I'm not arguing against the need for such studies, however I find it amazing that this is debatable at all.
Expecting that we as a species or society aren't subject to the most fundamental laws of the universe isn't rational. Even in the negligible timescale of our own species we've seen repeated cycles of collapse, the planet is littered with the remains of failed species. The only reason this needs study is because we're so arrogant as to believe there's an exemption clause in the fine print of the immutable laws of the universe, just for us. Scarier still is that we don't even have to be all godded up to believe that, it's how we're born. (Tangent: watch "Through The Wormhole" the episode "Does Belief in God Cause More Self Control?")
A collapse is coming, it's just a question of when. 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? a million?
Personally I'd lean toward the lower end of the scale. Whilst a substantial percentage of the world subscribes philosophies that essentially reinforce our innate belief that the earth "belongs" to man. Her resources perhaps put there for us to consume by some higher being. We're pretty fucked. Ecological responsibility can't be discussed with any creature that ultimately believes that a a higher being provides for them. Heck you can't even begin to discuss the timescales involved rationally with the vast majority of faiths around, and those that you can engage in dialogue are numerically so insignificant as to not matter.
Then there's the question of reproduction. Whilst first world populations are shrinking, the third world is growing, and we in the first world can't even agree that it would be in our own long term interests to pay for the education and food of every last man, woman and child amongst them that needs it. The reasons are purely selfish: it's the only humane way we can have even the slightest chance of avoiding a world with 10 + billion people on it. If the thought of that doesn't terrify you, it should. Assuming we agree that societal patterns observed in the past hold true of the future, then trouble and strife breeds conflict, breeds fascism, breeds violence. Picture a world a few decades from now where the poorest two thirds, armed with today's most horrific weapons use the model set by the past as their compass for the future. I'd wager the odds are heavily stacked in favour of things getting very bloody at some point. Believing that, whilst some may play with cataclysmic weapons, the genie will stay in the bottle for the rest, is naive at best. If you still can't picture what I mean, drop everything and go visit India, Bangladesh, Mexico or almost anywhere in sub-saharan Africa, spend a year or two outside the city, then picture what happens when that thin veneer if government and society is stripped away.
It's a fact that as a species and as individuals we're incredibly bad at forward looking decision making. We evolved geared to favour today and next week over next month or next year. Few plan and act for long term benefit even on a human scale, and collectively that's going to bite us in the ass. I don't imagine this is something that sits well with the entrepreneurial spirit of HN readers, but before you stand up and shout "Hey! I plan! I save! I recycle!" or whatever, remember this is about us in aggregate, each of us individually are quite irrelevant.
Ok, I'm done, I can't begin to address this subject properly.
“I'm gonna share with you a vision that I had, cause I love you. And you feel it. You know all
that money we spend on nuclear weapons and defense each year, trillions of dollars, correct?
Instead -- just play with this -- if we spent that money feeding and clothing the poor of the
world -- and it would pay for it many times over, not one human being excluded -- we can
explore space together, both inner and outer, forever in peace.” - Bill Hicks
Please, not this thing about defense spending again ... you could feed and clothe them many times over, for many generations, with all the entitlement spending ...
I'm not arguing against the need for such studies, however I find it amazing that this is debatable at all.
Expecting that we as a species or society aren't subject to the most fundamental laws of the universe isn't rational. Even in the negligible timescale of our own species we've seen repeated cycles of collapse, the planet is littered with the remains of failed species. The only reason this needs study is because we're so arrogant as to believe there's an exemption clause in the fine print of the immutable laws of the universe, just for us. Scarier still is that we don't even have to be all godded up to believe that, it's how we're born. (Tangent: watch "Through The Wormhole" the episode "Does Belief in God Cause More Self Control?")
A collapse is coming, it's just a question of when. 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? a million?
Personally I'd lean toward the lower end of the scale. Whilst a substantial percentage of the world subscribes philosophies that essentially reinforce our innate belief that the earth "belongs" to man. Her resources perhaps put there for us to consume by some higher being. We're pretty fucked. Ecological responsibility can't be discussed with any creature that ultimately believes that a a higher being provides for them. Heck you can't even begin to discuss the timescales involved rationally with the vast majority of faiths around, and those that you can engage in dialogue are numerically so insignificant as to not matter.
Then there's the question of reproduction. Whilst first world populations are shrinking, the third world is growing, and we in the first world can't even agree that it would be in our own long term interests to pay for the education and food of every last man, woman and child amongst them that needs it. The reasons are purely selfish: it's the only humane way we can have even the slightest chance of avoiding a world with 10 + billion people on it. If the thought of that doesn't terrify you, it should. Assuming we agree that societal patterns observed in the past hold true of the future, then trouble and strife breeds conflict, breeds fascism, breeds violence. Picture a world a few decades from now where the poorest two thirds, armed with today's most horrific weapons use the model set by the past as their compass for the future. I'd wager the odds are heavily stacked in favour of things getting very bloody at some point. Believing that, whilst some may play with cataclysmic weapons, the genie will stay in the bottle for the rest, is naive at best. If you still can't picture what I mean, drop everything and go visit India, Bangladesh, Mexico or almost anywhere in sub-saharan Africa, spend a year or two outside the city, then picture what happens when that thin veneer if government and society is stripped away.
It's a fact that as a species and as individuals we're incredibly bad at forward looking decision making. We evolved geared to favour today and next week over next month or next year. Few plan and act for long term benefit even on a human scale, and collectively that's going to bite us in the ass. I don't imagine this is something that sits well with the entrepreneurial spirit of HN readers, but before you stand up and shout "Hey! I plan! I save! I recycle!" or whatever, remember this is about us in aggregate, each of us individually are quite irrelevant.
Ok, I'm done, I can't begin to address this subject properly.