On Nov 10, 2016, at 12:26 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:06:33 -0500 John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
On Nov 10, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Razer <rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
On 11/10/2016 03:47 AM, John Newman wrote some non-analytical nonsense:
Violence ended slavery in the South. Violence created the so called "land of the free" =)
Sometimes it's the solution.
John
Violence is a tactic. It can LEAD to a solution but it is not the solution itself
Yes , truly spoken.
The thing about violence is - science has advanced so many "wonderful ways" for us to kill ourselves,
Not meaning to re-start a flame war =P, but I think you mean technology, not science. Yes, technological development is (partly) related to what can be called 'basic' science but they are distinct.
it becomes increasingly obvious humanity needs to either disavow war altogether (how to do that I have no idea) or face the inevitable conclusion that we are going to fucking destroy ourselves.
That's a possibility, but it doesn't strike me as too consistent with the 'science' of 'biology' - How many examples of species that commit collective suicide are there? Why should human *animals* be different? Even inter species competition doesn't lead to complete destruction usually.
On the other hand, given the trends in 'networking' and totalitarianism, it wouldn't be too surprising if the human race became some sort of collective entity in which our ruling monsters (say google and clinton) would act as a 'brain'.
Bostrum (the simulation hypothesis guy) has some interesting thoughts on the future of humanity that basically boil down to a few possibilities, one of which is humanity locking itself (forever) into some sort of totalitarian dystopia similar to what you outline. Fundamentally I think this is the same thing as destroying ourselves outright.
Fermi paradox solved =)
John