Our "childhood's end"?

[removeduser_4536284751384]

In aeons to come, I think historians from whatever many species humans have become will be fascinated by our era. I personally think we monsterously privileged to be alive right now. We, as a species, have entered our adolescence.

For most of our past, our ancestors have lived as ignorant children in the garden of Eden. We were mere intelligent animals, living out our evolutionary instincts in an era when they served us well. Unremarkable beside our countless other cousins in our biosphere.

Since about the end of the middle ages, we have entered a scientific revolution that has wrought huge changes in our species. I think future historians will look back on the era ca. 1500-2500? as the time when we ate from the tree of knowledge for our species. It is us, right now, who must do this. There is so much we must overcome. Now that we have the power to destroy ourselves, humans have never and will never again be as painfully vulnerable. Will we survive another 500 years of natural disasters and weapons of mass destruction? What is "The Great Filter" of civilizations, and will we survive it? Our evolutionary predispositions, like social divisiveness, religion, aggression etc are a continual source of problems. Might they go away as our collective wealth and knowledge increases, or may we have to eliminate them through genetic engineering? We do know there is currently practically no evolutionary pressure on humans, and that may be bad for our future. What's very interesting is that humanity has never been as interdependent and collectivized as it is now, and after this era, will never again be. I pity our libertarians. Perhaps they will be the first to abandon us and colonize some small objects in our solar system where we will never find them. If the colonization of the Americas is anything to go by, it will be the groups with non-mainstream political and religious beliefs who lead the way and have least attachment to home.

If we are successful in maturing, the tiny little organism we call Earth, for whom we act as gonads and central nervous system, will spread its seed throughout the cosmos. It is the first of a species which will someday - quite literally - be as numerous as the stars of the sky. Humanity will transition from a fearful, instinctual childhood when we were unremarkable beside our animal cousins, into an adult civilization that can will inherit the cosmos. What do you think?

Here are some videos on the subject:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Jaketh]

The driving force behind my desire to live to a great age or even to be immortal in some form is to see if our species has it in us to achieve colonization of space or if we fall and destroy ourselves. I sincerely hope we do colonize space one day and i wish i could be their to see it.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

The driving force behind my desire to live to a great age or even to be immortal in some form is to see if our species has it in us to achieve colonization of space or if we fall and destroy ourselves. I sincerely hope we do colonize space one day and i wish i could be their to see it.

I'm convinced by the end of this transition from Type 0 to Type 1, we will be able to bring back the dead and replace diseased bodies with new ones.

However, I can't think of a reason why they would bother bringing back anyone from the distant past. And I'm also curious of what death is all about.

[Elfdude]

I challenge that there is no evolutionary pressure on humans. Evolution is a function of genetic variability AND selection. Not simply selection alone. Through a larger population humans generate more and more genetic diversity leading to more novel evolution. Because of high proportion of other individuals beneficial mutations are very likely to survive and be introduced into the main population where they are tested better than a single bottlenecked species ever could've. If we were subjected to a bottleneck those beneficial mutations would undoubtedly be concentrated but so would the nonbeneficial mutations. That's a huge gamble and it's why evolution doesn't force us into smaller groups. To bias towards the beneficial you must have a large enough population where such a thing can happen and negative mutations can also occur without threatening the species itself. Does this mean humans will evolve? Yes. Does it mean that all humans will evolve? Of course not. The large species are somewhat like a sandbox for genes allowing many different pathways to split off. Human interbreeding however keeps these groups united. When formation of pathways exceeds the ability for us to reintegrate our genetics speciation will occur and new species will arise from humanity.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Actually, the dark ages becomes difficult to explain then...

The Romans, as of the 300s-400s AD, were literally on the verge of entering Victorian or Industrial-Era Society. St. Augustine was punishing people for teaching Heliocentrism and by the end of 290's the Romans had all the componets to make a functioning steam engine.

So if we're in our childhood, did we get dropped on our head for 1000 years?

[removeduser_4536284751384]

According to 19th century Romanticists.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

According to 19th century Romanticists.

I really hope for Immortality, or if there is a Heavan, I can at least watch our universe's future. Maybe even play it like a videogame.

"Let's do this Leroy Jenkins!"

I hope it has TVO

[Aanker]

I think the terms "collectivized" and "interdependency" are misused here. Obviously, we have social networks that have integrated us in a fashion previously unseen but if the new era has demonstrated anything, it is that we can rely on independent, non-state action to an increasing extent. A libertarian would probably be happy, in fact, that social networks have turned over the power of communication from the hands of government to private owners.

The interdependency you speak of is simply the result of trade equilibriums - supply and demand. Nobody really forces you to purchase wares from a specific country, and should production be cheaper in country A than, say, country B, production will move to country A. This is in line with freedom of market thinking.

Private companies now hold the ability to travel to space, and while they still admittedly need governmental institutions to achieve parts of the logistics, everything points to the fact that we will see powerful spacefaring corporations in the future. Before, only the entirety of nations were able to muster the wealth and resources necessary for such an undertaking.

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

I suspect the Oil companies will be first to become gigantic spacefaring corporations.

[Aanker]

I suspect the Oil companies will be first to become gigantic spacefaring corporations.

We are probably speaking of some form of company entirely devoted to spacefaring since the expertise required for putting cargo into orbit is quite different from that of excavating oil (unless you use Armageddon as a reference ).

But I still think most of the spearheading will actually be done by governments. To put a man on Mars requires such a high concentration and organization of effort that it is beyond the capability of your average, realistic crop of investors to summon the amount of funds necessary. Furthermore, such a journey is more of a stepping stone than something that would generate profit.

[Morkonan]

.. What do you think?..

I think we are in a very precarious position.

Odds are that Earth will not produce another technologically advanced species. We have already used a great deal of the easily available resources. A technologically advanced species not only needs intelligence, but the tools that enable it to exploit that intelligence. Should we disappear, for some reason, and, by chance, an intelligent species evolves to take our place, they may never be able to reach their potential before some existential threat wipes them out. Like it or not, we're probably the first and last technological civilization on Earth.

One ill-placed rock can wipe us out. Planet-killer asteroids are a concern, not because of their frequency, but simply because they are possible. Yet, we have yet to attempt to develop the means by which to protect ourselves. We have improved our ability to detect such objects, and that's half the battle, but if we can't give ourselves a year or so of warning, that detection will be worthless. Even then, a year may not be enough, depending upon the most desirable solution. In short, nature could easily drop a rock on our heads before we're able to do anything about it.

I worry about disease. The longer we are alive, the more opportunity organisms have to evolve which could develop into another Plague. This time, it may be permanent... Natural diseases are bad enough, but we've also opened up the technology hope-chest that enables just about anyone to develop a killer virus. If someone wished to develop a human-killer, they could do it. Today. Right now. Other advances and even accidents with genetic research could present more problems. Nanotech isn't immune to misuse or accident, either. It wouldn't take more than a couple of weeks to cover the Earth in grey goo...

We also face environmental risks on a grand scale. A gamma ray burst from a dying star/supernova/other could easily wipe out all life on Earth if it was close enough. Luckily, any likely candidate stars for that sort of event aren't close enough to us to do it instantly. But, there are those that are close enough to do the job, at least as far as we are concerned. The effects could wipe out species on our planet, destabilize our atmosphere and doom, immediately, anything caught on that side of the Earth.

We're using up our welcome on Earth. Despite all the politicizing, man's impact on our environment is telling. We're putting a strain on Earth, in certain areas, that is forcing environmental change. We're overfishing our oceans, our rivers are filled with toxins feeding into the sea, nitrogen and silt are killing critical species and even fish-hatcheries cause environmental problems - The local regions just can't handle the poo... (This doesn't even touch the hotly politicized topic of Anthropogenic Climate Change)

Water water, everywhere, and not a drop to drink. Our demand for fresh water is starting to outstrip our supply. We need that water not only for a nice bath, but to water our crops and animals. We need it for power generation, too. But, most of the world's population doesn't live near fresh water sources. They live in regions fed by seasonal snow or glacier melts and if these keep shrinking, they'll soon not have enough fresh water and there's nothing that can be done - We can not transport as much water to these regions as seasonal weather can. While it may not be a species-wide risk, it's enough of one to put severe environmental and social strain on many regions, as their own stable water supplies come under increasing demand by those who have left drought-ridden regions.

Food. Food is a problem. It's not that we don't have enough, right now. It's that we can't get enough food to where it is needed, when it is needed. Instability in many regions can be caused by a lack of foodstuffs and it's a problem that self-escalates. Food shortages cause instability, instability draws even more resources away from food production, what food is being produced is reduced, causing more instability, blah blah blah.. It has it's own inbuilt feedback mechanism and that could possibly cause widespread instability, forcing mass immigrations into more plentiful areas, causing instability, causing reduced food production, causing.. well, you get the picture.

We are at the mercy of time, in my opinion. If we do not act to seriously reduce the impact any or all of these sorts of variables could have on our existence, then it is just a matter of time before one of them occurs and wipes us out. It will happen. One of these events will occur. That is not debatable. It is a statistical certainty. The only thing that is debatable is whether or not we will act now in order to mitigate the severity of a class of problems in the future. That future in which such an event occurs is unknown. It could be tomorrow or five hundred years from now. But, what is known are the consequences if we don't act.

Unfortunately, humans in groups seem not to act with preventative measures until something dire occurs in their own back yard. By that time, it's too late. It may even be too late for us, today. It might be that we have passed the window of opportunity for action. Instead of a bright future for a species just now starting to come into its own, we may have nothing.

Hubris is the Great Filter.