Should The Human Race Be Destroyed?
Poll: Should The Human Race Be Destroyed?
Total Members Polled: 172
Discussion
Not an easy decision to make, but with all the problems on this pathetic little planet (and no I don't believe climate change is man made), I wonder whether we should accept the ultimate solution. As a race we're utterly destructive, conflicted and IMHO we're regressing. Is it time to remove the human race, preserve the planet for future life, and rest easy knowing that our sacrifice was without doubt our largest ever achievement?
Au contraire, a very easy decision - of course not.
The human race has immense potential and is capable of great wonders. The fact that it is also flawed is one of the key factors that will drive us to evolve and ultimately become better tomorrow than we are today.
The human race has immense potential and is capable of great wonders. The fact that it is also flawed is one of the key factors that will drive us to evolve and ultimately become better tomorrow than we are today.
Edited by AlexKP on Tuesday 10th March 11:23
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I believe that too.Recently I was reading a book about the oriogins of civilisation. Something about South American tribes and their evolution from hunter gatherers to tribes to chiefdoms to states to empires.
The theory amongst academics is that society evolved as a result of an over-supply of food (mostly due to agriculture)which led to the withdrawal of some folk from hunting/fishing etc, leaving others to fight wars etc. Which developed a warrior class later to become the ruling class etc etc
All very interesting; sadly civilisation seems to originate as a result of wars!
Until the next theory comes along......
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The first one here is a paper from the Journal of Science. You can prob find it one the internet:Carneiro, Robert C. (1970) A Theory on the Origin of the State. Journal of Science 169:733-738
The following books are all related to the topic; although there is some consternation as to the particulars of the theories:
Roosevelt, Anna C. (1990) Moundbuilders of the Amazon: Geophysical Archaeology on Marajó Island, Brasil. Academic Press, New York.
A.C. Roosevelt, Anna C. (1988) Archaeological Research on Marajó Island, Brazil
Schaan, Denise Pahl (2008) ‘The Non-Agricultural Chiefdoms of Marajó Island’ in Handbook of South American Archaeology. Edited by Silverman & Isbell, Ch. 19: pp. 339-355
Roosevelt, A. C. (1999) The Maritime, Highland, Forest Dynamic and the Origins of Complex Culture
Evans, Clifford, and Betty J Meggers (1957) Archaeological Investigations at the Mouth of the Amazon.
That should get you started
Jasandjules said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Let me guess, you are under 21? My comments actually aren't based upon a naiive hope that humanity will "get better".
Actually they are based upon some pretty sound scientific reasoning - to summarise (badly) a lot of social anthropologists work:
- The most basic human instinct is survival.
- For our species to flourish it requires co-operation.
- For long term survival and success it requires ever greater co-operation.
- The alternative to survival is extinction - and this is in direct contravention to the most basic human instinct.
- Therefore human beings will co-operate and society will develop because the alternative is not permissible.
So ultimately, although we will get to the eleventh hour in screwing things up, our basic primal survival instinct will then take over and we will make things better. Not necessarily for altruistic reasons, but because the alternative is no alternative.
And therefore through fits and starts and high points and lows, the progression of our species and society is inevitable.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff