Civilization

[Darth Revan of the Sith]

How far do you think civilization has come since 0 A.D.
Has it evolved to a height no one ever thought possible?
Or are we downgrading ourselves slowly by eliminating the principles of the Ancient World?
What do you think?





NOTE: This is not a debate...

[六兆年と一夜物語]

We're greedier than our primitive ancestors (before Feudalism).

Bah.

[Organized Chaos]

Civilisation has prospered on a massive technological scale which no one thought we could acheive ; We invented the computer, We cloned sheeps, We walked on the moon etc. But on a psychological and ethnic scale, no we have not. The human race is a very spiteful race, fighting wars over things that could be settled easily, we are so adept at fighting, that we spend more time doing it than anything else. We have brilliant technology but we use it in the wrong way ; Bombs, Guns, Weapons, Viruses etc. We could be using our intellect to cure cancer and other harmful diseases but instead we waste all our money for wars that have 2 equally stubborn sides thinking they're right. Even at schools and in the average household, there is fighting. Not physical but mental fighting. We compete against each other for things that do not matter. Our biggest weakness is our emotions. If a person can make you angry or sad, then they have won the fight. And we can do its so easily, it's not funny. We only have 1 life yet we waste it fighting. No one cares about the Ancient World, we spend all our times on machines, mindlessly obeying to their "will".So to answer your question - no, we have downgraded into beasts of spite and hate (like the middle ages and the time before) but now we have machines and words to fight for us.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

Dynamite was made to make people afraid of wars.

Look what happened there.

We are evolving on a technological scale. We have not changed psychologically though.

[.Starrk]

The development of technology is amazing.

[Βyakuya]

Civilization has evolved close to the point we shall destroy ourselves and close to the point we shall all become lazy asses.

[Yang Xiao-Long]

In terms of technology, civilization has advanced quite a bit. Other than that, not so much.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Ignorance has slowly been fading. Slowly and not so surely, as technological ignorance is fading far faster than societal ignorance.

Principles of the Ancient World were created when people were even more ignorant; there is no point in adhering to them and the people that do in modern times stifle progress. Most religion is a great example of that. Just look at the quotes in the Bible that have, as the years passed, been said by Christians to "no longer apply". All the statements about burning others are now being largely viewed as symbolic. Women and gay rights are now being worked into the Bible as well.

To put it simply: old humanity drew principles from nothing, as they new so little. Current humanity can draw principles from so much more.

Of course, we'll step backwards at times, but I think forward momentum at least slightly outweighs it. You learn about history and tend to think about how awful certain times were. People will, hopefully, be looking back at our times now and thinking the same thing.

[Grunt Issun]

We've technilogicly advanced greatly... but humans as a civilization have downgraded to the point of mere beasts, I belive one day we might better ourselves nearly completly, but not for a long, long time.

[CinnamonStar]

[quote name='GLaDOS MK. 2' timestamp='1308683344' post='5300761']
We could be using our intellect to cure cancer and other harmful diseases but instead we waste all our money for wars that have 2 equally stubborn sides thinking they're right.
[/quote]

And you don't think there are people who use their intellect to cure cancer? Not everyone is busy supporting wars and there [i]are[/i] some scientists out there who are working to find cures for illnesses.:/

Meh, I'm probably going to be called an ignorant because I don't believe that "we" have turned into "beasts of spite and war" because it's very hard to pin the whole humanity down as a whole. Wars still exist, often for reasons that are hard to understand, but not everyone participates or supports them, and people from the "ancient world" were fighting for stupid reasons too.

I don't think it's possible to evolve perfectly or downgrade perfectly, so I can't answer the question.
And I don't understand the whole idea of having to "evolve" and be like Supermans or else we're failing, or an entire society as a whole totally downgrading itself. So I just prefer saying that things are different and can be turned better or worse.

[Makο]

Technologically: We are moving at a rather startling speed. At least, startling for those who don't live in this generation.

Physically, Mentally, Etc.: I don't feel it's fair to say that we are all downgrading. As previously mentioned, "...not everyone participates or supports them...". People seem to be judging the entire world based on a smaller population. Also, those stupid things we fight over are stupid for some, but not stupid for others. And, unfortunately, the ones who think they're not stupid usually have the most influence, and are able to start these fights.

[Altαir]

And what is wrong with wars, in terms of evolution? If anything, I think wars do lead to succession. Without wars, how can we ever learn from them? Wars may not solve problems, but they make it evident to the world - never make the mistake again.

Our nature is that we test, we establish, and we change. This is our evolution.

I'm a bit confused, though. When you mention "evolution", do you mean evolution or procession?

[Frunk]

One word: capitalism.

The fact that the world exists almost wholly under corporate capitalism is undeniable proof that civilisation has gone backward. Perfect civilisation - id est one without major problems like war, disease, famine, greed corruption and etcetera - can never possibly be achieved while the capitalist model is adhered to, because the system is greed-based and advances of the whole populace cannot happen while the powerful are more concerned about their respective bottom lines than the common people.

[Raine]

There is no evolution of civilization, its more like a child and a parent. Every civilization even one's existing within the same time period are extremely different. The Greeks had a civilization of city-states that promoted competition and variety amongst it's inhabitants which while lead to accelerated rates of technology and cultural development became detrimental and fragile in the face of external pressure and long periods of time. The Romans. the next great civilization after that saw it's predecessor, and learned from mistakes then combined it with their own unique style of their very own. With that knowledge they unified the people unlike the Greeks into a more coherent defensible society however managed to still create that sense of fast paced tech. and culture progress with the invention of again they're own Republic and mild internal competition. It was only after this system faded with the government turning into an Empire thus lacking that same progress did the empire begin to fall.

Evolution seems to imply that society, governments, etc. are a coherent structure that learns and adapts to find a better fit when in fact its more like learned from the past. Civilization is not 1 thing it is hundreds and hundreds most of which have never face each other during their life span. If a general operating in the Middle East looks back at Russian occupation of Eastern Europe during the latter half of WW2 and see things that obviously does not go as planned he can conclude a similar tactic will be mostly likely unsuccessful as well.

As for how civilizations have worked off each other, it is exactly the same as it was at the beginning of civilizations. Technology has VASTLY! improved and normal human life has changed as well but if you were to advance the same people from back then to today's life so that they transition well, I believe they would be doing the same thing after it became natural. Human nature is human nature no amount of tech or government changes that. We're people back in the day less greedy? No. They just had far less ways and possibilities of obtaining it. Humans are self-centered, cruel, impulsive, greedy creatures who value nothing more than what they want over all others. This is incredibly shown today now with the internet and so many opportunities for the average human to live how they want. Civilization will never change because it is made by humans and we never change.

[Whirr]

Personally, I think technology is unhealthy for humans once it gets to a certain point. Social interaction is becoming decreasingly necessary and all of the children are turning into invalids.

[Raine]

[quote name='Whirr' timestamp='1308702816' post='5301445']
Personally, I think technology is unhealthy for humans once it gets to a certain point. Social interaction is becoming decreasingly necessary and all of the children are turning into invalids.
[/quote]

That is incredibly short-sighted of you. You are assuming that technology will continuously develop into this void area where people can live their lives alone inside the web and tech. but while that may be true for the next several year technology simply cannot continue that way forever because at some point technology will stop creating a reality online and start creating online in reality thus instead of tech promoting an isolated lifestyle it would promote a social one, a v.1.5 reality. But the question was more or less along the lines of past to present society not future, however this it's self the progress of technology into the projected future is a nice topic and should need it's own topic because there is a lot to discuss in that.

[Whirr]

[quote name='Raine™' timestamp='1308703537' post='5301472']
That is incredibly short-sighted of you. You are assuming that technology will continuously develop into this void area where people can live their lives alone inside the web and tech. but while that may be true for the next several year technology simply cannot continue that way forever because at some point technology will stop creating a reality online and start creating online in reality thus instead of tech promoting an isolated lifestyle it would promote a social one, a v.1.5 reality. But the question was more or less along the lines of past to present society not future, however this it's self the progress of technology into the projected future is a nice topic and should need it's own topic because there is a lot to discuss in that.
[/quote]

I find it much more likely that technology will cater to the needs of individual people and improve on things like virtual reality and war. Health, on the other hand, will advance so that people can maintain increasingly unhealthy lifestyles and not necessarily relinquish life expectancy.

[Raine]

[quote name='Whirr' timestamp='1308704620' post='5301527']
I find it much more likely that technology will cater to the needs of individual people and improve on things like virtual reality and war. Health, on the other hand, will advance so that people can maintain increasingly unhealthy lifestyles and not necessarily relinquish life expectancy.
[/quote]

Why? How do you figure? There may come a time in the near future where isolated technology reaches an all-time high but it won't last because technology is the way of fixing problems and advancing us. People are unhealthy? Eventually we will develop something for that. People are isolated? Lets fix that. Its that thinking that will advance us out of here. At first the isolation will be let's create mass areas for people to communicate online for very long period of time. (I think this is what your referring) They developers will push for more than that and the online interaction will increase but eventually a tipping point will be reached after a good few years and they would start moving this into this v.1.5 reality that allows for everything you can do online in RL and this thinking is what turning the post office into the phone into the car phone into the cell phone into the PC. Technology will not make us self destruct because as soon as it come to light they redirect into what they think will sell and be more advanced. A very good example of this is in Ren but I HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend you don't watch it unless your at LEAST! 15.

[Darth Revan of the Sith]

The two opinions I put up there are just examples you do not have to choose one or the other make your own opinion... [s]As for me I find it rude to participate in my own thread[/s]

[Cody Frost]

Civilization:

50% interesting.

50% "I'm bored. Bored¸ bored¸ bored¸ bored¸ bored¸ bored¸ bored¸ bored. I'm bored" -Garfield

[PowerlinX]

[quote name='GLaDOS MK. 2' timestamp='1308683344' post='5300761']
Civilisation has prospered on a massive technological scale which no one thought we could acheive ; We invented the computer, We cloned sheeps, We walked on the moon etc. But on a psychological and ethnic scale, no we have not. The human race is a very spiteful race, fighting wars over things that could be settled easily, we are so adept at fighting, that we spend more time doing it than anything else. We have brilliant technology but we use it in the wrong way ; Bombs, Guns, Weapons, Viruses etc. We could be using our intellect to cure cancer and other harmful diseases but instead we waste all our money for wars that have 2 equally stubborn sides thinking they're right. Even at schools and in the average household, there is fighting. Not physical but mental fighting. We compete against each other for things that do not matter. Our biggest weakness is our emotions. If a person can make you angry or sad, then they have won the fight. And we can do its so easily, it's not funny. We only have 1 life yet we waste it fighting. No one cares about the Ancient World, we spend all our times on machines, mindlessly obeying to their "will".So to answer your question - no, we have downgraded into beasts of spite and hate (like the middle ages and the time before) but now we have machines and words to fight for us.
[/quote]

Amen brother.

[Whirr]

[quote name='Raine™' timestamp='1308705631' post='5301564']
Why? How do you figure? There may come a time in the near future where isolated technology reaches an all-time high but it won't last because technology is the way of fixing problems and advancing us. People are unhealthy? Eventually we will develop something for that. People are isolated? Lets fix that. Its that thinking that will advance us out of here. At first the isolation will be let's create mass areas for people to communicate online for very long period of time. (I think this is what your referring) They developers will push for more than that and the online interaction will increase but eventually a tipping point will be reached after a good few years and they would start moving this into this v.1.5 reality that allows for everything you can do online in RL and this thinking is what turning the post office into the phone into the car phone into the cell phone into the PC. Technology will not make us self destruct because as soon as it come to light they redirect into what they think will sell and be more advanced. A very good example of this is in Ren but I HIGHLY HIGHLY HIGHLY recommend you don't watch it unless your at LEAST! 15.
[/quote]

You seem to be under the false impression that technology is advanced for the goodness of mankind. Technology is advanced because someone makes a profit from it. In our capitalistic global economy, the driving force is self-interest; the more a person can make off of it, the more it will be advanced. The more it costs another industry, the more it will try to be stifled. Take, for example, green technology. Green technology is, without question, better for the world. The people who support it use this argument, but the more realistic argument is that it's a new industry that could stimulate the economy, make jobs, and consequentially make an oligarchy overseeing it's development [i]extremely[/i] wealthy. Other organizations (such as oil industries) try to say that these technological advances are too expensive, and that they could result in a higher deficit and, possibly, an even greater recession and unemployment rate due to the sheer cost it would fiscally require. The [i]real[/i] reasoning behind it, however, is that green technology would essentially bankrupt these organizations, much like electric lightbulbs did to oil lanterns.

My point is that the driving force of advancement is one group of people getting an edge on another group of people. As long as people enjoy their unhealthy lifestyles, technological advancements will work to cater to their lifestyle in order to make a larger profit. As long as there are two militaries on earth, they will compete for greatness. As long as people are getting sick from their unhealthy lifestyles, medicine will advance to keep them comfortable.

[Raine]

[quote name='Whirr' timestamp='1308765239' post='5303098']
You seem to be under the false impression that technology is advanced for the goodness of mankind. Technology is advanced because someone makes a profit from it. In our capitalistic global economy, the driving force is self-interest; the more a person can make off of it, the more it will be advanced. The more it costs another industry, the more it will try to be stifled. Take, for example, green technology. Green technology is, without question, better for the world. The people who support it use this argument, but the more realistic argument is that it's a new industry that could stimulate the economy, make jobs, and consequentially make an oligarchy overseeing it's development [i]extremely[/i] wealthy. Other organizations (such as oil industries) try to say that these technological advances are too expensive, and that they could result in a higher deficit and, possibly, an even greater recession and unemployment rate due to the sheer cost it would fiscally require. The [i]real[/i] reasoning behind it, however, is that green technology would essentially bankrupt these organizations, much like electric lightbulbs did to oil lanterns.

My point is that the driving force of advancement is one group of people getting an edge on another group of people. As long as people enjoy their unhealthy lifestyles, technological advancements will work to cater to their lifestyle in order to make a larger profit. As long as there are two militaries on earth, they will compete for greatness. As long as people are getting sick from their unhealthy lifestyles, medicine will advance to keep them comfortable.
[/quote]

I see your point but the ideas of capitalism and human progress are not so different often they are the same thing, give enough time you will see how financial gain coordinates to progress. Henry Ford created Ford to make a profit on the idea of automobiles and the assembly line and as it progressed now people all over the world have long-range transportation for minimal cost, that is both progress and personal gain. Then the idea continued to evolve as cars became cleaner and more comfortable, then launched truck transport followed by highways that allowed for expansion of cities into suburbs due to less travel time. That concept that selfish gain ideas evolve into progress applies to tech as well. Will there contiue to be a time where the promotion of unhealthy lifestyle and isolated living? Yes. Will that last? By no means, because companies will figure out new ways to make money evolving that technology into a next tier. Technology and capitalist behavior are by nature, preventions to self-destructive patterns because it always finds something new and better then before.

(Agian Ren is the perfect example of this by again the >15 age rule apply s because I dare not scar a tween for life.)

[Whirr]

[quote name='Raine™' timestamp='1308767149' post='5303166']
I see your point but the ideas of capitalism and human progress are not so different often they are the same thing, give enough time you will see how financial gain coordinates to progress. Henry Ford created Ford to make a profit on the idea of automobiles and the assembly line and as it progressed now people all over the world have long-range transportation for minimal cost, that is both progress and personal gain. Then the idea continued to evolve as cars became cleaner and more comfortable, then launched truck transport followed by highways that allowed for expansion of cities into suburbs due to less travel time. That concept that selfish gain ideas evolve into progress applies to tech as well. Will there contiue to be a time where the promotion of unhealthy lifestyle and isolated living? Yes. Will that last? By no means, because companies will figure out new ways to make money evolving that technology into a next tier. Technology and capitalist behavior are by nature, preventions to self-destructive patterns because it always finds something new and better then before.

(Agian Ren is the perfect example of this by again the >15 age rule apply s because I dare not scar a tween for life.)
[/quote]

You've got a point on this, but it still requires a lot of speculation. I'm more talking about the more foreseeable advancements of man.

[Raine]

[quote name='Whirr' timestamp='1308768588' post='5303244']
You've got a point on this, but it still requires a lot of speculation. I'm more talking about the more foreseeable advancements of man.
[/quote]

I understand but we can never know what becomes profitable in 20 years so all we have to trust is the nature of advancement and see that technology would not force humanity into self-destruction.