PeakOil is You
Does humanity serve any purpose after peak oil
Re: Would you end it all?
by Sheb » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 13:57:48
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('albente', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Grifter', 'S')orry to continue the off topicness. To offer something to the threads new meaning, the purpose is enlightenment.
You might be not all that far off with that assessment. I like the following in regards to 2012 especially the last point:
Terence McKenna's mathematical novelty theory suggests a point of singularity in which a great number of things could happen, including "hyperspatial breakthrough", planetesimal impact, alien contact, historical metamorphosis, metamorphosis of natural law, solar explosion, quasar ignition at the galactic core, or nothing.
Numerological constructs, shuch as that "singularity theory" are just that: Numerology.
But number games aside...purpose for man? The only purpose mankind has ever served is for itself, to grow, learn, and sometimes bloom & die (Of course, that's leaving higher powers out of it). We don't serve a "purpose" to nature. As far as Nature is concerned, there is, for th emost part, only cause and effect.
But assuming we have accomplished all we will ever accomplish is fairl presumptuous, don't you think? Don't get me wrong. We are definitely in a bloom phase. We've been there before. Hell, if the Roman civilization hadn't bloomed and then faded, they probably would have invented batteries, electricity, steam engines, internal combustion, gunpowder, etc. (these are extrapolated from things that were already in the works). But they didn't.
So, ask yourself, not what purpose does *humanity* serve, but rather, what purpose can *you* serve. For humanity is like a mold...the closest to a purpose a mold has is to use up the resources available to it to create a future of molds based on the genes that propagate best. But an individual can make choices and can take actions that can increase the probability of a future to their liking. The age of oil well end, as did the iron age (with the fall of rome) and the bronze age (with the fall of the Hellenistic greek culture. And that's just the west! However, new ages will come about and do draw on and benefit from whatever history is available from ages that came before. Pity that few people from each age leave anything lasting in that respect. But we can know now, based on how much knowledge survived the voyage across the last dark ages, is that maybe the next age would benefit from *more*, not less, knowledge sent as an inheritance across the centuries to come.
As for those who believe that the world is overpopulated and therefore don't want kids...first, that's a noble and responsible sentiment. After all, the world *is* overpopulated and life is hard. However, remember, sometimes such attitudes may have genetic basis. Wouldn't it, in a sort of ironic way, make sense to have children who can then compete for the genetic future of mankind against those who may simply have as many kids as they possibly can because that is just what they do?
-
Sheb - Lignite
- Posts: 219
- Joined: Mon 16 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: New Mexico
Re: Would you end it all?
by Tyler_JC » Sun 29 Apr 2007, 16:44:03
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Grifter', '
')I like the quote $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he foundation of all mental illness is the absence of legitimate suffering.
')I like the quote $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he foundation of all mental illness is the absence of legitimate suffering.
I'm strongly inclined to disagree with Jung about that one.
Jung was alive before any meaningful discoveries about the brain's inner workings were made. We didn't know about dopamine or serotonin or the other neurotransmitters in the 1930s. Neurobiology promises cures to mental illness via pharmaceutical intervention, not meditation and spirituality as Jung suggested.
If what Jung said about mental illness was true, what do we do with all of those suffering from PTSD?
Lastly, Jung was heavily influenced by Sigmund Freud. And Freud was heavily influenced by cocaine and his own mental illness. (Read Freud's thoughts on the Oedipus Complex, that should be enough to convince you of his insanity)
As for civilization, why does Peak Oil mean the end of cultural progress?
I don't particularly care if we don't invent a better mousetrap or figure out how to make my computer run 1000 times faster or build a theme park on Venus.
There will still be artists, musicians, writers, etc. who make the world a better place by adding to our cultural melting pot.
Most people fill their homes and their lives with useless plastic garbage. Look into any American middle school child's bedroom. He or she could trash 90% of that stuff and still have toys that are left unplayed with.
To me, Peak Oil means a substantial decrease in the amount of junk produced and that might not be such a bad thing.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
- Tyler_JC
- Expert
- Posts: 5438
- Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Boston, MA
. Let me reverse it, how were cultures of the past any better of than us (besides the superficial)? So we would agree that a large part of the problem is cultural. We have a culture that values the immediate and throwaway. Our culture could take a few lessons from the past. But in any case our culture has evolved over time and can continue to evolve which is most likely what will happen post peak. 
Anyone who would raise such an absurd question must surely feel life to be pointless without intensive fossil fuel use. At least you won't be competing very hard against people like me who will be determined to live once the die-off begins.
Reread the myths that abound around the world, not as the quaint imaginings of primitive humans, but instead as stories told of the handful of technocrats who had preserved cutting edge technology when the rest of the world was devastated by some global catastrophe. They take on a different meaning if one can step outside the box to examine them.
