Progress=extinction ?

[Virtual ghost]

I am not 100% sure where to place this but I think this is the most appropriate place. This is something that is going around my head for years.
This thread is continuation of "Inhuman thoughts" thread. Some parts will be represented in little bit funny and stereotypical way but the topic is quite serious actually.


Towards my looking at the world is that as technological level is growing people/social group are drifting apart for each other, slowly but surely. This is the process that is probably old a mankind itself. But rate seems to be accelerating lately. To me it is not hard to imagine that even long ago in Africa this divide existed.

For example imagine a tribe made of about 100 people that is having and huge party since chieftain daughter is getting married or whatever.
But about 20 meters further in the in the half dark one INTJ and one INTP are looking at the party and thinking.

INTJ: You know what, this sucks.
INTP: I could not agree more. But there is not much we can do about it.
INTJ: I guess you are right. It is just that I get quite disappointed every time I see this.
INTP: Me too. Two days ago I was talking with the leader of hunters about that they should try to aim for animals legs or head not bodies. Since animal will probably not have enough energy to escape this way. Plus with our current methods we are just loosing spears since animal will probably manage to get away with spear in it this way. We are probably just feeding the lions this way. The hunter leader said that he will think about it.
INTJ: That was quite opened minded for him.
INTP: Yes it was, but that is not is not the worst thing. While we were talking the dancing girls heard the discussion so they laugh at me like I am some kind of idiot. It was so humiliating. But they failed to see is that if we don't manage to get 100 Kg of meat more per week we will be in serious problem.
INTJ: I know. Since population of big animals dropped for about 20% in the last years. Which does not smell good on the long run.
INTP: So, what we are going to do about it?
INTJ: There is no much we can actually do. Since we are not the most popular guys here plus there are natural limits. The only thing that we can is helping everybody else with thinking about things and hope it is enough, we are not good for anything else and hopefully there will be others like us in history. With some luck reason will win one day.


And that is how it started.

Majority lived their life with all of its ups and downs, happiness and pain etc.
But a number of weird people were always snooping around analyzing and thinking. With time kingdoms started to arise and fall and they were replaced by bigger entities like large kingdoms and empires. But thinking in the background never stopped. So with enough time changes created by thinking were slowly becoming more and more obvious. But since people are being born and die no one could see the whole process. So in one moment enough facts have accumulated to start speeding up the tempo. Once the clear balance of progress was created the process managed to speed up even more. What eventually lead into position we are today.


I am not saying that all progress was done by INTs. But INT mindset is probably the most likely one to create a concept that is completely new or to pay attention to statistics. All of the inventions after they are invented were used by others to create something really useful.
But as technological level grows it is harder and harder to maintain the connection between inventor, engineer and especially user. People today use TV, all kind players, cell phones, planes and ....... but what they don't know is, how things work. People think that they can do almost everything they want but that is possible only because of turbo specialization
(By natural standards of course) They know how to use equipment but they don't understand principles that make them work. What in a way is a complete loss of freedom.
Scientists usually don’t have bad intentions but this unavoidably leads to bad outcome for others. The thing is that human mind is not able to adapt to all the new things that are coming. For example the boom of children birth is one example of this. Plus, more people is something good for increasing general strength of a society so it was welcome. Accessibility of food is also one famous example of this.

On the other hand today we have machines to build machines so having a skillful hand is not that much important today. Not to mention that human hand can be skillful as you want but still it will be unable to create modern technology.

This is where problem starts to show itself. NTs push things in direction where others will have hard time functioning. For example, emotionality is becoming more of a social problem then strength and large parts of things that are important can't be observed by human senses anymore.

Ok then, we will just have to make sure that NT mindset is wiped out and everything will be fine. But the thing is that you can't stop birth of NTs in all cases. It is in human nature. You will need to rewrite entire human genetic to avoid that. Since you have NTs they will always question, research and organize things and each generation will be curious once again. What means that NTs by their nature are destroying balance that others need. I said NTs but in a way everybody is a NT do some degree, it is just a question how much.

NTness is pushing everything else into the second plan. For example: There is a huge collection of love songs and novels today but if you live in society where you can change gender the entire thing looses its strength and value. Unless you look at it from from NT perspective, in that case that was never something that much important.

Modern generations don't realise how much something like TV has harmed things like Fe. In a way internet is even worse. People skilled in Fe will probably know about what I am talking about here. On the other hand it made possible that NTs (especially INTs) have easier time exchanging their ideas.



Those are some of the most obvious cases of this. There are plenty of others. In a way this is no different then prickles and gooey thread.




So we come to paradox/problem. Either everyone will be happy and researching will be stopped or progress will take many people into uncomfortable zone. In which we already actually are. You can’t do much about this since one side will prevail with time. The only way you can have peaceful co-existence is to split progressive from everything/everybody else. What will probably not work since one side will probably become "out gunned" with time so the other will be able to do whatever it likes with other. This also works the same way if you don't separate them completely. I think that which side is which is quite obvious.




H.G Wells imagined that humanity will split into Eloi and Morlocks. While right now it looks more like Eloi and Borg if current trends continue.


This can look like a very nice fantasy but when you take a look where we are this is serious and current problem.


If we presume that we don't manage to wipe out curiosity, things will inevitably end with progress that will consume humanity as we know it.
But so far there was no system that managed to control this urge. The only system that could do it is the one you are trying to stop from being created in the first place.

To complicate things even more there is no way that we can survive in this universe without very strong technological progress. But that is another story.


This is one of the main reasons why I have lost almost all sympathy/empathy for people and many things they care about. Since it looks to me that plenty of "important things" don't have any real future and they are classified as un-significant in my head. Because of this I don't have soft and gentle core which plenty of people are searching. Am I depressed? No.
Actually I am exited/curious about this and the outcome of it.


This is getting too long so I will stop here.

 

[BlueScreen]

Computers will improve and replace you.

 

[Cimarron]

People think that they can do almost everything they want but that is possible only because of turbo specialization
(By natural standards of course) They know how to use equipment but they don't understand principles that make them work. What in a way is a complete loss of freedom.

That was an interesting way of looking at it.

I think I can imagine how the men and women of Great Ideas could become a separate class in society, but I think it's always been that way, to an extent (as you mentioned already).

So what is the question here? What is the debate? I guess this is what you've given:

So we come to paradox/problem. Either everyone will be happy and researching will be stopped, or progress will take many people into uncomfortable zone. In which we already actually are.

How is this a problem? Also, in what ways do you think this is a problem?


Later in that paragraph, you went on to say that one class (either the people of Ideas, or the Bulk of humanity) will eventually crush the other, and that the time is moving closer. But you tossed that out yourself in other parts of your post, claiming (as I said above) that curiosity has always existed and will probably always exist. So have you made up your mind? It doesn't sound like you have, so maybe you should be more clear.

 

[BlueScreen]

That was an interesting way of looking at it.

I think I can imagine how the men and women of Great Ideas could become a separate class in society, but I think it's always been that way, to an extent (as you mentioned already).

So what is the question here? What is the debate? I guess this is what you've given:
How is this a problem? Also, in what ways do you think this is a problem?


Later in that paragraph, you went on to say that one class (either the people of Ideas, or the Bulk of humanity) will eventually crush the other, and that the time is moving closer. But you tossed that out yourself in other parts of your post, claiming (as I said above) that curiosity has always existed and will probably always exist. So have you made up your mind? It doesn't sound like you have, so maybe you should be more clear.

Was thinking the same. Use some Te and simplify/optimise for us!

I'm not sure how NTs get an exclusive run on world changing creativity and curiousity either. That is primarily an NP trait. And ENPs generally sit at the top of the list for it; closely followed by INTPs.

 

[Virtual ghost]

That was an interesting way of looking at it.

I think I can imagine how the men and women of Great Ideas could become a separate class in society, but I think it's always been that way, to an extent (as you mentioned already).

So what is the question here? What is the debate? I guess this is what you've given:
How is this a problem? Also, in what ways do you think this is a problem?


Later in that paragraph, you went on to say that one class (either the people of Ideas, or the Bulk of humanity) will eventually crush the other, and that the time is moving closer. But you tossed that out yourself in other parts of your post, claiming (as I said above) that curiosity has always existed and will probably always exist. So have you made up your mind? It doesn't sound like you have, so maybe you should be more clear.

I in a way there is no debate. Since the only thing that could prevent this is complete annihilation of intelligence or something supernatural.

One of the things why I could look undetermined is because I am looking at this from many viewpoints.


I see that you probably did not get the point.
We always had curioustity and creativity in this form, But the thing is that after so much time those two mixed with rationality started to push things in direction that does not fit casual human needs. Even on this forum you can sense in some places there is a divide between NTs and others.
The thing is that if this rate of progress continues the divide will grow. Even if the society is doing ok.

If progress continues it is enevitabe that human nature will lose itself in this since our bodies will be under constant chemical additive, you could change parts of youself with surgery if you want to, GM children , implants etc.... and of this is only the beginning.


The problem is that our own progress leads us to extinction (at least this form of us). Also machines are gaining more and more abilities.
On the other hand this kinds of things are the only ones that could lead to survival of cililization in universe as it is. Once progree totally takes over there will not be classes and society in standard meaning of the word.



The only real question here is "Will we sacrafice mankind to save the civilization?". If answer is "No" then mankind will be wiped out sooner or later in this universe. From purely rational view our bast bet is gambling with technology. Which will surely lead to apocalypse towards the perspective of average human. But the thing is that this "apocalypse" is actually the most logical choice.
What we will choose ? It will be interesting to watch.


What is probably confusing is that I can see machines/cyborgs as something that can be creative.
One of the reson s why this is not very clear is because this is quite complex story andit will take few post to explain it. But I did not want to make too big post for the opening.
I know I have posted similar things before/already.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Was thinking the same. Use some Te and simplify/optimise for us!

I'm not sure how NTs get an exclusive run on world changing creativity and curiousity either. That is primarily an NP trait. And ENPs generally sit at the top of the list for it; closely followed by INTPs.

It is quite simple actually. NT are pushing technology level up. When you get to a certain point the outcomes will start to look less and less like original.

Take one example, take a look at people who have a Ph.D in hard science. You will see that quite a number of them are NTs.

As they are pushing progress further and further they will leave others behind in understanding of reality. (at least rational concept of it)

If you don't get it I can try to explain once again.
It is possible that the word creativity is confusing you.

 

[Cimarron]

Then I must ask: Did you want responses on this thread, or did you just want to tell us what you've been thinking about? And yet, I shouldn't criticize, as I could see myself doing the same thing...

I agree that it will be interesting to see which is chosen, or which prevails. You've given us your predictions. Do you want someone to expand upon those with their own thoughts?

 

[BlueScreen]

Ahh cool. I see the point now.

What is probably confusing is that I can see machines/cyborgs as something that can be creative.

I think so too. I've always thought the reason they can't be at present is the way we design them. The whole language of programming and machines relies on yes or no, on or off, 1 or 0. There is no room for grays. But as we understand our own structure more and what produces creativity (it may be deterministic even, just of high enough parameters and complexity to never appear that way, plus the chaotic nature of what comes in our sensory inputs randomises it), we will use it to design computers and machines that are more adaptive thinkers. At the moment we think we are a long way with computers, but may have just perfected the steam engine.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Then I must ask: Did you want responses on this thread, or did you just want to tell us what you've been thinking about? And yet, I shouldn't criticize, as I could see myself doing the same thing...

I agree that it will be interesting to see which is chosen, or which prevails. You've given us your predictions. Do you want someone to expand upon those with their own thoughts?

I like replyes, it is just that in general picture is black and white here. This is why I said there is no debate. We will do this or we will not do it.
But that does not mean that details can't be discussed to a greater detail.
This can be discussed but you don't have much to debate here.


If someone has something to share they are free to post it.

 

[professor goodstain]

ENP's take the credit for it

 

[Virtual ghost]

One other thing is that people look as future as somthing that is 10 or 20 years ahead.
Some people will look may be a few hundered years into the future. Those that go further are rare. But that does not change a fact that literally billions of years are ahead of us. The only real alternative to this is the destruction of reality.

 

[BlueScreen]

ENP's take the credit for it

. No NPs get credit.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What if one day scientists and engineer decide to form a pact to overthrow elected government(s)?

It could be quite hard so stop something like that if very large number of them decides one day to do this. In current world idiocracy is spreading. What is ok thing for position of political elites since it makes their job easier in certain way.

What means that many of the people who actually know something could get quite annoyed with this kind of society. So one day they could simply decide to crash the system or take controle over it.

I am perfectly aware that this scenario is not likely but it gets easier and easier to pull it out as technological level is growing.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I have one question

How much time other people spend thinking about world in which humans don't exist ?

 

[ajblaise]

Progress can only lead to extinction until what becomes new progress changes its course to avoid extinction.

 

[Nonsensical]

Humans are a disease that is progressively going to consume the earth...until it consumes us..it's our logical faite.

 

[JocktheMotie]

Humans are a disease that is progressively going to consume the earth...until it consumes us..it's our logical faite.

I guess we should all kill ourselves then to save our precious earth. Or maybe we should stop feeling bad about acting as we were created.

 

[EcK]

Humans are a disease that is progressively going to consume the earth...until it consumes us..it's our logical faite.

you can see every life form as a mean disease that consumes the poor innocent minerals. Ah, and those stars that won't let hydrogen be, who needs heavier elements anyway!

 

[Venom]

you can see every life form as a mean disease that consumes the poor innocent minerals. Ah, and those stars that won't let hydrogen be, who needs heavier elements anyway!

 

[SuperServal]

Hyper-individualization is one of the results of industrial "progress." This way of living is the most prominent in the United States...a country that formed it's national identity during the Industrial Revolution.

We tend to value making it on our own in the world. We want our own car, our own house, our own things, and we want the best of all of that. This is what is isolating. This is what is destroying human interaction. Working 50+ hours a week to pay for your two SUVs, 5 TVs, and your McMansion (hate that word, but it works) is not conducive to maintaining healthy human relationships. If you are working all the time you are tired all the time. Therefore work plus tiredness means you can't spend time with friends and family.

Isn't it ironic that in modern society we have all these "time saving devices" but we just keep piling shit on and making our lives more complex? Most of us really don't just take time to breath.

Humans can have technology.....we just need to chill the fuck out and realize that CONSTANTLY working does not equal progress. This underlies why I strongly believe in socialist ideas.

Also technology and progress, as much damage as they have done, have ultimately been beneficial to humankind. I mean...more people can reach their full potential (self-actualization) because they don't have to worry about hunting and growing food or how to build a shelter. We have unlocked many mysteries of the planet and the universe with new technology. We have also realized how much we don't know. How can this be bad? It's like our species is undergoing increasingly intense self-reflection culminating in self growth.

With all this new technology we can now live better lives and we have the knowledge and capability to fix the problems. We can start cleaning up the environment, use less energy, and understand the values of community. It's almost like we can now start reaping the benefits of the industrial revolution and start erasing the major costs that came from it.

Humans have harmed the planet but we are not a disease. A virus is just genetic material wrapped in a protein coat. Bacteria are some of the simplest living things on the planet. Humans can rationalize, we can access spirituality, we can love, and we can transform. Viruses and bacteria can't do that like humans can. We have the ability and the chance to make this planet a great place to live. Once we integrate technology, spirituality, and community into each other I think we will survive and thrive. And we would actually be beneficial to the old Earth.

Either we get to that stage or we all probably die. Which will it be?