You might have noticed that more and more people can'r find work, there are more and more food shorteges in certain parts of the world, unsufficient resources for everybody i.e. water, electricity, and so on. The are many problems on a material plan, but we often forget what happengs on a moral level. From the moment i began existing as a conscient beying i have been feeling that life isn't valued enough or at all in our times and societies.
there's also the effect we have on the planet im not talking about our inpact on ecology (there is that too!!) i'm pointing out that we have made many spicies exting or on the verge of extinction, not to mention the enormous amount of resources we deploy often in detriment of other living creatures and other humans.
so the problems are here what are the solutions? is reducing our numbers is a solution?
I completely agree with valkery. At the rate we're going, our planet is going to be exhausted very quickly. I would personally say that we reduce the population to less than 100,000. Obviously this would be seen as immoral, etc. However, it would be effective in achieving its desired effect. I would say that we did a Noah's Ark kind of thing. Take several hundred people in each professional field and set them off in a reserve. I would base it off of estimated capacity for increase in innovation, etc. This would allow us to further our society and rid ourselves of most people who bring society down. Also, I would impose a limit of two children, as an earlier poster said.
I completely agree with valkery. At the rate we're going, our planet is going to be exhausted very quickly. I would personally say that we reduce the population to less than 100,000. Obviously this would be seen as immoral, etc. However, it would be effective in achieving its desired effect. I would say that we did a Noah's Ark kind of thing. Take several hundred people in each professional field and set them off in a reserve. I would base it off of estimated capacity for increase in innovation, etc. This would allow us to further our society and rid ourselves of most people who bring society down. Also, I would impose a limit of two children, as an earlier poster said.
How would that even be remotely beneficial to anything at all?
Don't know how to quote, however, it would reduce the consumption of Earth's resources. And remove societal failures. And fix the gene pool. Also, it would reduce the likelihood of total war campaigns due to the lack of numbers.
The answer is depends on the troubles, it will relieve some, but at the same time cause many as well. For example: Less to feed, but less to help make food. Things like that.
Don't know how to quote, however, it would reduce the consumption of Earth's resources. And remove societal failures. And fix the gene pool. Also, it would reduce the likelihood of total war campaigns due to the lack of numbers.
I wasn't aware society was failing or that the gene pool needed fixing. Explain to me why they do, because I see no reason to do this. We're consuming Earth's resources, yes, but most of them are renewable and we are renewing them - eventually fossil fuels will run out, but those're really the only major nonrenewable resources we're using. The switch to alternative forms of energy is beginning slowly, but it's still beginning.
Also, to quote, you copy and paste the text you want to quote, highlight it in the box, and then click the quote button while it's highlighted.
I wasn't aware society was failing or that the gene pool needed fixing.
Well, society as a whole is pretty wretched. When you consider the average person, at least in the USA, it's just a lazy drone who works day to day just to get by and wastes resources. So by picking ideal citizens who actually contribute and have a positive outlook and are willing to make society better, we can have a more ideal race.
Also, to quote, you copy and paste the text you want to quote, highlight it in the box, and then click the quote button while it's highlighted
So by picking ideal citizens who actually contribute and have a positive outlook and are willing to make society better, we can have a more ideal race.
I suppose so. I believe in Social Darwinism for sure. As far as free-marketing is concerned, I always believe there should be regulations, for safety reasons if for nothing else.
Now let me pose a question: If Social Darwinism leads to a net unhappiness relative to what would be possible with a different system, then how is it justified? Can you justify it on Utilitarian terms, and if you can't, then how do you justify it?
It's gotta happen eventually. That, or the world will eventually turn into an Orwellian society where the elite rule all the lower people and it becomes a dictatorship. For example, when the world population gets to... I don't know... 15, 20 billion? There's not gonna be enough space for everyone, and there will be panic. The people will turn to the government, the government will gladly take power, and sure they might fix the problem, but at what cost? Complete control of your life? And why shouldn't we have an ideal race? The general population these days disgrace the potential that humans have. The amount of skill, intelligence, and drive that humans are capable of utilizing is incredible. Most people waste these gifts by working at gas stations or McDonald's.
Now let me pose a question: If Social Darwinism leads to a net unhappiness relative to what would be possible with a different system, then how is it justified? Can you justify it on Utilitarian terms, and if you can't, then how do you justify it?
Well, if I'm understanding you correctly, you're considering Social Darwinism in its least ideal form. At its best, and how I consider it will be utilized if there's a huge decrease in population, all members of the new society would learn to be productive. If not, they would fail, and die. That way, we eventually shed our society of all of the people that plague our population right now. As far as Utilitarianism is concerned, everyone would be contributing as much as possible. If not, they would be unable to survive and would, as I said previously, die. Eventually, the offspring of the successful would be successful by nature due to an entire society of people who are successful.
What do you think about transhumanism and the many aspects of it? How would this compare to Social Darwinism?
Well, transhumanism is fairly interesting, but seems hundreds of years out of our reach. By the time this technology would be available, the population issue would have already been solved by relocating to other planets, perhaps even out of our solar system. It would essentially remove Social Darwinism as a feasible option due to its ability to create absolute equality. However, transhumanism would probably ruin our society as we know it. As of right now, the masses follow the government because politicians are more educated and intelligent than the average Joe. If everyone were of equal intelligence, the fight for power would be unimaginable and could potentially destroy our race. So, I think if technology such as this was available, it would be kept very hush hush, at least until the government could regulate it.
What is your view on Utilitarianism?
I believe that Utilitarianism should be the basis for any successful society. As of right now, most of our society does what they need to do to get by. Very few do anything out of their way to help society better itself, which is why progress is so slow. If every citizen of a country was constantly working to better the country itself, the results would be unimaginable. Things would improve drastically, and the argument that Utilitarianism is a form of slavery / extreme nationalism would fade immediately.
Hmm...but remember that part of transhumanism is optimizing human intelligence as well.
Right. And if you optimize human intelligence, would we not all be of equal or at least ALMOST equal intelligence? Intelligence does not equate to civility, and due to the increase in intelligence, many people would be fighting for positions of power.
