlers with keys to an airplane, or adolescents placed in charge of armies. We have no idea what we really need anymore. If the "progress" made between the neolithic era and the iron age only spawned the fall of the roman empire, and the advances of science brought us the power to upset the entire climate, and if during all this time we remained murderers, liars, enslavers, and cheats, fearful of everything, weak and selfish - why do we think we should keep inventing things? We've tried "progress" for at least 10,000 years, inventing our indoor plumbing, warmth in the snowy winter, waterproof shoes, no more wolf attacks, cell phone connectivity, hospitals and grocery stores and so much invention making our world, and what do we do with all of this, generation after generation after generation - we are still murdering, lying, child-beating terrible people. All of us.

We do, in fact, suck at running things. We are each individually and all taken together, our own worst enemy.

Maybe if we focused more on being better people, here in our homes, truly, and learned to get along with our immediate neighbors, hope might emerge during discussions between factions and parties over issues impacting the world, and these discussions might actually start to be discussions, leading to something that could actually be done.

Doesn't anyone find it interesting that in discussions like this, we always blame someone else? We talk about capitalists, or politicians, or oil burners, or whomever. Aren't every one of these people our brothers, sisters, mothers - ourselves? When we say people should stop doing X and start doing Y - we should stop ourselves and just say "I'm not doing X, and I'm not doing Y." And be the world we want the world to be.

Fully confess, I'm to blame for the end of humanity. Sorry folks. Working on it.

Fully confess, I'm to blame for the end of humanity. Sorry folks. Working on it. — Fire Ologist

Don't beat yourself up. Let us.

I mean the ones taxing us to death are a problem but not the only problem we have on our hands. How many people that know about the global warming crisis yet, don't do anything about it?

What about companies putting recycling bins and trash cans next to each other and connect them underneath while the unsuspecting recycler is thinking he/she is saving the world.

We are about to doom ourselves because of the greed we have as humanity.

We do, in fact, suck at running things. We are each individually and all taken together, our own worst enemy. — Fire Ologist

True, we do suck at running things but maybe its not in our nature to "run things" and we should instead focus on building our structures,ideas,beliefs around the already existant nature that used to, and still tries to run things for us?

Our planet is the one that gives us the resources we need to build and thrive, instead of helping it create more resources we just take more than we need and end up damaging it more in the end.

Hamlet calls humans "the paragon of animals". Shakespeare was as aware as we are how flawed our species is, but sure: in some ways we are paragons, but we are also deeply flawed in our inability to regularly and effectively act in the present to avoid somewhat distant or uncertain harms. What might be clear vision is clouded by emotions, misinformation, missing information, aspirations, hopes, greed, fear, wishful thinking, etc. Even love clouds our vision. — BC

We are overrun by emotions as a species and sometimes let our emotions get in the way of our actions if we have no self-control. But why would someone be let in charge if that person has no self-control or even worse, can get impulsive and act on it really easily?

There are many examples of this kind of people throughout our history and nearly all of them majorly caused a type of alarmism,doomerism to their own people just because they lack self-control.

The thing

Actually, we are doing fairly well with global warming. Billions of flawed people recognize it and worry about it. Every day millions of individual minute actions are directed toward reducing waste. It is our misfortune that the problem of methane and CO2 in the atmosphere has reached high enough levels that we can't undo the damage by small actions. 99.9% of the world's population are not in a position to enact very big changes, and the 1/10th of 1% that could are greedy bastards, for the most part, that can't let go of opportunities to get even richer. — BC

The fact that we can't do anything or just doing minor fixes even when all of us gathered together tells alot about the current system that is in place.

There is a saying that the first leader and creator of Turkey said and it goes like this;

Türkiye’nin gerçek sahibi ve efendisi, gerçek üretici olan köylüdür. O halde, herkesten daha çok refah, mutluluk ve servete hak kazanmış ve lâyık olan köylüdür." — Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

Which with a rough translation means:
"The real owner and master of Turkey is the people, who is the real producer. Therefore, it is the people who is entitled to and deserves more prosperity, happiness and wealth than anyone else."

"The real owner and master of Turkey is the people, who is the real producer. Therefore, it is the people who is entitled to and deserves more prosperity, happiness and wealth than anyone else." — Ege

Nice words, heard in nations the world over, over and over in history.
Heard.... but never seen.
The people "taxing us to death" are doing so to provide more tax cuts, exemptions and deferments for the very, very rich who produce nothing at all.

Heard.... but never seen. — Vera Mont

actually around the time Atatürk was alive he had made many improvements to give power to the people rather than focusing more on power to the government.

He built factories changed, entirety of how education worked so that a middle school graduate could have known alot of things even before going to high school yet it all changed over time as he died and people eventually lost the power they had on their hands.

actually around the time Atatürk was alive he had made many improvements to give power to the people rather than focusing more on power to the government. — Ege

Sure, so did lots of reformers in lots of countries since then.
But it takes years to make the improvements, and when the other kind of administration comes to power, which it always does, it takes them hardly any time at all to tear it all down again. Ultimately, the wealth and power never stays with the people.

But it takes years to make the improvements, and when the other kind of administration comes to power, which it always does, it takes them hardly any time at all to tear it all down again. Ultimately, the wealth and power never stays with the people. — Vera Mont

Yeah it's just a matter of keeping the power on the people's hands rather than giving ultimate power to the governments or the ones with the wealth.

Yeah it's just a matter of keeping the power on the people's hands rather than giving ultimate power to the governments or the ones with the wealth. — Ege

Uh-hu

Actually, it's quite simple, and people were able to do it for thousands of years. But when they opted for large, diverse populations (very useful for defence, innovation and productivity), they gave up horizontal social organization for a vertical one, and thus instituted governance, hierarchy, class stratification, specialization and the concentration of wealth and power.
Maybe, after the collapse, whoever is left will reinvent tribes.

The mere action of kindness can bring a sense of euphoria to a person while hatred only brings more hatred towards each other — Ege

Yet people love to hate and despise. Perhaps the strongest emotion there is is contempt, and the most pleasurable one.

they gave up horizontal social organization for a vertical one — Vera Mont

We weren't around, so what you and I say about them is a guess. My guess is that they didn't EXCHANGE horizontal organization for a vertical one. Verticality was imposed upon them. We can go one step back, as some writers have, like James C. Scott in "Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States" and suggest that grain was the bait and exploitation of the farmers by the 'elite' was the trap.

Even so, people have maintained horizontal organization at various levels, because it is just plain necessary for the survival of th species.

Sure, so did lots of reformers in lots of countries since then.
But it takes years to make the improvements, and when the other kind of administration comes to power, which it always does, it takes them hardly any time at all to tear it all down again. Ultimately, the wealth and power never stays with the people. — Vera Mont

I can't decide whether you are profoundly pessimistic or deeply realistic.

Perhaps we can say that wealth and power doesn't begin with "the people" in the first place. (and who do we count as "the people" and who are the evil "them"?) What "the people" -- the peasants, the laborers achieve is "enough" plus a little extra. Wealth and power are the province of the accumulators, the far-sighted exploiters, the "creative class" who figure out how to wring that "little extra from "the people" and keep it for themselves.

The peasants aren't free of the stain of cupidity. They too desire to accumulate, and as reported in the Medieval magazine Successful Peasant, some became quite comfortable and moved up quite a few notches in the social order. Most peasants don't end up in the pages of Successful Peasant because making minimal ends meet takes all the time, energy, and heart they have.

Exploitation (to create capital) is probably a necessary step to material progress. Yes, material progress doesn't benefit everyone -- at least, often, not for a long time.

We weren't around, so what you and I say about them is a guess. — BC

It was guessed by some fairly well-established anthropologists, and is borne out by what Europeans learned about the 'primitive' cultures they conquered.

My guess is that they didn't EXCHANGE horizontal organization for a vertical one. Verticality was imposed upon them. — BC

In North America, yes. But South American, African and Asian empires existed before the Europens and their superior weapons arrived. In order to impose its organization on other cultures, a people need to be powerful. Some civilization had to be the first to wield that power; other followed suit.

"Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States" and suggest that grain was the bait and exploitation of the farmers by the 'elite' was the trap. — BC

I can believe that. But persuasion - even manipulation - do not amount to force. Free men can't be trapped by grain or anything else if they don't want the benefits.

Even so, people have maintained horizontal organization at various levels — BC

In small numbers of related or interdependent people. Not on the scale of thousands or millions.

I can't decide whether you are profoundly pessimistic or deeply realistic. — BC

Observant.

(and who do we count as "the people" and who are the evil "them"?) — BC

I haven't identified factions, or used the word 'evil' (big can o' worms, that word). I said humans reorganized into new configurations of their own accord, because they perceived an advantage or benefit in doing so. They still do. It doesn't always backfire, but humans are not collectively very far-sighted.

Exploitation (to create capital) is probably a necessary step to material progress. — BC

I disagree with 'necessary', but I'm sure it speeds some forms of material progress.

it is because hate and contempt are the easiest ones that we opt for while if we work for the kindness and love we would struggle at first yes but the end result would be much better,
Imagine it as working out for your body but for your emotions.