|
Stephann -> RE: Is the human species getting smarter? (9/10/2007 3:35:26 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
I agree with you that we're maybe too dependant on the wrong tech and out of touch with the world, Termyn8or, but I gotta say your post is a bit bleak and one sided...
quote:
The skills needed to survive are no longer needed. This is handled by someone else. This gives us the greatest freedom.
-than why the need for a rant about lack of 'survival skills'?
quote:
Monkeys learn to use a leaf from a plant to lure insects out for them to eat, insects actually have interspecies arraingments to survive. In the absence of things like that, we must hunt. Bears find a way to get fish out of the river, wolves find those sheep that are a bit slow. Whales find plankton and sharks find anything they can.
-mostly we don't hunt. We use tools like monkeys. Interspecies arraignments get you you're cheeseburger. We fish like bears only better. We pray on stupid sheep. are we 'natural' yet?
quote:
How do we measure up ? Anyone who thinks survival is not the most important skill needs to be reeducated.
-survival isn't a skill. Survival is clinging on in a hostile enviroment. Or, Anybody not in the process of dying at this moment is surviving. Living long enough so that your offspring can continue the cycle is the 'most important skill'.
Do you really think taking a caveman out of his native enviroment and climate, stripping him of his tech (skins/axe/fire), and taking away the kin he divides labor with is going to mean he's any better at 'survival' than you are?
quote:
A few here might be able to survive after some holocaust that wipes out all technology, but many wouldn't.
thats the point of a holocaust. Its designed to kill everyone. The technology goes down in flames with the human race. A weapon of mass distruction meant to take out technology is called an EMP bomb. EMP's are probably the least deadly way to wipe out human life.
quote:
With technology and the ease it bestows upon people, they get lazy. They cannot survive without the modern conveniences.
or maybe technology only made it possible to have lightbulbs and factory labor and so much work we don't have time to dream and other things that are the oppisite of lazy. You're lazy. Many humans work damn hard. Ask a prehistoric or third world farmer if he considers himself lazy.
quote:
It is simple, go camping, out in the REAL wilderness. Just how long do you want to stay there ? (that's even if you can survive).
camping, by definition, is a recreation. It's supposed to be roughing it. Try it. It's really not all that hard. Creating enough abundance over a long period of time to have children, i.e. survival, means making the enviroment easier on you, not dwelling in a harsh wilderness state like camping.
quote:
can't even stand being out on my front porch at might because of the mosquitos. What I am seemingly accusing others of, I admit to about myself.
Try a smokey fire to keep the bugs at bay or covering yourself in blankets/clothing. Or, gasp, live in a sheltered place like a house. It worked for generations of not infected by maleria hunters, gatherers, and farmers.
quote:
I was born into technology, and actually my family seems to have a knack for it, but could we survive 'out there' ? I say no.
Of course you couldn't survive without technology. technology has been used since before there were human beings, homo sapiens evolved already using tools. From stones to furs to community to fire, none of us would be here if it wern't for tools-ANY primitive tribe in ANY enviroment.
If you miss nature so much, recognizing that fact is an important step.
quote:
People whio design nuclear bombs sometimes cannot dress themselves.
And other important people drive Hummers. Obviously not all contributions are judged by intellegence or survival skills. Are you saying only smart athletic outdoorsy types have improved your life? I think technology has opened the doors for others to do their part as well , and the caveman-esque roll model can kick his feet up every once in a while a drink a beer. Whats wrong with that? Let the idiots make their own way and you're taxes might just be lower.
Sure, technolgy equals pollution and war and alientation and that sucks.
But, christ, man. Do you want to live like you're in Darfur? Are you saying you would want an absoloute minimum level of technology? I'll bet, dollars to donuts, if you spent ONE day living like the non-exploitative class (i.e. protocapitolist's of the world) you'd learn WHY we've spent all these millenia's on sometimes misguided attempts to get as far away from bare survival as possible.
A few random thoughts.
My limited understanding of evolution, is that as our brains evolved, they required a higher number of calories to sustain it. The human brain consumes about 20 watts (400 calories a day, roughly 1/5th of our dietary intake.) In beginning to add meat to supplement our diets, our brains were fueled to become larger.. making us more adept at using tools and cooperative social behavior, securing more meat, allowing greater calorie intake... creating an evolutionary cycle.
Technology is a Pandora's box. Once out, you can't put it back in. Our world today doesn't have electric ovens and airplanes and cancer treatments because we've just 'gotten smarter'; it's because every single technological advancement is just that; a step forward. Today's economy is driven and fueled by technology. In a way that never existed before in time, technological advances have inherent value. The more specialized an economy is, the more prosperous all the people within it become. A quick look at the way technology is used in Africa, parts of Asia, or Latin America compared to Europe, Australia, or North America quickly illustrates these differences.
But as suggested, cavemen and bush people aren't necessarily capable of surviving off the land alone any better than a New York City stockbroker; but if the stockbroker and the bushman were both told that six months from now they'll be dumped in the middle of a forest to live for a year, my money is on the stockbroker to survive the ordeal, simply because his life has depended on being able to learn and make use of tools. He could do consultations, research, and get the best minds availible to tell him where and how to hunt, what to eat, and how to survive. The bushman may have survived in a primitive fashion his whole life, but always dependent upon his own society; his fellow hunters for example.
The ability to use technology reflects our ability to adapt. Adaptation is necessary for a society to grow. The question of 'if a society should grow,' is a far different moral quandry.
Stephan
|
|
|
|
