[Bobboau]

but do people realy consiterit that way or do they accept it as reality and move on, not questioning it? you said it was "quite common" so there doesn't seem to be the stigma atached to it that you'd expect.

[Rictor]

My point is that imperfection should be cherished. A world without greed, intolerance, hatred...a world without sin, is a world I don't want to live in. I don't want to live with a sterilized, perfect, smiling version of mankind, I want to live with the real deal, warts and all. With that in mind, it's quite unfortunate that things are in fact getting progressively better.

[Kosh]

A world without greed, intolerance, hatred...a world without sin, is a world I don't want to live in.

I have nothing to say about that. If you want to live in a world full of evil, go ahead.

[Ford Prefect]

The problem is that we can only look at this theoretical world without suffering from within the paradigm that has governed us from the beginning of time: That turmoil is a necessary evil. This mode of thought leads us to the inescapable conclusion that a "happy" world is also an emotionally dead, sterile world. But in reality, if we ever achieve a utopia, I think it will be the result not simply of dramatic social change, but of a shift in the very philosophical anthropology of human beings themselves, the likes of which we haven't undergone since the rise of language itself. We cannot even begin to comprehend the characteristics of this hypothetical world, let alone whether it's possible or not.

[Rictor]

The question is not whether it's possible, but desireable. If it's desireable, in all likelyhood it's possible. If it's not desirable, it should be made impossible.

As you say, such changes that will accompany a transition to a utopia will significantly, if not completely, alter mankind.  Which essentially means that, yes, you can make a better world, but you will never live to see it, because you will die in the process and something else will be born. Or, if you somehow survive, this utopia will bring you no happiness. Am I the only one who thinks its ever so slightly insane for a species to wish for it's own demise, to actively work toward it? Man is, if you choose to be honest about it, as much a creature of fire and blood as a creature of enlightenment, creativity, tolerance and grace. We're equal parts Genghis Khan and Mozart (or whatever, you get the gist). If you deny one, you deny the whole. If you work to eliminate one, you work to eliminate the whole. I can't know what's best for the future, and I don't care. And yet, to bring about this utopia would be to sacrifice the present on the altar of the future, and to sacrifice the desires of man-at-present to the desires of man-of-tommorow. What is good is entirely subjective. It seems natural to me that any person (or age) will favour what is good for them over what is good for a stranger (age), and an unborn one at that

/rant

[IceFire]

Yes, but they've secured enough oil and money to ensure the United States gets to spend the next 50 years not being invaded by China or collapsing economically (barring EU interference).

If I was an american, I wouldn't so much be giving a **** about all the dead people - given that sending them into the meat grinder ensured I wouldn't end up in a Chinese 're-education center' in 5 years.

I've gotta disgaree there...unless I'm missing something the US is closer to that particular future because of the actions of the current administration.  They are in a heap of debt that is skyrocketing out of control.  Am I missing a piece of the puzzle here?  What happens if/when they go to war in Iran?  They can't afford the current two quasi-wars they are fighting.

[Ford Prefect]

The question is not whether it's possible, but desireable. If it's desireable, in all likelyhood it's possible. If it's not desirable, it should be made impossible.

As you say, such changes that will accompany a transition to a utopia will significantly, if not completely, alter mankind.  Which essentially means that, yes, you can make a better world, but you will never live to see it, because you will die in the process and something else will be born. Or, if you somehow survive, this utopia will bring you no happiness. Am I the only one who thinks its ever so slightly insane for a species to wish for it's own demise, to actively work toward it? Man is, if you choose to be honest about it, as much a creature of fire and blood as a creature of enlightenment, creativity, tolerance and grace. We're equal parts Genghis Khan and Mozart (or whatever, you get the gist). If you deny one, you deny the whole. If you work to eliminate one, you work to eliminate the whole. I can't know what's best for the future, and I don't care. And yet, to bring about this utopia would be to sacrifice the present on the altar of the future, and to sacrifice the desires of man-at-present to the desires of man-of-tommorow. What is good is entirely subjective. It seems natural to me that any person (or age) will favour what is good for them over what is good for a stranger (age), and an unborn one at that

But again, even this very idea is, itself, a product of our current mode of thought. Obviously I can't claim to know how or if we will transcend this causal loop, but if we do, we will not look back and mourn what was lost, because we will have transformed at the most fundamental level the way in which we view and value the universe. The entire field of epistemology may become obsolete in the face of more sophisticated psychology. We can't look at such a future without our view of it being distorted by our own values.

[aldo_14]

Note: Unpredictiability is a fundamental part of human nature because it's of benefit in evolutionary terms.

[Kosh]

Yes, but they've secured enough oil and money to ensure the United States gets to spend the next 50 years not being invaded by China or collapsing economically (barring EU interference).

If I was an american, I wouldn't so much be giving a **** about all the dead people - given that sending them into the meat grinder ensured I wouldn't end up in a Chinese 're-education center' in 5 years.

I've gotta disgaree there...unless I'm missing something the US is closer to that particular future because of the actions of the current administration. They are in a heap of debt that is skyrocketing out of control. Am I missing a piece of the puzzle here? What happens if/when they go to war in Iran? They can't afford the current two quasi-wars they are fighting.

I'd give it 20 years at the most. It will probably take that long for the East Asian countries to figure out how to not be so depdant on exports. But once they do, then look out...........