I've been thinking some deep philosophical shit lately.
First my question is, since technology is ever improving where we don't really need to fight for food as much anymore in most developed nations. So will our basic primal instincts except the ones for sex, happiness, curiosity shit like that disappear. Socialists talk about a utopia but that is only possible if some of humans basic primal instincts were removed. So is there a chance millennium from now if we are still living that we will have forgotten those traits?
And if so what is the point of living, the strife to be better than everybody else and to build our empires is what keeps us motivated most of the time. So if we take that away will we even be able to continue? And I was thinking of when people go through an "existential crisis" everyone is like oh that's just a phase you'll get out of it. like it's something crazy, but really my idea is that its us thinking about the big picture. We're so stuck in this world and its small little box that we often forget about the bigger picture.
Now I'm not saying it's bad to focus on this world, believe in a higher power, and not become a nihilist because that's good. Because nihilism even optimistic nihilism will always turn to evil and prevail without the strife of humans and a belief in a higher power.
But say we are to keep a functioning society with values and void of nihilism. Still all the pleasure and happiness of the people will inevitably be meaningless. But the only logical thing I see that would work out is if we would become so knowledgeable we could learn about what created the universe and if there are other universes and what is the space outside of the universe.
This shit scares me. How can something be infinite in the real world? Because what is outside of the universe? That most be infinite. And if there is wall there is always something beyond the wall it can't just stop. So these two ideas are contradicting in my mind and it scares me.
>So is there a chance millennium from now if we are still living that we will have forgotten those traits?
Nah we'll always have them. They are ingrained into our DNA. We haven't really changed that much at all in 1,000 years.
>I was thinking of when people go through an "existential crisis" everyone is like oh that's just a phase you'll get out of it. like it's something crazy, but really my idea is that its us thinking about the big picture
I've been in an existential crisis for over 4 years now - you just need to learn how to spend the time that is given to you the best. You'll find out in time - the truth is no-one knows. But that's good! You can make your life be whatever you want it to be.
>Will always turn to evil and prevail without the strife of humans and a belief in a higher power.
Not true. You can be moral without God, and there was the most horrific shit done in the name of God anyway.
>But say we are to keep a functioning society with values and void of nihilism. Still all the pleasure and happiness of the people will inevitably be meaningless. But the only logical thing I see that would work out is if we would become so knowledgeable we could learn about what created the universe and if there are other universes and what is the space outside of the universe.
No collation of knowledge will suffice the need for happiness. Even if you knew everything there ever will or ever would be, you would still need inner peace to achieve happiness - which doesn't come from books.
>How can something be infinite in the real world? Because what is outside of the universe? That most be infinite. And if there is wall there is always something beyond the wall it can't just stop.
Infinity isn't a quantity or measurement, but a state. The state of everything existing at the same time. Think of a balloon that gets bigger and bigger - that's the universe. There is nothing outside the universe either - its hard to understand.
Kevin Ward
Unless we gain infinite knowledge, which we never will, the drive for curiosity will remain within us. It will just be that the things we grow curious about will be at a much higher level. Instead of "How do we get a car to run on natural recyclable fuel", it could be "how do we get this space station half way across the galaxy within a certain amount of time". Furthermore, no one is porn with intelligence outside of natural instincts, so I believe people will always be curious about the mundane around them.
Sex will be interesting though. If we can genetically engineer children exactly the way we want them to be, then some will form their children in labs rather through natural reproduction. These kids will be the ones who revolutionize everything. So much to the point that natural reproduction is just a sentence to be a failure. This is what scares me most about the future. I have a theory that eventually everything will be so advanced, that everyone will have to have acquired such a vast amount of knowledge in order to be relevant, that the competition for success will literally be like that Black Mirror episode where they ride bikes. Only the best of the best will have an occupation that isn't "cycling". The class division will be immense, and in turn, happiness is reduced to being able to purchase soap for your hands. Basically, happiness is having enough air to breathe for that month in your 12x12 box.
But I don't know, I'm still working out all of the intricacies of it and am generally thinking dystopian. For all I know it could be utopian, but given human nature I am pessimistic.
Jacob Cooper
The only vision for humanity we are being sold is the ever expanding of technology and that's our only path, but there is another vision for humanity that we will return to our natural being and live in "harmony" with nature - and also a vision where we can use technology but not against nature but as a complement. TL;DR Nature > Technology "Nature is our true culture"
Aiden Ward
Don't be afraid of these thoughts. You'll come out of it in the end with a much better sense of what is important to you and be better for it. Keep spiraling out
Xavier Perry
How does that work?
I have the tendency you mentioned to think about the future technologically and can't really conceive of any other future. Wouldn't these nature-technology symbiotic relationship be on particular undeveloped planets? Sort of like third world countries?
Dominic Baker
>Not true. You can be moral without God
The problem with that though is that your morals are based on the culture you currently preside in. For vikings, it was not immoral to plunder and rape, but for western society it is considered to be.
Without objective morality, you're only as "good" as you ever can be given your environment. So you're never actually aligned with any real sense of morality, only what is considered acceptable within your society. Which for most is fine, but there is no stable foundation for morality, which to me makes it all a temporal charade.
David Collins
nothing outside the universe >black holes/ time warps/ stargates in to other universes >come on meow
To achieve a society that is moral without God, you must first create an environment where God isn't the law of the land, while retaining moral virtues.
Using Foucault, God is just a form of 'sovereign power' which is like me saying to you: 'Hey. Stop doing this or you will go to Hell. If you do, you will go to Heaven'.
Instead you must instill 'Disciplinary power' which means that instead of the fear of wrongdoing to appease God, you must FEEL that doing wrong is bad. It would be like me saying to you: 'You can do that if you want, but everyone else isn't doing that and no-one will support you if you do'. - With this type of power it makes the person self-correcting through guilt instead of shame like with God.
Carter Adams
I'm actually refering to our own planet, we have everything we need here, I don't share the Elon Musk vision of the "future". The future is what me make up it to be - the main future meme now is technological achievment and intergalactic colonisation. I rather stay on earth. Watch Easy Rider "...we blew it."
Charles Hughes
Think of a lot of bubbles floating around in air. I mean there's nothing outside of those bubbles, except for the other bubbles.
Kevin Barnes
But where do all the morals come from? Mostly religion. We have seen throughout history those cultures or nations that gave up religion for progressing and technology have inevitably been the most violent and worse off.
Without religion Nihilism will always surely come abroad.
Nicholas Moore
Yes, we will forget our primal instincts. This is due to mutations that would've normally killed us in older days, such as the dissolution of the nuclear family roles. Also genetic diseases would've been wiped out like many food allergies but that has not happened. We have circumvented natural selection and that's why our society is getting more fucked up by the year. The immigrant invasion is coming though, and that's going to wipe out the weak who can't live without the GUBBIMENT
Eli Brooks
Without man-made religion we rely on each other more. People can't handle that which is why it didn't work in the past and even so now in the present, but the more advanced and intelligent we get the easier it will be.
That's all religion is at the end of the day - man-made philosophy. Morals always came from men writing in a book. Not from a higher power. Using this logic we could do so again.
We just need powerful guilt processes implemented in order for it to succeed.
Luis Wood
I don't know how much you'd like this since this is kinda new-agey material (but much better than the rest imho), but this deals with the concept of infinity (and many other things) in a way that I think is beautiful. Good luck either way OP! >lawofone.info
Gabriel Cooper
That makes sense. Using guilt as a way to correct behavior rather than shame.
But it doesn't address the crux of my concern: How do you determine what is actually moral if it's based on preferences? Or are you conceding that it is entirely subjective?
It all sounds much more like acceptable behaviors in a given culture rather than morality though. Which is fine if that's the way you're defining morality. It would then just be a difference in definitions.
Landon Garcia
Exactly I agree with you. Personally I am agnostic and believe there may be a god since it's still very fishy how the universe was created. But I also believe it might just be natural or another civilization created this universe.
Yes it is man made philosphy. The idea of a higher power in all of man's religion is most likely wrong. Allah, God, Buddha etc... If there really is a higher power it may be some weird abstract thing we could have never thought of. As they said truth is stranger than fiction.
But the fact that people believe that the morals written in the book come from a higher power rather than a fellow man means that only a higher power will be able to enforce morals. What I'm trying to say is that humans can not enforce morals on other humans because there is so many contradicting morals and opinions and generally we see each other as the same or less. So the only way to really get morals across is a higher power that has their power uncontested.
Kayden Myers
The main message however is that all is one, and that we are all individualized portions of the infinite creator (but containing within ourselfs a micro comic hologram of the universe, like every tiny speck of the creator) trying to experience itself thought free will and the illusion of separation.
Thomas Lopez
Yeah, I suppose so. Some will willfully stay behind to enjoy the world they have now rather than subscribe to the future presented to us. But these people will eventually die off. Their genes will be removed from the pool due to the continuing advancements of the ones who went on as they colonize those areas.
James Watson
This was a better explanation of the idea I was trying to get across. Thanks
Owen Allen
Yeah morals were written by men, but it was also men that enforced the word of God as innately divine and true through their own eyes - because morals exist subjectively.
When people believed God would reward them for being good, they are doing so in an innately immoral way - selfishness.
I believe that with intelligence comes greater empathy - which is very important. The more knowledge you have of other people's thoughts and situations, the better you will treat them.
Now we are effectively in a post-religious state (in Europe) and because of intelligence we have still retained our morals through anther medium - Law. What's happened is that God has been replaced by politics and morals have been replaced by law. You can't truly change someone's soul - only change their mind. Morals are also a state of mind - not of soul - and can always be changed because they are subjective.
Anthony Ward
Law is mostly enforced by the people. So if the people decide something that used to be immoral by religion is no longer immoral. Who says that law can't be changed? In most democratic countries they have been changing laws that forbided against immoral acts. Now they are changing them.
