Post scarcity

[BonusWaffle]

Does anyone else find this idea terrifying? Do you think that human nature can adapt to it or will we all go completely insane for lack of purpose?

Maybe the goal that humanity is continually striving for will ultimately be its undoing and we will all end up killing ourselves.

I always thought it would end up being like star trek, where we start out with all our needs and wants fulfilled and use that extra time to better explore our world, but isnt the reason we have the desire to explore and make sense of the things around us that it enables us to better provide for our needs and wants?

 

[Hassknecht]

Human nature can adapt to it. People do cope very well with nihilism.
But humanity will also find other ways to keep itself busy. Science is still in its infant-stage in some regards. A world where funds and capitalist reasons ('Do we really need to go to Mars? What would we gain from that?') are no issues anymore would see a couple of great advancements in all the sciences and culture.
So no, I don't find this idea terrifying.

 

[SuAside]

A good deal of humanity would be perfectly content being entertained and doing nothing, but there will always be those that want to reach out & discover stuff (be it in scientific research or space exploration).

The whole point is moot though, since humanity is quite likely to be wiped out before we reach a post-scarcity societal structure. Also, post-scarcity implies that if the technology exists to make it happen, it will actually be implemented for all, rather than being horded by some. With human nature, this isn't really a given.

 

[Hassknecht]

Humanity is not going to be wiped out. Why and how should it? Anything short of a proper extinction event will be but a set-back. We in the west don't know it anymore, but humans are very durable and very adaptable. It's why we're where we are now.

 

[Akratus]

The universe is made of chaos, so I'd be extremely surprised if we'd ever go insane from extreme normality and lack of want.

Humanity is not going to be wiped out. Why and how should it? Anything short of a proper extinction event will be but a set-back. We in the west don't know it anymore, but humans are very durable and very adaptable. It's why we're where we are now.

Reminds me of a sci-fi short story where an alien is making a report on the human race and he talks about how they can not be destroyed apart from a total extinction event. As they will always rebuild and thrive. Like cochroaches.

 

[SuAside]

Humanity is not going to be wiped out. Why and how should it? Anything short of a proper extinction event will be but a set-back. We in the west don't know it anymore, but humans are very durable and very adaptable. It's why we're where we are now.

Such hubris.

I would agree that humanity will be hard to wipe out after we've learnt to colonize and mine space. But until then, I think our chances are rather meager. I would suspect our chances of reaching that stage are slim.

An asteroid has wiped out almost all life on this planet before, it can happen again. Our understanding of our Sun is still very lacking. There are many unknown black holes in space.
And even here on Earth there's plenty of stuff that can be catastrophic to the human race. From pandemics (man-made or otherwise), exhaustion of resources, movement in our earth's crust and core, global destruction in all out war or just a failed science experiment.

Such a cataclismic does not even need to entirely wipe out the human race, it just needs to set back our progress in terms of space colonization enough, and then we'll eventually be screwed as a species.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Humanity is not going to be wiped out. Why and how should it? Anything short of a proper extinction event will be but a set-back. We in the west don't know it anymore, but humans are very durable and very adaptable. It's why we're where we are now.

civilizations and species have appeared and disappeared from this planet. Why should humanity as whole be the exception? We are not so far away from nature that we can exist without it. There are quite a few events that have at least the potential to kill the human race of which some might be man made while other situations by nature or even cosmic events, like asteroids or super vulcanoes which are a realistic if unlikely dangers. The explosions of super vulcanoes like yellowstone caldera have the potential to turn the ecosymstem of this planet upside down. Not to mention there is still the event of mass extinction which happend millions of years ago, it might happen again in the far future. Who knows. I mean if suddenly 70% of the species on this planet (in some cases even 90%) would dissapear that would definitely have a huge effect on us as well.

We are today in a very unique position though, historically speaking, with technology like nuclear science at our hand we now possess the weapons to pretty much end human life, I know its a bit more complicated then that, but I guess its pretty obvious that a nuclear war would be a quite devastating thing. On a global scale.

Then you have the pollution, its a fact that we change our world again, on a global level, I am not going in here detail with global warming now, because I know that its again a rather complex topic and either you believe in it or you don't. But what is undeniable, is the that we as race change the face of this planet, there are already many places that are not habitable for humans and I am not only talking about Tschernobyle.

For example, we can also no longer ignore cases like the Great Pacific garbage patch where we don't even know all the consequences yet on marine biology, because particles of polymer find their way in the food chain.

The big issue for us humans is that we are currently on top of the food chain, literally, we eat our way trough nature. That means though that any changes in nature will hit us last. But when it hits us, it will be pretty hard.

I agree that destroying humanity as species would require quite some cataclysmic event on a global level, but we should not be so arrogant to believe that we are not more then a footnote for our planet, leave alone for our universe. We always had as species a huge arrogance. Time to change that or we might disappear one day really.

The universe is made of chaos, so I'd be extremely surprised if we'd ever go insane from extreme normality and lack of want.

Actually space is quite logic, if you think about it. There is not really a lot of room for chaos.

 

[zegh8578]

Humanity is not going to be wiped out. Why and how should it? Anything short of a proper extinction event will be but a set-back. We in the west don't know it anymore, but humans are very durable and very adaptable. It's why we're where we are now.

This is a good point. For years I would go around amusing myself with the certainty of human extinction - especially with all the drama around us, it seemed - to a young angsty teen - that humanity would indeed soon vanish, and good riddance to all.

But reality is nothing is written, life is not "cyclic"*, and humans are doomed to nothing. In fact, we are likely the less doomed creature on this planet, with our innate ability to change our environment before it changes us. We either safely move, with a definite goal as to where to move (contrary to animals, who simply flee an area, for then to just as well arrive at an identical scenario, and continue suffering)

We have allready tested ourselves in a total wilderness, where all we have to help ourselves be flint and fire - and we have shown that with flint and fire - we can ultimately build scyscraping societies - cus hey, that was how we got here in the first place.
Meaning, rob us of everything, down to flint and fire, and we are technically capable of winning it all back again

*in the sense that just because the year is cyclic, does not mean the cycle is stable. It is more of something resembling a cycle, life forms adapting to the predictability of seasons, but far from all life adhere to this, therefore, the "cycle" is just one aspect of life, but by far a dominating aspect. Adaptive dynamics is much more dominating than the idea of a cycle.

 

[Crni Vuk]

but there are global events that we cant change. If the atmosphere gets more sulfur acid due to a super volcano, what do we as humans want to do?

Such events happened in the past and the tendency to destroy a hell lot of life on earth.

We are helpless to geological events of such proportions.

Luckily we are talking as well about geological time frames here. So there is no reason to be worried really. But in a few 1000 years? We have to wait and see!

 

[AskWazzup]

Does anyone else find this idea terrifying? Do you think that human nature can adapt to it or will we all go completely insane for lack of purpose?

Having some existential angst issues ? Answer is no. The idea is terrifying from the perspective of a very limited homo-sapiens being. That is, our needs, wants, thoughts and scares, our drive is dictated by evolutionary, physical, cultural state. Even the best of us are simple people who feel shame, sadness and have a limited perspective on the WHOLE. I like the analogy of the bat: say you want to feel what it is to be a bat,. well, you can't. You can try, but you will be a human trying to interpret being a bat, because you don't have the same body, brain, you don't have sonar vision. So by the same token purpose is dependant on the advancement of the facility in your head.

So no, even if we got to that point in our current state, we will still have a near infinite things to do.

 

[Akratus]

The universe is made of chaos, so I'd be extremely surprised if we'd ever go insane from extreme normality and lack of want.

Actually space is quite logic, if you think about it. There is not really a lot of room for chaos.

Dude.

Galaxies colliding:

Supernova:

Unknown star outburst:

A black hole destroying a star:

A black hole playing around with unimaginable amounts of matter:

Completely mundane sun stuff:

You were saying?

 

[Hassknecht]

None of that is chaotic.
Now to be fair, there isn't any chaos at all if you think about it. Well, except for the uncertainties of quantum mechanics. But even those are statistical and not chaotic.

 

[AskWazzup]

The linguists wars begin. This is why language sucks ass.

 

[Akratus]

None of that is chaotic.
Now to be fair, there isn't any chaos at all if you think about it. Well, except for the uncertainties of quantum mechanics. But even those are statistical and not chaotic.

 

[Hassknecht]

None of that is chaotic.
Now to be fair, there isn't any chaos at all if you think about it. Well, except for the uncertainties of quantum mechanics. But even those are statistical and not chaotic.

So, uh, yeah. That was a really good response to the topic and not random bullshit at all.

 

[Crni Vuk]

well those stuff you show are easier to comprehend and understand then lets say ... the reason why a cat exists.

Our universe is a place of logic and reason. Human behavior on the other hand? Or behavior in general? Psychology? So many contradicting situations and illogical coherences.

I mean you where saying?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baUY9LFlYh0[/youtube]

The linguists wars begin. This is why language sucks ass.

this has nothing to do with linguistic. Its just the misconception of "chaos". If the things from above would be "chaotic" in their nature, then you could not calculate it, but for example, coliding galaxies or super novaes can be simulated even. Particuilarly super noves and the creation of stars is pretty well understood (nuclear physics), the concept of fusion, atoms and what keeps them together. This is all well understood. Using it on the other hand, is a whole different story, as it has been seen with Tschernobyle and other incidents. We have no controll over it, even if many people will tell you otherwise, but that controll is an illusion we have not "mastered" nuclear technology. Hell if you want to be really anal then we have not really mastered anything so far, I mean car accients still happen and it kills people despite the fact that cars exist for? 100 years now?

As far as the universe goes though, on paper, a lot of it is understood. One of the greatest discoveries was that many of the theories scientists came up with here on earth proved to be right outside in space when they saw how fusion creates stars, something that they proved already on paper with research in nuclear phiscs and the ideas that spawned from that science gave us a real understanding about the universe. Of course what happens with the hydrogen atom when you expose it to immense heat and preasure isnt what people like to hear when they watch star trek or such stuff, because thats not the "deeper understanding" of the universe. But really, this is one of the fundamentals out there. And understanding it helped us a lot.

You just have to find the right people, we pretty much have no problem today with how things work. Its more about the why. But thats not really the job of science. Or is it? Who knows.

 

[AskWazzup]

this has nothing to do with linguistic. Its just the misconception of "chaos".

Well there you go, misconception of the meaning of the word, which is what linguistics is in part about - the meaning of the word and its use.

coliding galaxies or super novaes can be simulated even. Particuilarly super noves and the creation of stars is pretty well understood (nuclear physics), the concept of fusion, atoms and what keeps them together. This is all well understood. Using it on the other hand, is a whole different story, as it has been seen with Tschernobyle and other incidents. We have no controll over it, even if many people will tell you otherwise, but that controll is an illusion we have not "mastered" nuclear technology. Hell if you want to be really anal then we have not really mastered anything so far, I mean car accients still happen and it kills people despite the fact that cars exist for? 100 years now?

As far as the universe goes though, on paper, a lot of it is understood. One of the greatest discoveries was that many of the theories scientists came up with here on earth proved to be right outside in space when they saw how fusion creates stars, something that they proved already on paper with research in nuclear phiscs and the ideas that spawned from that science gave us a real understanding about the universe.

I think you are giving too much benefit to the scientific community. The "well understood" part applies to the stuff that's between micro and macro (obviously excluding newton), but not to the later ones. For example they can see a trace of a fundamental particle and even somewhat predict what it does, but have no idea how it came about. Same with black holes and such where you have minds like Hawkins and Susskind debating black hole paradox and many other scientists who are in constant quarrel (some of which is understandably political) about various issues.

 

[Crni Vuk]

well I am not talking about black holes or quantum physics, but that we don't understand it has a reason, limitations we cant overcome. We try to observe here situations that are outside of our normal universe where everything works with cause and effect, once you step in to quantum physics the situations is changing because you can not separate cause and effect anymore (hint to the always intelligent Hassknecht: "Well, except for the uncertainties of quantum mechanics. But even those are statistical and not chaotic.". Thats why it is so alien for us because we as humans have no way to understand quantum physic. I mean pretty much anything else is still possible to imagine, hell even stars. We are creatures made for a world made of matter. Once you step outside of it though, its simply outside of our mind.

The understanding on the levels of atoms, is pretty good. There are still questions and for sure a lot of mysteries, but the picture as whole, the creation of stars, galaxies colliding etc. That kind of stuff. Yeah, which is the majority of the visible universe is understood.

When you talk about space, the universe, black holes, dark matter all that stuff, there is a hell lot of romanticizing. This all disappears rather fast when you start to talk with someone whos really working in that field. But that of course doesn't sell! Its boring. Its a lot of math behind it. But the principles, the fundamentals, that is very well understood. And really? What else is there to it? Most of the stars, or pretty much anything we can see, works on very simple principles (relatively simple! We are talking about science here), where gravity, pressure, heat etc. are all well understood concepts. There is not so much mystery around it like they say it is. But it simply sells better. Why do we understand it? Well, because a lot of people made predictions based on what we calculate here and found out with the research in nuclear physics. It happened that many of the predictions have been true. The rules we defined here on earth have proven to be correct on the other end of the universe.

That doesn't mean that there are no questions or that its not very fascinating. Or that we could even say that we know "everything", we probably know nothing as there is still more to see and explore. But once you get to the core of it, it all becomes math anyway. The principles are known. What keeps the atoms together for example. And based on those they can make a lot of theories. We simply have to see if those are true.

Interesting is that many of the things they release as informations today is stuff that scientists have thought about already a long time ago, in some cases it even goes as far back as to the time of Einstein, don't forget the idea of relativity was not born with Einstein, there have been a lot of people working on that idea much sooner then he did, maybe even without knowing it. But only today we have actually the technology to 1. to observe and 2. actually prove a lot of it. For example, the concept behind stars and how they are created, black holes or quantum physics (the general concept), those are not really so new and revolutionary as we might think. Theories existed already for quite some time, just that no one had really a way to prove it. People like Max Planck did some research in the early 1900 century which have been a first step in the direction of quantum physics, actually stuff he defined back then (Planck constant) made other future research possible. Or the idea that photons could behave like waves or particles was also known, people just could not decide which to use because there was no way to prove it only to observe it, Newton was the one that favoured particles for example a different scientist of his time that light behaved like waves. People decided Newton was right. Today we know its both.

Compare it with the string theory today. It can help to explain a lot of things and to answer some questions, but there is no way (yet) to yeah tell if its right or not.

I am not a scientist, but I know a few people that studied physics and when you start to talk with them about it really is a bit different compared to watching a documentary about black holes or what ever. I am not saying they are wrong, but they tend to dramatize it a lot. Black holes for example, the math behind it is there.

 

[FalloutTroll]

I'm even scared to talk about that kinda stuff, i'm only 14 but i get random creepy shit in my head all the time. There is something seriously wrong with this world. Whats the point of life? Is the light at the end of the tunnel an opening to a new life? I went off the topic but say anything is possible. Zombie apocalypse? I play too many games...

 

[AskWazzup]

I am not a scientist, but I know a few people that studied physics and when you start to talk with them about it really is a bit different compared to watching a documentary about black holes or what ever. I am not saying they are wrong, but they tend to dramatize it a lot. Black holes for example, the math behind it is there.

Neither am i and i'm just beginning to delve into the subject a bit deeper, but are you, by chance, implying that i get all my info on these subjects from documentaries ? Because my reservations about the scientific community having "a good understanding" came about by watching some interesting courses (which thanks to our information age can also be found free in youtube) in physics and things related to it (geology, weather etc.). On that note i would also suggest that documentaries as a source of information is a waste of time. As you have said it Crni, there is too much drama and no enough content in those.

I'm even scared to talk about that kinda stuff, i'm only 14 but i get random creepy shit in my head all the time. There is something seriously wrong with this world. Whats the point of life? Is the light at the end of the tunnel an opening to a new life? I went off the topic but say anything is possible. Zombie apocalypse? I play too many games...

Don't worry about that, with age you get a better grounding in life (well, at least if you are curious and want to explore your mind) and you get a better sense of it, albeit never a full one, but enough to get you by.