Do you ever feel like there's BS society sees as normal and good today but 1000 years from today people are actually going to think we were trying to destroy ourselves? If America is or isn't still around have you ever asked if they'll look back fondly at us?
It's a great question. I mean first off, do you really believe in a Pax America or even 1300 years of the Star Spangled Banner? That would put us in the running as one of the longest nations to continually exist. I'm pretty doubtful of that. It's nothing against our particular way of life but entropy is a part of the natural order and it'd have to be a hell of a good millenium for us.
Let's say though, that millenium has passed. Will Robot Smith is still living off the hype of 2999 and is staring in iHuman, a daring take on a human that breaks The Three Laws by allowing a robot to come to harm. We possibly live in New New York and there is a University on Mars.
How will humanity view who we were today in the 20th and 21st centuries? Enlightened? Industrial? Savage?
Studying the past is often declared essential to shaping the future. Imagine our past millenium and the upheavals to our species. In just one thousand years we have gone from a dark world that knew a thousandth of a percent of what we have learned in the last 300 years.
Year 1000 was a leap year starting on Monday of the Julian calendar. 310,000,000 humans inhabited Earth. The Golden Age of Islam was at its height. The Pope had recently dug up the last Pope and put the corpse on trial. Civilizations as great and powerful as ours rose, fell, reformed and fell again. The Magna Carta and the Dark Ages. The Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. These are just examples of European history.
But all history must meet at our Industrial Age. For the first time in history we drove back the darkness of the night and displayed a mastery of our habitat in such dominance that we could destroy it. In the last three hundred years what would be called magic a millenium ago and worshiped has become so commonplace that we don't think twice that we are communicating over electrons across the world.
Now tell me what you think our legacy will be in the year 3000. Will we be remembered as the industrious? The savage? Or just middle years of history like the year 1000, caught between the beginning and end of Islams golden age, remembered more for the Mongols that destroyed.
I'm not sure if they'll remember us or think anything about us, particularly. There's nothing that makes our age stand out very much in the bigger picture of things. Aside from the massive technological leaps in the 20th century and before, I don't see anything that makes our relative time very noteworthy. There's important things happening all the time, of course, but I'm sure there were hugely important things going on in the 1010's that we don't remember, either.
You should add more content to the OP, by the way :o
This thread makes me instantly think about "The Jetsons". I'd doubt any of that stuff would actually happen in the year 3000, but it'd be hilarious. Space suits, hovering vehicles, robot maids, and etc.
Or we could go backwards in advancement and end up like the Flintstones.
On October 21 2012 23:05 marttorn wrote: I'm not sure if they'll remember us or think anything about us, particularly. There's nothing that makes our age stand out very much in the bigger picture of things. Aside from the massive technological leaps in the 20th century and before, I don't see anything that makes our relative time very noteworthy. There's important things happening all the time, of course, but I'm sure there were hugely important things going on in the 1010's that we don't remember, either.
You should add more content to the OP, by the way :o
The Gallo-Romans living in the time of Theodosius didn't see anything special about their age. They assumed that the Roman Empire was alive and well, and that they continued to be its heirs. That a Barbarian King now ruled the roost in Rome did not seem to them to be a break from their political traditions. That their cities and language were declining, and the centres of power fragmenting they did not, or pretended not to notice.
There are plenty of things which are happening to our civilisation under our very noses. And the most important of them are probably the least talked about.
On October 21 2012 23:05 marttorn wrote: There's nothing that makes our age stand out very much in the bigger picture of things. Aside from the massive technological leaps in the 20th century and before, I don't see anything that makes our relative time very noteworthy.
Of course, if you disregard what makes us stand out, we don't.
On October 21 2012 23:10 NeonFox wrote: What do you think about people who lived 1000 years ago?
I'm not quite sure this can be used as anargument because they will have way more stored and documented data about us than we had about people who lived 1000 years ago.
Well I think in 1000 years "everyone" in the sense of "most people" simply won't care just as much as most people in the world of today don't really care about history that happened before WW1, if we are in the lucky position that we can afford to care about history.
If you replace "everyone" with "historians" and/or "1000 years" with "100 years" or "the future" (and gave it a better op), you would probably be a lot closer to getting the response I assume you wanted.
On October 21 2012 23:11 MoltkeWarding wrote: There are plenty of things which are happening to our civilisation under our very noses. And the most important of them are probably the least talked about.
I think they will be amazed at how the people let themselves become enslaved to a society that makes them spend their entire lives working just so they can in return recieve a piece of paper that represents something that doesnt even exist.
I believe 1000 years from now, a monetary society wont exist, and would be looked upon as one of mankinds worst mistakes.
Probably that happned *some technological advance that prove most important for future*. Maturation and economical advance of formerly underdeveloped countries. Rise of China and India. And hopefully time of stabilization after last big wars on Earth.
Predicting 100 years into future is outrageously difficult, even guessing the societal changes that occur within 10 years would be quite an challenge to say the list. I'd say making statements pertaining to 1000 years after is downright impossible.
On October 21 2012 23:21 Mafe wrote: Well I think in 1000 years "everyone" in the sense of "most people" simply won't care just as much as most people in the world of today don't really care about history that happened before WW1, if we are in the lucky position that we can afford to care about history.
If you replace "everyone" with "historians" and/or "1000 years" with "100 years" or "the future" (and gave it a better op), you would probably be a lot closer to getting the response I assume you wanted.
Historians are by no means immune to the popular poison of personal projection. The historians who are capable of liberating their judgements from the mental limitations of their age are always going to be a precious minority. Tocqueville knew this when he gave a fairly accurate portrayal of the Democratic Historian in Democracy Book II.
Hark! TL.net! He is speaking to you!
M. de Lafayette says somewhere in his "Memoirs" that the exaggerated system of general causes affords surprising consolations to second-rate statesmen. I will add, that its effects are not less consolatory to second-rate historians; it can always furnish a few mighty reasons to extricate them from the most difficult part of their work, and it indulges the indolence or incapacity of their minds, whilst it confers upon them the honors of deep thinking.
What will historians think of us 1000 years from now? It takes a prophet to know.
It is actually a very interesting question to ask, however the answer is defined by the assumption where we will be in 1000 years from now. The possibilities range from nuclear wasteland without any life whatsoever over faschist world ruling regime to space civilisation, heck it may even be possible that the only humans in 1000 years are refugees that fled the planet from some sort of defining catastrophy. It gets a lot easier when you just assume that the people in 1000 years are in a position to care about what happened in the 21st century. That would mean no major wars between about 2500-3000, since they would put civilisation in a position where ppl. are too busy rebuilding to care about the past. IF there is a big war between now and aproximately 2500, there will probably be very little information that survives (I am thinking of nuclear dimensions if I say major wars ofc.) and the information that DOES survive would define the viev of our age. On the other hand, if there WAS such a big war, most people wouldnt even bother too much with what happened far earlier. The second scenario - no big wars - is almost impossible to predict. What you have to keep in mind though is that their viev of us would be FUNDAMENTALLY different since we store and collect information in dimensions that have been unimaginable even 5 years earlier, making the viev they might have on us probably much more accurate, if they bother to look at us. They may very well not. If they do, they can almost reconstruct everything from our age. What is much more likely is that everyone will know a little bit about us, and we will probably be summed up as the age of exploding technological growth, information and resource anahilation.
Closing this topic based upon the shitty OP. An hour ago he was PMed and told that while it was an interesting subject the OP needed work. He failed to edit it or respond so here we are. However if anyone in the topic would like to continue it then PM me with your proposed first post and I'll reopen it and edit his out and yours in.
The fact that I rewrote the OP aside, I have exclusive evidence from 2009 of how we will be remembered.
On April 30 2009 13:25 EsX_Raptor wrote: Yes my friends, it is not a joke, this is for real.
10:28 PM 4/29/2009
It was recently observed by the space telescope "Hobby-Eberly" in Mt. Fowlkes, Texas, that there is indeed a new form of life living under the surface of the moon whose sole and only purpose is to plan a huge invasion on the earth right before the release of StarCraft 2.
Majorly they will laugh about us because we had religions and believed in things that obviously were never existing.
Natural selection will sort these people out soon enough (so I hope). (Countries like germany will be 99% religion free in <50 years, whereas muslim countries have a very long road to travel (>1000years imo) cause they live culturally in the middle ages right now. and that took 1000 years to move on, in the western world as well
"So THEY are the guys who forced us poor bastards to live in arcologies instead of in the nature when we're stupid enough not to live on another planet. Oh well, I never wanted to see the sky anyway..."
why do people think religion will no longer exist? Billions of people their lives are based around religion. the west only makes up a small part of the worlds population (and will shrink dramatically over the next century)
I wonder, if digitalized images survive, what we'll be remembered by. Maybe Times Picture of the Year. Maybe the atomic bomb. Or maybe a cat picture.
(If I'm to give an honest answer, that is how we will be remembered. Automated machinery, electronics, early robotics and most importantly, nuclear fission.)
On October 22 2012 01:40 Bahamut1337 wrote: why do people think religion will no longer exist? Billions of people their lives are based around religion. the west only makes up a small part of the worlds population (and will shrink dramatically over the next century)
billions of people without proper education you mean. Education will rise as time moves on, and therefore religion will vanish
That's pretty fucking bigoted to assume spirituality and common belief equates to stupidity. Even if half of all people who practiced religion were stupid it would still be stereotyping billions of people.
On October 22 2012 01:43 farvacola wrote: They will look back and laugh at abject atheism, unable to comprehend the self-righteous rationalism needed to judge the interior lives of others
Wait, what? You're telling me future generations won't think exactly like I do only more so? But I'm so rational and educated!
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Care to clarify? Do you mean our current practice of religion, and the religions that exist, or the idea of 'god'?
I don't know why would such a society look down upon religious people, inteligent design as a theory is an interesting concept and can be explored intellectually imo.
I presume the people of future will look upon us as we look on those before us. Certain individual achievements will be praised but as a whole we'll probably be criticized.
On October 21 2012 23:49 Chaosvuistje wrote: 0101010001101000011011110111001101100101001000000110100101100100011010010110111101110100011100110010000001101110011001010111011001100101011100100010000001110011011000010111011100100000011010010111010000100000011000110110111101101101011010010110111001100111
The singularity is inevitable
Hahaha, epic post, I don't think many people will get this. HINT: it is de-codable
On October 22 2012 01:44 Probe1 wrote: That's pretty fucking bigoted to assume spirituality and common belief equates to stupidity. Even if half of all people who practiced religion were stupid it would still be stereotyping billions of people.
You don't have to be stupid to have ideas not based on logic. Most people have their (religious) views shaped by society, that's incredibly obvious. As there is decent evidence to suggest that more education creates a climate in which society rejects religion more and more until it becomes a fringe idea I'd say the idea that a better educated world will lead to a largely irreligious one is pretty reasonable. Obviously by no means certain, but an understandable supposition.
Anyway, I suspect this will be seen as a transition period. The world changes faster and faster in so many ways. What the destination is I don't know - perhaps just more change, though you'd imagine there has to eventually be an implosion or stability. But I think that will be the defining idea of the latter half of the previous millennium and the first century or two of this one.
Of course, the present always seems like a transitive period from the past to the future, so this isn't much of a prediction but meh.
The development of civilization has paralleled the individual human lifecycle. In childhood, you are under your parent's control. You know very little and have little self awareness. That was the vast majority of humanity, as it lived under kings, queens and the aristocracy. As one hits adolescence, one begins to assert their individuality and rebel against authority. This is an adolescent age for humanity. The Protestant Reformation was the first step in adolescent self-assertion, and the printing press increased our self-knowledge. It came to a head in the 20th century, particularly in the 1960s. We finally set ourselves free from our parents--the authority of tradition. Now we are in a phase that resembles the life of a college student. Free, hedonistic, careless, irresponsible with money, short on perspective but assertive and outspoken. I suppose in 1000 years we may have found ourselves a job, may've settled down and started a family. May've started to dress a bit more conservatively, gained some perspective about what why we even formed a society in the first place, and so on.
On October 22 2012 01:51 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why would such a society look down upon religious people, inteligent design as a theory is an interesting concept and can be explored intellectually imo.
lol, really?
My take on the question : they'll be most likely puzzled by the gaps between our knowledge and our beliefs. Also, embarassed to see how bigoted and backwards our societies are. A bit like how we feel a chill in our spine thinking of people burning witches in the past, they'll look at the disgusting and cruel things some people are now saying about gays for example, and they'll shake their head in silence.
Boy: "Ay pop, where dun think you went the ol' ones who builded them giant things? Timmy be say'in they flew in the sky an' had magic, but I be think'in he be ly'in like usual"
Father: "T'is true, boy. But THE LORD smited them for they arrogance and hubris, an' for they evil ways and godlessness, and burned they cities to the ground in a flash of light, and cursed the ground which'in they be build upon. But you don' be worry'in bout them. Get back to yer farm chores"
On October 22 2012 02:59 Fission wrote: Boy: "Ay pop, where dun think you went the ol' ones who builded them giant things? Timmy be say'in they flew in the sky an' had magic, but I be think'in he be ly'in like usual"
Father: "T'is true, boy. But THE LORD smited them for they arrogance and hubris, an' for they evil ways and godlessness, and burned they cities to the ground in a flash of light, and cursed the ground which'in they be build upon. But you don' be worry'in bout them. Get back to yer farm chores"
Indeed. I find it much more likely that humanity (along with most other life on the planet) will be long extinct by the year 3000, probably in a sea of nuclear fire.
Considering with all the recording options that exsist compared to millenia ago, they will have a lot more information that is also more accurate. Maybe we won't be some huge page in history like a large scale war, but there will be plenty more documents from civil life, celebrities etc.
You don't have holiday pictures of Slave McPeasant from ancient regimes in comparison to John Commoner of today for example.
So all in all, depending wheter there will be scientific breakthroughs, major scale world events or disasters will decide wheter history will remember these days as another year X or just a span of some certain age.
I'm always a cynic, and I don't think humanity would survive (at least up to today's standards) past the next couple hundred years. Someone's bound to launch a nuke at someone else, and then WW3 starts and Earth blows up. Someone else said he would give humanity 300 years. I think that's a bit generous but the idea is the same. The invention of nuclear technology has changed the world.
Unless we blast ourselves back to the stone age future educated versions of humanity won't view this time all that positively. Case in point...
On October 22 2012 01:51 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why would such a society look down upon religious people, inteligent design as a theoryhypothesis is an interesting hilarious concept and can be explored intellectually through rain dance and ritual sacrifice imo.
(adjusted for critical thinkers). Now back to dodging all those lightning bolts that are yet to strike me down.
On October 22 2012 03:10 ampson wrote: "Damn, Queen is some good music for being a thousand years old."
It's kinda funny to try and imagine who will be the writers, musicians, thinkers, painters, etc... that will still be admired in a thousand years
On October 22 2012 03:14 mostevil wrote: Unless we blast ourselves back to the stone age future educated versions of humanity won't view this time all that positively. Case in point...
On October 22 2012 01:51 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why would such a society look down upon religious people, inteligent design as a theoryhypothesis is an interesting hilarious concept and can be explored intellectually through rain dance and ritual sacrifice imo.
(adjusted for critical thinkers). Now back to dodging all those lightning bolts that are yet to strike me down.
But, but... but.... that banana fits my hole so nicely, and it gives me such fuzzy feelings, surely, God made it that way so I could enjoy myself!
On October 22 2012 01:51 Andr3 wrote: I don't know why would such a society look down upon religious people, inteligent design as a theory is an interesting concept and can be explored intellectually imo.
lol, really?
My take on the question : they'll be most likely puzzled by the gaps between our knowledge and our beliefs. Also, embarassed to see how bigoted and backwards our societies are. A bit like how we feel a chill in our spine thinking of people burning witches in the past, they'll look at the disgusting and cruel things some people are now saying about gays for example, and they'll shake their head in silence.
I don't know, for all of history there has been a very wide intellectual gap between the elite and the normal person. For example, around the 1000's scholars in Baghdad and Cordoba made awesome advances in medicine, science, etc. while the average person probably was just concerned with getting food. Now, the normal person is concerned with who's on Dancing with the Stars instead of the policies of the future presidential candidates, or space exploration. However, public education has changed society as we know it: the average person has likely heard of Aristotle, knows how to read and write, and can at least do algebra. I think in the future, these gaps will continue to lessen but won't ever disappear.
Also, I think the world is in a golden age right now. There are very little actual threats, and there is only one nation that is truly dominant. We focus on these uneducated, poor men from Afghanistan instead of actual nations for knocking down two of our towers: they are so insignificant when compared to the Mongols or the Soviets just decades ago. Anyone in a developed country can get whatever he or she wants through hard work and dedication, and education isn't too hard to get. Life is good.
I think we'll probably look at our stance on certain things, like gay marriage, the teaching of creationism and the influence of God on government, as well as the existence of dictators in the middle east and barbaric attacks between religious sects as primitive. Hah, come to think of it almost all of that stems from religion XD.
I am inclined to think that someday money will no longer be necessary; i.e. our moral standards and human nature will evolve towards some sort of ideal, highly advanced technological society where everyone has what they need and want - and don't want to be Donald Trump's by nature. To that end we'll probably understand ourselves a lot better, specifically the constant drive to acquire more and more and be seen as more and more important, and learn how to temper that in order to be in a state of harmony without being a slave to our desires. So mastery of ourselves.
Probably the major way in which we will be viewed is primitive technologically. I don't know what it would be like 1000 years from now, but I suspect it will be somewhat inconceivable. The singularity is probably a real thing
On October 22 2012 02:09 jdsowa wrote: The development of civilization has paralleled the individual human lifecycle. In childhood, you are under your parent's control. You know very little and have little self awareness. That was the vast majority of humanity, as it lived under kings, queens and the aristocracy. As one hits adolescence, one begins to assert their individuality and rebel against authority. This is an adolescent age for humanity. The Protestant Reformation was the first step in adolescent self-assertion, and the printing press increased our self-knowledge. It came to a head in the 20th century, particularly in the 1960s. We finally set ourselves free from our parents--the authority of tradition. Now we are in a phase that resembles the life of a college student. Free, hedonistic, careless, irresponsible with money, short on perspective but assertive and outspoken. I suppose in 1000 years we may have found ourselves a job, may've settled down and started a family. May've started to dress a bit more conservatively, gained some perspective about what why we even formed a society in the first place, and so on.
Guh...this is just wrong. Progressive history, fine, but the equations you make are totally off base.
First off, it's a Eurocentric way of viewing history. Most of the world has followed a very different path than this and to try and equate them without specific evidences that link individual occurrences, you're short-changing the rest of human history.
Second, I may be off base here but you seem to be implying and perpetuating the "Dark Age" myth. Damn thing is a historiographical construct resulting from the Catholic Churches adoption of Ecclesiastical history as a way to explain itself.
Bold Line: Even in Europe's case, this idea of a codified and permanent aristocracy with legitimate authority that did not derive from another source, i.e. the Roman Emperor, didn't exist for the "majority" of European history. It was people putting their rulers in and taking those they didn't like out, or pledging allegiance to those who suited them best. It was representative democracy, albeit a more brutal and violent form.
You can seriously consider this "Monarchical/Aristocratic" period in Europe from about the 7th century under the Merovingian's till around...well, it really sorta phases out over time, but the real symbolic "nail in the coffin" was the beheading of Louis the XVI. While this varied by region around Europe, both in terms of when it began, and when it ended. It was very dependent on how well the former Roman institutions managed to keep running and how quickly the Catholic Church reentered a region and whether or not they reestablished monasteries.
I don't know that they will look down on us any more than we look down on ancient civilizations (and this is a more apt comparison than the middle ages, because progress is exponential, not linear). More likely, our cultures and societies will just be an interesting subject for historical research or whatever kind of art they have, but they won't view us with any particular feeling. They'll be too detached and evolved to really understand us as being similar to them, just as we don't "judge" mesopotamians or ancient Egyptians because they just seem too alien and primitive for our standards to even apply. like, those guys didn't have cybernetic bodies and immortal gene-modded hive brains connected through faster than light ansibles to a universal data hub?!?! No wonder they had wars and nations!!! Man those old pre-galactic empire days must have been interesting, in a backwards, savage kind of way.
What earth will look like in 1000 years I really can't imagine. There would definitely be some surprising developments, but there would definitely be some constants that are just as surprising.
The one thing that stands out in my mind currently that people 1000 years in the future will look back and /facepalm is all religious belief. Look how we (general society) view ancient religions, and amplify that by like 100. I think it will be a great shame of humanity that we let so many people be scammed and lied to about things that no one could possibly know about (higher powers, life after death, etc.). Seeing a society that has enough understanding of the universe to leave earth orbit, communicate globally at the speed of light, but still having a majority of the world population believe in ancient myths as if they were real will be pretty embarrassing, imo.
On October 22 2012 03:24 HardlyNever wrote: What earth will look like in 1000 years I really can't imagine. There would definitely be some surprising developments, but there would definitely be some constants that are just as surprising.
The one thing that stands out in my mind currently that people 1000 years in the future will look back and /facepalm is all religious belief. Look how we (general society) view ancient religions, and amplify that by like 100. I think it will be a great shame of humanity that we let so many people be scammed and lied to about things that no one could possibly know about (higher powers, life after death, etc.). Seeing a society that has enough understanding of the universe to leave earth orbit, communicate globally at the speed of light, but still having a majority of the world population believe in ancient myths as if they were real will be pretty embarrassing, imo.
I doubt we will look back 1,000 years and facepalm at religion. It's not like we look back and go "those Greeks were so stupid, I can't believe they actually believed in Zeus." We just look back at it as what ancient people did. Why should people 1,000 years in the future be more critical of past civilizations than we are today?
Hopefully in 1000 years, humans will be replaced by some sort of genetically engineered or synthetically augmented superior version. I definitely wouldn't want such a emotionally driven, faith dependent, and crutch-seeking species to be having inter-galactic capabilities.
On October 21 2012 23:49 Chaosvuistje wrote: 0101010001101000011011110111001101100101001000000110100101100100011010010110111101110100011100110010000001101110011001010111011001100101011100100010000001110011011000010111011100100000011010010111010000100000011000110110111101101101011010010110111001100111
On October 22 2012 02:59 Fission wrote: Boy: "Ay pop, where dun think you went the ol' ones who builded them giant things? Timmy be say'in they flew in the sky an' had magic, but I be think'in he be ly'in like usual"
Father: "T'is true, boy. But THE LORD smited them for they arrogance and hubris, an' for they evil ways and godlessness, and burned they cities to the ground in a flash of light, and cursed the ground which'in they be build upon. But you don' be worry'in bout them. Get back to yer farm chores"
I like this lol. Hopefully we don't nuke the world to death.
On October 22 2012 03:24 HardlyNever wrote: What earth will look like in 1000 years I really can't imagine. There would definitely be some surprising developments, but there would definitely be some constants that are just as surprising.
The one thing that stands out in my mind currently that people 1000 years in the future will look back and /facepalm is all religious belief. Look how we (general society) view ancient religions, and amplify that by like 100. I think it will be a great shame of humanity that we let so many people be scammed and lied to about things that no one could possibly know about (higher powers, life after death, etc.). Seeing a society that has enough understanding of the universe to leave earth orbit, communicate globally at the speed of light, but still having a majority of the world population believe in ancient myths as if they were real will be pretty embarrassing, imo.
I doubt we will look back 1,000 years and facepalm at religion. It's not like we look back and go "those Greeks were so stupid, I can't believe they actually believed in Zeus." We just look back at it as what ancient people did. Why should people 1,000 years in the future be more critical of past civilizations than we are today?
Well, as someone who does actually study ancient history, I do /facepalm ancient societies sometimes, lol. But it isn't simply because they do stupid things, it is that they do some things really well, then do completely stupid things beside it (for instance, ancient mathematics = pretty good, ancient medicine = completely retarded).
It is the disparity/discrepancy between knowledge on somethings and complete failure on others that seems ridiculous, to me at least, looking back 1000+ years (really, closer to 2000, though).
Again, being able to "put a man on the moon" (to use the clique) yet still a lot of people thinking that earth and humanity is the figurative center of the universe at the same time, seems ridiculous, to me as a historian.
i dont think were going to last that long... were still 3 button presses away from a nuclear holocaust. plus any engineered virus is still a scary threat. hell the middle east is just a ticking time bomb, which has ZERO hope of ever being saved. could start ww3 etc etc.
1. Our most dominant society today, America, hasn't been around nearly as long as some of the other dominant ones in the past. Roman Empire existed over a millenium, and Carthage was around for 600 years. America was only around for 300 or so years, so people who cringe at the thought that any of our current societies today will be completely wiped off the map in 1000 years, I don't think its going to be that big of a deal.
2. There's a saying that technological advancements or development of any kind progresses at an accelerating rate. The development of the information age like the internet and smartphones didn't take nearly as long as the printing press, paper, and other stuff, which are nowhere near as advanced as what we have today. So in 1000 years what people will be using and consuming will be nothing we can imagine right now.
That being said, people in a thousand years from now I think will just look at us the way we're looking at our history, probably just another period of time. But I think what we got going for us is the dawn of some significant tech like the internet and the digital stuff that will serve as the basis of what will turn into something quite extroadinary.
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Let me defend this underelaborated statement a bit, do not mistake it for bashing, treat is as food for thought and an invitation to have counter arguments presented:
Not only do I have the same view, I also have a personal example to keep me away from even considering religion being based on any true fact, and that being sole existence of Scientology. It also craftily compares two religions 2000 years apart (fair enough, considering we're talking of 3000 year people looking at us). If I compare it's (scientology's) conception and evolution (a really interesting but obviously fictional story about Xenu etc., written by a sci-fi writer ADMITTING to wanting to make money through religion, turned into sets of ideological behaviors, mostly written down in easy to understand manner, followed by complete denial of prior existence of that exact founding story and forgetting what it was all based upon - science fiction) to Christnianity, I understand this and other religions had exact same process of evolving no matter who creates them / is the main hero / writes them down (whether it's a sci-fi writer or a bunch of educated fishermen, as we believe)
So to finish off with what people will think in 1000 years:
"Thank [whatever] that Scientology was born 1000 years ago, it gives us a purpose in life, a reason to gather up in our church, takes care of our afterlife of which we still know nothing about and makes us just feel guided and gives us a feeling that even though we have no idea why and what for we exist, there is something out there that does".
Reason I believe it will be said is because it has been repeated every 1000 years, for at least 4 millennia.
I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of religion, because as many correctly point out, it's within our nature.
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Let me defend this underelaborated statement a bit, do not mistake it for bashing, treat is as food for thought and an invitation to have counter arguments presented:
Not only do I have the same view, I also have a personal example to keep me away from even considering religion being based on any true fact, and that being sole existence of Scientology. It also craftily compares two religions 2000 years apart (fair enough, considering we're talking of 3000 year people looking at us). If I compare it's (scientology's) conception and evolution (a really interesting but obviously fictional story about Xenu etc., written by a sci-fi writer ADMITTING to wanting to make money through religion, turned into sets of ideological behaviors, mostly written down in easy to understand manner, followed by complete denial of prior existence of that exact founding story and forgetting what it was all based upon - science fiction) to Christnianity, I understand this and other religions had exact same process of evolving no matter who creates them / is the main hero / writes them down (whether it's a sci-fi writer or a bunch of educated fishermen, as we believe)
So to finish off with what people will think in 1000 years:
"Thank [whatever] that Scientology was born 1000 years ago, it gives us a purpose in life, a reason to gather up in our church, takes care of our afterlife of which we still know nothing about and makes us just feel guided and gives us a feeling that even though we have no idea why and what for we exist, there is something out there that does".
Reason I believe it will be said is because it has been repeated every 1000 years, for at least 4 millennia.
I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of religion, because as many correctly point out, it's within our nature.
It is bashing, it was the jump-off point for much merriment about how stupid religious people are. Take that, you stupid Muslims who preserved Euclid for us! Take that, you stupid pantheist Euclid!
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Let me defend this underelaborated statement a bit, do not mistake it for bashing, treat is as food for thought and an invitation to have counter arguments presented:
Not only do I have the same view, I also have a personal example to keep me away from even considering religion being based on any true fact, and that being sole existence of Scientology. It also craftily compares two religions 2000 years apart (fair enough, considering we're talking of 3000 year people looking at us). If I compare it's (scientology's) conception and evolution (a really interesting but obviously fictional story about Xenu etc., written by a sci-fi writer ADMITTING to wanting to make money through religion, turned into sets of ideological behaviors, mostly written down in easy to understand manner, followed by complete denial of prior existence of that exact founding story and forgetting what it was all based upon - science fiction) to Christnianity, I understand this and other religions had exact same process of evolving no matter who creates them / is the main hero / writes them down (whether it's a sci-fi writer or a bunch of educated fishermen, as we believe)
So to finish off with what people will think in 1000 years:
"Thank [whatever] that Scientology was born 1000 years ago, it gives us a purpose in life, a reason to gather up in our church, takes care of our afterlife of which we still know nothing about and makes us just feel guided and gives us a feeling that even though we have no idea why and what for we exist, there is something out there that does".
Reason I believe it will be said is because it has been repeated every 1000 years, for at least 4 millennia.
I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of religion, because as many correctly point out, it's within our nature.
It is bashing, it was the jump-off point for much merriment about how stupid religious people are. Take that, you stupid Muslims who preserved Euclid for us! Take that, you stupid pantheist Euclid!
I never said a word about religious people and your sarcasm isn't helping ... I'd like a mature discussion with counter-arguments. Also, considering you've replied 15 seconds after I posted, it's impossible you've read the whole thing AND wrote your reply, so please... refer to my actual post (or specific points in it), and don't say sarcastic things about bashing just beacuse I asked kindly not to MISinterpret it as such.
In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women. Current religions will have changed enormously,and be alot smaller then today. There will be prosperity for everyone. People will look back on these times and think they where bad times.Times where people where extremely egocentric and only after personal gain,war hungry and short sighted. And they will feel pitty for the misfortune so manny people have to encounter in their daily lives now.
This is my hope for the future
More specifally about the usa. History is written by winners. For now the usa is a winner but this wont last forever. Then history might be written by people who are not to found of the foreign policys of the usa in the 20-21th century. History might change drastically, it all depends on the perspective:p
Its just an cynical observation. I do think a revolution where women would gain more power everywhere in the world might not be a bad thing, and that it might change the opinnion about the current times People might conclude that the world was run by idiots who where at war all the time.Unable to work together and set aside old vetes. Am not thinking specifically about different historys written by christans, jews, muslims or other religions.
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Let me defend this underelaborated statement a bit, do not mistake it for bashing, treat is as food for thought and an invitation to have counter arguments presented:
Not only do I have the same view, I also have a personal example to keep me away from even considering religion being based on any true fact, and that being sole existence of Scientology. It also craftily compares two religions 2000 years apart (fair enough, considering we're talking of 3000 year people looking at us). If I compare it's (scientology's) conception and evolution (a really interesting but obviously fictional story about Xenu etc., written by a sci-fi writer ADMITTING to wanting to make money through religion, turned into sets of ideological behaviors, mostly written down in easy to understand manner, followed by complete denial of prior existence of that exact founding story and forgetting what it was all based upon - science fiction) to Christnianity, I understand this and other religions had exact same process of evolving no matter who creates them / is the main hero / writes them down (whether it's a sci-fi writer or a bunch of educated fishermen, as we believe)
So to finish off with what people will think in 1000 years:
"Thank [whatever] that Scientology was born 1000 years ago, it gives us a purpose in life, a reason to gather up in our church, takes care of our afterlife of which we still know nothing about and makes us just feel guided and gives us a feeling that even though we have no idea why and what for we exist, there is something out there that does".
Reason I believe it will be said is because it has been repeated every 1000 years, for at least 4 millennia.
I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of religion, because as many correctly point out, it's within our nature.
It is bashing, it was the jump-off point for much merriment about how stupid religious people are. Take that, you stupid Muslims who preserved Euclid for us! Take that, you stupid pantheist Euclid!
I never said a word about religious people and your sarcasm isn't helping ... I'd like a mature discussion with counter-arguments. Also, considering you've replied 15 seconds after I posted, it's impossible you've read the whole thing AND wrote your reply, so please... refer to my actual post (or specific points in it), and don't say sarcastic things about bashing just beacuse I asked kindly not to MISinterpret it as such.
I disagreed with is you saying that post wasn't bashing. I would also point out that Scientology is based on the word of L. Ron Hubbard, whereas mainstream religions are usually based or buttressed on the accounts of people who claimed to have witnessed various events (like the Gospels, or Siddhartha's travels teaching the dharma). So I would say that your comparison is slightly bashy in nature, given that it shows you basically hold all religions to the same low level of respect on their legitimacy regardless of circumstances.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women. Current religions will have changed enormously,and be alot smaller then today. There will be prosperity for everyone. People will look back on these times and think they where bad times.Times where people where extremely egocentric and only after personal gain,war hungry and short sighted. And they will feel pitty for the misfortune so manny people have to encounter in their daily lives now.
This is my hope for the future
More specifally about the usa. History is written by winners. For now the usa is a winner but this wont last forever. Then history might be written by people who are not to found of the foreign policys of the usa in the 20-21th century. History might change drastically, it all depends on the perspective:p
You better hope not, because if America isn't writing it, it sure as hell won't be Europe either. Of course, childish anti-Americanism by definition precludes caring about what kind of history the Russians or the Chinese might create, much less the kind they would write.
On October 21 2012 23:43 decaf wrote: Any intellectual society will always look down at one that hasn't gotten rid of religion yet.
Let me defend this underelaborated statement a bit, do not mistake it for bashing, treat is as food for thought and an invitation to have counter arguments presented:
Not only do I have the same view, I also have a personal example to keep me away from even considering religion being based on any true fact, and that being sole existence of Scientology. It also craftily compares two religions 2000 years apart (fair enough, considering we're talking of 3000 year people looking at us). If I compare it's (scientology's) conception and evolution (a really interesting but obviously fictional story about Xenu etc., written by a sci-fi writer ADMITTING to wanting to make money through religion, turned into sets of ideological behaviors, mostly written down in easy to understand manner, followed by complete denial of prior existence of that exact founding story and forgetting what it was all based upon - science fiction) to Christnianity, I understand this and other religions had exact same process of evolving no matter who creates them / is the main hero / writes them down (whether it's a sci-fi writer or a bunch of educated fishermen, as we believe)
So to finish off with what people will think in 1000 years:
"Thank [whatever] that Scientology was born 1000 years ago, it gives us a purpose in life, a reason to gather up in our church, takes care of our afterlife of which we still know nothing about and makes us just feel guided and gives us a feeling that even though we have no idea why and what for we exist, there is something out there that does".
Reason I believe it will be said is because it has been repeated every 1000 years, for at least 4 millennia.
I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of religion, because as many correctly point out, it's within our nature.
It is bashing, it was the jump-off point for much merriment about how stupid religious people are. Take that, you stupid Muslims who preserved Euclid for us! Take that, you stupid pantheist Euclid!
Islam was the cause of the "Islamic Golden Age" only in so far as it was a unifying force. It's silly to pretend that religion was what allowed Euclid et al to be passed back to Europeans; it was scholars provided for by an empire, and their scholarship was eventually retarded because of Islamic unease with it.
On October 22 2012 03:32 Tarot wrote: Hopefully in 1000 years, humans will be replaced by some sort of genetically engineered or synthetically augmented superior version. I definitely wouldn't want such a emotionally driven, faith dependent, and crutch-seeking species to be having inter-galactic capabilities.
5 million years of evolution, 10,000 years of civilization and in just 1000 more we'll have taken forced evolutionary steps, transcending our human coil?
Edit: Also, so we become the emotionless, cruel bad guysspecies from alien movies that always try to invade Earth somehow. Fitting.
On October 22 2012 03:32 Tarot wrote: Hopefully in 1000 years, humans will be replaced by some sort of genetically engineered or synthetically augmented superior version. I definitely wouldn't want such a emotionally driven, faith dependent, and crutch-seeking species to be having inter-galactic capabilities.
5 million years of evolution, 10,000 years of civilization and in just 1000 more we'll have taken forced evolutionary steps, transcending our human coil?
Edit: Also, so we become the emotionless, cruel bad guysspecies from alien movies that always try to invade Earth somehow. Fitting.
I'm pretty sure human ancestors have been evolving for quite a bit more than five millions years. Regardless, you simply strengthen his point. Life on Earth has had an utterly incredible exponential growth in capability and there's nothing to suggest that exponential growth will stop in the foreseeable future.
Of course, the idea of removing emotions or seems stupid, but the idea of a new "superior" life being created by humans from humans is not.
People have tendency to mostly remember wars. Thus, the best thing you can hope for is to be remembered as "then nothing really interesting happened for 200 years"
post industrial savages or something along those lines because it was expressed by the Vulcan women in star trek enterprise tv series. I think that it depends of your political perspective and nationality but in the future nationality might not matter.
On October 22 2012 01:44 Probe1 wrote: That's pretty fucking bigoted to assume spirituality and common belief equates to stupidity. Even if half of all people who practiced religion were stupid it would still be stereotyping billions of people.
Much more than half the people are stupid or willfully ignorant to ideas that would cause them discomfort. Willful ignorance is the most basic coping strategy and religion is just one the more sophisticated examples of it.
FWIW, I don't think we will be "judged" for it too harshly. The human brain evolved in a very different envirnoment to cope with challenges that were nothing like the ones we're facing now. There's a tiny part of our brain that isn't overadapted to the specific physical and social environment of the past.
We seem to be living at or very near the peak of energy consumption. Even if all energy power plants would be converted to nuclear today, there is only enough Uranium in the whole Earth to last for a 100 years (and this is not even accounting for exponential energy necessity), or so my nuclear physics teacher said. After that, our current living style and all our extrapolated fantasies will be just that, fantasies.
We might go down in an earth-shattering war, or just slowly and quietly dim and shade away, but imho it is a lot more likely to rensemble what it was a 1000 years ago than 'Universities on Mars'.
if people dont have a skewed perspective of history they will probably remember us as the big fuckups that used up all the good resources for nothing and fucked up everything so badly that worse times followed
also: if you assume any kind of big change in the way people live, then the current times will always be looked upon as backward by people in the future, no matter wether this change seems benefitial to us right now
On October 22 2012 06:22 DeepElemBlues wrote: I disagreed with is you saying that post wasn't bashing. I would also point out that Scientology is based on the word of L. Ron Hubbard, whereas mainstream religions are usually based or buttressed on the accounts of people who claimed to have witnessed various events (like the Gospels, or Siddhartha's travels teaching the dharma). So I would say that your comparison is slightly bashy in nature, given that it shows you basically hold all religions to the same low level of respect on their legitimacy regardless of circumstances.
Now that's much better However, I don't question legitimacy or accountability of the original creators, but merely point out the huge difference between what was intended in religion and what it ends up to be after some time. The example of Scientology was merely to show that time is not a factor, whether it's 60 years or 1700-ish years of evolution. I kind of think all religions are converging to a general set of good ideas, despite their very different roots. Hence, I agree with you pointing how different roots different religions have, yet I just think they converge to something quite common to many of them (self development, social productivity, morality, etc.).
On October 22 2012 03:32 Tarot wrote: Hopefully in 1000 years, humans will be replaced by some sort of genetically engineered or synthetically augmented superior version. I definitely wouldn't want such a emotionally driven, faith dependent, and crutch-seeking species to be having inter-galactic capabilities.
5 million years of evolution, 10,000 years of civilization and in just 1000 more we'll have taken forced evolutionary steps, transcending our human coil?
Edit: Also, so we become the emotionless, cruel bad guysspecies from alien movies that always try to invade Earth somehow. Fitting.
Forced evolutionary steps? Probably not.
But stuff like genetic modification and robotic implants for humans is most likely within 1000 years. I wouldn't be surprised if a few thousand years from now (assuming we don't blow ourselves up), the 'human' as we know today will have no place in society except in a zoo.
On October 22 2012 03:32 Tarot wrote: Hopefully in 1000 years, humans will be replaced by some sort of genetically engineered or synthetically augmented superior version. I definitely wouldn't want such a emotionally driven, faith dependent, and crutch-seeking species to be having inter-galactic capabilities.
5 million years of evolution, 10,000 years of civilization and in just 1000 more we'll have taken forced evolutionary steps, transcending our human coil?
Edit: Also, so we become the emotionless, cruel bad guysspecies from alien movies that always try to invade Earth somehow. Fitting.
Forced evolutionary steps? Probably not.
But stuff like genetic modification and robotic implants for humans is most likely within 1000 years. I wouldn't be surprised if a few thousand years from now (assuming we don't blow ourselves up), the 'human' as we know today will have no place in society except in a zoo.
Intelligent posts like this are what I love about TL.
If society hasn't crumbled by then we will probably look back on this time as an era of great technological prowess and many, many wars... Kinda like were looking back on the crusards only much much worse I guess xD.. Lets hope that the future doesn't repeat our mistakes I guess.
On October 22 2012 03:24 HardlyNever wrote: What earth will look like in 1000 years I really can't imagine. There would definitely be some surprising developments, but there would definitely be some constants that are just as surprising.
The one thing that stands out in my mind currently that people 1000 years in the future will look back and /facepalm is all religious belief. Look how we (general society) view ancient religions, and amplify that by like 100. I think it will be a great shame of humanity that we let so many people be scammed and lied to about things that no one could possibly know about (higher powers, life after death, etc.). Seeing a society that has enough understanding of the universe to leave earth orbit, communicate globally at the speed of light, but still having a majority of the world population believe in ancient myths as if they were real will be pretty embarrassing, imo.
I doubt we will look back 1,000 years and facepalm at religion. It's not like we look back and go "those Greeks were so stupid, I can't believe they actually believed in Zeus." We just look back at it as what ancient people did. Why should people 1,000 years in the future be more critical of past civilizations than we are today?
Well, you know, there is a difference between the two scenarios. 1000 years ago the Greeks didn't have a significant knowledge of the cultures 1000 years before then. They didn't say "Oh, all those old religions are amusing myths. Alright, time for church."
A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller, Jr. and is considered one of the best if not the best science fiction novels, deals with this question in a quite interesting manner. Basically, it assumes that humanity is not wise enough, and quite possibly will never be wise enough to handle nuclear weapons and that the world will be devastated by them. The survivors condemn technology and destroy virtually all knowledge resulting in another dark age, but of course some knowledge is saved, hidden, and is passed down by an order started and named after a Jewish electrical engineer called Leibowitz. Of course that's just the introduction to the book, and to give more details would spoil the plot (which you can if you really want to find out on wikipedia).
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
Let's have this discussion in 100 years (not 1.000) again.
The Muslim world will have ceased to exist by then. There will be a more liberal, more open version of the religion, but the insane, restrictive patriarchial society that exists now in many Arabic country will be wiped from the globe.
Arabic women won't take that shit forever, not with the internet being univerally accessible, the USA won't watch the discriminative culture forever and the maniacs will have killed each other.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
Let's have this discussion in 100 years (not 1.000) again.
The Muslim world will have ceased to exist by then. There will be a more liberal, more open version of the religion, but the insane, restrictive patriarchial society that exists now in many Arabic country will be wiped from the globe.
Arabic women won't take that shit forever, not with the internet being univerally accessible, the USA won't watch the discriminative culture forever and the maniacs will have killed each other.
In 1000, the US won't be the police of the world anymore though because of its current economy.
On October 22 2012 06:22 DeepElemBlues wrote: I disagreed with is you saying that post wasn't bashing. I would also point out that Scientology is based on the word of L. Ron Hubbard, whereas mainstream religions are usually based or buttressed on the accounts of people who claimed to have witnessed various events (like the Gospels, or Siddhartha's travels teaching the dharma). So I would say that your comparison is slightly bashy in nature, given that it shows you basically hold all religions to the same low level of respect on their legitimacy regardless of circumstances.
Now that's much better However, I don't question legitimacy or accountability of the original creators, but merely point out the huge difference between what was intended in religion and what it ends up to be after some time. The example of Scientology was merely to show that time is not a factor, whether it's 60 years or 1700-ish years of evolution. I kind of think all religions are converging to a general set of good ideas, despite their very different roots. Hence, I agree with you pointing how different roots different religions have, yet I just think they converge to something quite common to many of them (self development, social productivity, morality, etc.).
That's why the ability for reform of the institution of the religion is so vital for a religion to be healthy. Let's keep Scientology as an example. Would it be possible for a Scientologist to go against official doctrine and try to change it, if that Scientologist and others thought that the organization was not being true to L. Ron Hubbard's "teachings"? No. Religions like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, to a much (much much) lesser degree Islam, all have traditions of reform from within and the creation and spread of new doctrines that claim to be closer to the "true" faith as taught by the founders of that religion. It keeps the religious institution from becoming so hidebound that it stifles the religion.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
its not fair to say they have completely unchanged in 1000 years. the younger, educated sections of many muslim societies arent that different from you and i. give them 50-100 years and they will probably as 'western' as we are now. you only have to look at the strength of religion in our societies 100 years ago to see how much can change in a few generations.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
Let's have this discussion in 100 years (not 1.000) again.
The Muslim world will have ceased to exist by then. There will be a more liberal, more open version of the religion, but the insane, restrictive patriarchial society that exists now in many Arabic country will be wiped from the globe.
Arabic women won't take that shit forever, not with the internet being univerally accessible, the USA won't watch the discriminative culture forever and the maniacs will have killed each other.
In 1000, the US won't be the police of the world anymore though because of its current economy.
Well, I assume that in 2030 the US won't be the world police anymore.
In 1.000 years it will probably be ruled by the roach-people, a China-made human-roach-hybrid that has basic primate intellect, and can work 80-hour-weeks for a good 20 years without requiering medical attention.
On October 22 2012 09:24 Littlemuff wrote: Well if people are able to look back at us in 1000 years I doubt they'll have any problem.
That's such a good point.
Lectems, clay-shards and cave paintings are far more durable than SSD-drives.
Historians and archeologists will have a hell of time getting anything done in a post-digital-age.
1) People won't believe the stuff (and the amounts) we used to eat, and the lifestyles we used to have. They'll see the early 2000s man as a fat lazy moron
2) People will wonder how we could cope with such short lives, and such a limited space to explore.
3) This will be remembered as a period of transition economically. This is the last vestige of the old system, and we're seeing the first signs of a new collaborative system, helped by the emergence of the internet.
On October 22 2012 07:08 Simberto wrote: People have tendency to mostly remember wars. Thus, the best thing you can hope for is to be remembered as "then nothing really interesting happened for 200 years"
Love this post. Although I think there's plenty of room for positive change to fill up future history books.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
Let's have this discussion in 100 years (not 1.000) again.
The Muslim world will have ceased to exist by then. There will be a more liberal, more open version of the religion, but the insane, restrictive patriarchial society that exists now in many Arabic country will be wiped from the globe.
Arabic women won't take that shit forever, not with the internet being univerally accessible, the USA won't watch the discriminative culture forever and the maniacs will have killed each other.
In 100 years the middle east will have run out of oil and since the majority of the nations rely totally on oil exports for income i see the people embracing extremist parties once the economy tanks.
They'll think we were retarded, considering we almost wiped out our entire species in the war of 2020's for no other reason than we were 'too different' from each other.
The Era of Moore's Law. Looking back from 1000 years, the defining characteristic of this period of time would seem to be the exponential improvement of computers, and everything that has been created as a result of that.
One of the largest changes in technology in the past half-century or so, has been the development of computers. There's been major change in societies, communication, capabilities between a pre-computer era and today. And we're sitting right in that transitional period when they were developing.
(Also, think back to 1000 years ago, you don't particularly make big distinctions between the year 950, or 1050. From the perspective of someone 1000 years from now, most of the major development of computers could fit rather well in a single conceptual span of time.)
On October 22 2012 08:59 Gnaix wrote: A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller, Jr. and is considered one of the best if not the best science fiction novels, deals with this question in a quite interesting manner. Basically, it assumes that humanity is not wise enough, and quite possibly will never be wise enough to handle nuclear weapons and that the world will be devastated by them. The survivors condemn technology and destroy virtually all knowledge resulting in another dark age, but of course some knowledge is saved, hidden, and is passed down by an order started and named after a Jewish electrical engineer called Leibowitz. Of course that's just the introduction to the book, and to give more details would spoil the plot (which you can if you really want to find out on wikipedia).
That book is a product of the 60's/cold war paranoia and seems pretty dated nowadays itself.
Anyway most basically all religions will be non-mainstream cult things, and the idea of American exceptionalism which is popular here will be a ridiculous joke. Those seem like easy and non-reachy predictions though.
It's a little bit funny that most people simply name things that they don't like and then breezily predict that they will be reduced to a pathetic level that the poster would find personally amusing right now.
Well, as with any discussion about the future but especially with this one, what we are really talking about is the present. What are the things today that will shape the future? What are the things today that seem important but won't be in the future? What means do we have today for preserving information, and how will that compare to the ways that time has of destroying information?
It is interesting to consider-- if there was some kind of horrible war or disaster, it could be a coinflip as to what would be remembered. I mean, take something like the pyramids. First of all, they are very resilient to the passage of time. A digital society, like ours, can be destroyed as easily as wiping out electricity. Second, they are incredible artificial; their existence is indicative of past culture, and have inherent meaning. You take something like a hard drive, fast forward a thousand years through some dramatic change where our systems of technology are destroyed, and it is as alien as... well, an alien artifact.
But let's just say there isn't a wild war or disaster. This is just really hard to imagine. Because that is dependent on knowing what will develop in the next few years, and that is just impossible. Consider someone (possibly like yourself) just 20 years ago; could you have, practically, imagined how connected you are with everyone today. When I post this, people from all over the world will instantly have ability to read what I've written, view any high quality pictures/videos I might have taken only seconds earlier, and proceed to send it to anyone they might know on the other side of the world. People can create virtual worlds that are startlingly realistic, and you can experience it on a device that you keep in your room. Just 20 years ago, that was pretty difficult to imagine. Go back a hundred, and the idea that people would travel around at 60 miles an hour to get to something as everyday as work was unthought of. It just kind of blows my mind to consider. I have no idea what might happen in the next 10 years, let alone the next 100, completely let alone the next thousand, in terms of scientific and technological advances.
And that's leaving alone the idea that we would leave Earth and populate some other planet or thing.
On October 22 2012 03:24 HardlyNever wrote: What earth will look like in 1000 years I really can't imagine. There would definitely be some surprising developments, but there would definitely be some constants that are just as surprising.
The one thing that stands out in my mind currently that people 1000 years in the future will look back and /facepalm is all religious belief. Look how we (general society) view ancient religions, and amplify that by like 100. I think it will be a great shame of humanity that we let so many people be scammed and lied to about things that no one could possibly know about (higher powers, life after death, etc.). Seeing a society that has enough understanding of the universe to leave earth orbit, communicate globally at the speed of light, but still having a majority of the world population believe in ancient myths as if they were real will be pretty embarrassing, imo.
I doubt we will look back 1,000 years and facepalm at religion. It's not like we look back and go "those Greeks were so stupid, I can't believe they actually believed in Zeus." We just look back at it as what ancient people did. Why should people 1,000 years in the future be more critical of past civilizations than we are today?
Well, you know, there is a difference between the two scenarios. 1000 years ago the Greeks didn't have a significant knowledge of the cultures 1000 years before then. They didn't say "Oh, all those old religions are amusing myths. Alright, time for church." Now we do.
Excellent point. I feel like a lot of religious belief nowadays is sort of like... religious inertia. It's gone from a spiritual to cultural to social thing. Maybe a political one as well. One thing that is for sure, if there is any religion a 1000 years from now, it will not resemble anything we have today. A lot of religion in the past was the whole "God of the Gaps" thing, where if past peoples couldn't explain something, it was god. That still happens to a point, today, especially with the cosmos and human origin. I think that religion would be more:
A) Personal. Like introspection into your on consciousness; even the most zealous atheist has, or at least should, admit that there are parts of your mind that are not readily available in everyday means. There's a reason that meditation and drugs have such a draw; you can find things out about yourself or your environment that you can't otherwise. There isn't really anything supernatural about that, it's just how humans are. I'm a complete atheist and I accept this.
B) Einsteinan. He used the phrase "god" to describe the world around him that he didn't understand. It was like the god of the gaps, but instead of taking ignorance for granted, he tried to find alternative means. God was just this conceptual curiosity that made the universe have such appeal.
On October 22 2012 06:22 Rassy wrote: In 1000 years the world will be united and run by women.
Sounds hellish.
Anyway you people think the muslim world will suddenly give up religion? They've hardly changed in the past 1000 years and they won't change much in the coming 1000 years.Look at the current situation with muslim brotherhood moving into power in Egypt etc middle east is becoming more religious not less.
Let's have this discussion in 100 years (not 1.000) again.
The Muslim world will have ceased to exist by then. There will be a more liberal, more open version of the religion, but the insane, restrictive patriarchial society that exists now in many Arabic country will be wiped from the globe.
Arabic women won't take that shit forever, not with the internet being univerally accessible, the USA won't watch the discriminative culture forever and the maniacs will have killed each other.
In 1000, the US won't be the police of the world anymore though because of its current economy.
Well, I assume that in 2030 the US won't be the world police anymore.
In 1.000 years it will probably be ruled by the roach-people, a China-made human-roach-hybrid that has basic primate intellect, and can work 80-hour-weeks for a good 20 years without requiering medical attention.
On October 22 2012 14:17 GoldforGolden wrote: let's just hope they will find us stupid and selfish. that would mean human society has improved
+1
As a student of history there are no longer any ages I look over with glossy eyed stupor, every age was inefficient, stupid and seflish. Just some ages more bearable then others (Medieval ages were like studying paint drying...)
This one is no different, so much waste, greed and violence. So far from an advanced civilization but at least its getting closer.
Very interesting to consider. Taking the example of the powers of civilisations 1000 years ago, we can guess:
1) Religion will continue to be sidelined. I think few people would deny that the majority of the population back then was religious because a) everyone else was, and b) because you get killed if you weren't the correct religion. People above make good points about the 'God of the gaps' (wizard did it), and it was an easy way to explain things. A little wonder has gone from the world now that people put their faith in science - the average person probably doesn't understand much more about their world or the things that surround them but we're happy to assume 'them scientists' know, and that's good enough for us.
2) The countries on top now will not be on top for a millenium. People will look back and treat the notion of American exceptionalism the same way we treat Hitler's assertions his reich would last 1000 years, or the Caliphate saying it would take over the entire world, or the Romans saying their Empire would last forever. Countries on top in the year 1000 - the Fatimid dynasty (the original Caliphate having already begun disintegration), the Byzantine Empire (kinda...) and the Song dynasty in China. All gone, long gone. Now, nations existing as legal entities and being treated as semi-permanent things, and people identifying themselves more as a nationality rather than a tribal entity does change things. You are an american, I am a Brit etc instead of I am a Roman, or an Arab, or a Frank. Of course, racial identity still exists, but as time passes I think this will mean less and less as skin colour means less and less. I think many countries will continue to exists in one form or another, and the map will change less drastically. Instead of conquest we will find countries absorb each other or disintegrate as politicians put forth arguments, instead of troops annexing territory and resources. Countries and nations will appear and disappear at a slower rate than before in history.
3) On a more recent scale, and ever since the Industrial Revolution where innovation for it's own sake became something to be desired, our lives will change at a rapid pace as everyday life is shaped around us and our comforts. For centuries we obeyed the rising sun, the seasons, the paths that we trod to reach the fields or farms or factories where food and goods were made. Now we can work at any hour, remotely, conferencing with people the world away in real time, doing things unimaginable even a decade ago. The world will move more towards what is comfortable for the masses as goods are marketed towards being wanted rather than needed (bigger tv, more comfy chair, bigger portions of food etc). Honestly I think brick and mortar's days are numbered and many shops will become entirely digital - malls and shopping arcades will become vacant as more companies move towards the Amazon model - a few giant warehouses never seen far away from the people who sit at home to click a button and have it delivered. The strange model of having a mall move into the area and leech away the mom-and-pop shops of the last fifty years will end and might even see a reverse, as small 'authentic' towns are rebuilt to attract tourism, reclamation projects are started to remove many of the stores that are no longer needed. But that would only be over the next century, I have no idea what to expect beyond that.
On October 21 2012 23:31 LeroyJenkem wrote: I think they will be amazed at how the people let themselves become enslaved to a society that makes them spend their entire lives working just so they can in return recieve a piece of paper that represents something that doesnt even exist.
I believe 1000 years from now, a monetary society wont exist, and would be looked upon as one of mankinds worst mistakes.
Worst mistake? Lol, let's see if you have a better idea.
I think we will be remembered for the industrial revolution, nuclear research, and space flight. The same way we remember the first uses of cuneiform in Sumer.
On October 21 2012 23:31 LeroyJenkem wrote: I think they will be amazed at how the people let themselves become enslaved to a society that makes them spend their entire lives working just so they can in return recieve a piece of paper that represents something that doesnt even exist.
I believe 1000 years from now, a monetary society wont exist, and would be looked upon as one of mankinds worst mistakes.
Worst mistake? Lol, let's see if you have a better idea.
I think we will be remembered for the industrial revolution, nuclear research, and space flight. The same way we remember the first uses of cuneiform in Sumer.
Money will not cease to exist in 1000 years. It will be entirely digital and likely a unified global currency (as will the economy be, probably) but it will still exist. Ways of valuing labour and tying it to some form or recompense has existed for far longer than 1000 years and will still continue to exist.
I like the idea of us being a transitional period, personally, and we will be seen as the real Middle Ages, where societies and mankind as a whole moved beyond the primary limitations of the previous world (lack of resources, light, medicine, disease, food) and into....whatever we become in the future. Provided we don't get any stupid rogue states, of course.
On October 21 2012 23:31 LeroyJenkem wrote: I think they will be amazed at how the people let themselves become enslaved to a society that makes them spend their entire lives working just so they can in return recieve a piece of paper that represents something that doesnt even exist.
I believe 1000 years from now, a monetary society wont exist, and would be looked upon as one of mankinds worst mistakes.
Worst mistake? Lol, let's see if you have a better idea.
I think we will be remembered for the industrial revolution, nuclear research, and space flight. The same way we remember the first uses of cuneiform in Sumer.
Money will not cease to exist in 1000 years. It will be entirely digital and likely a unified global currency (as will the economy be, probably) but it will still exist. Ways of valuing labour and tying it to some form or recompense has existed for far longer than 1000 years and will still continue to exist.
I like the idea of us being a transitional period, personally, and we will be seen as the real Middle Ages, where societies and mankind as a whole moved beyond the primary limitations of the previous world (lack of resources, light, medicine, disease, food) and into....whatever we become in the future. Provided we don't get any stupid rogue states, of course.
i think its more likely that well have gone extinct/society will crumble if the world gets to a point where theres a unified global currency and weve solved resource problems and all that there wont be any rogue states because then we can jsut cut them off
i mean there arent really many countries now that are going against the flow of the rest of the world im pretty sure in 1000 years theyll all have given up and gone the easier route
I'm just sad that I live in an age where religion still have a big place in human life. Whatever the future for mankind looks like for their sake, I hope they have got ridden of religion in some way.
I wish humans could just accept that we know nothing about "the big picture" and can't do anything more than living our lives in best possible way and explore the reality we live in.
To answer the OP. I think they will look back at the early technological advances of mankind and shake their heads on how fast we consumed the resources of earth with the technology we have.
Too big portion of humans are too stupid to be dealing with the technology we have at our hands.
I wish humans could just accept that we know nothing about "the big picture" and can't do anything more than living our lives in best possible way and explore the reality we live in.
But... we do know quite a lot about the big picture...?
The long term future of humanity holds two very extreme possibilties: It will either be (near)-extinction or ecstasy.
The first one seems by far the most likely scenario. The last hundred years have been a century-long flirt with apocalypse. And although the clearly visible threat of the Cold War is behind us, the planet is still stacked with nuclear weapons and the majority of all humans on earth still buy into some form of ideological extremism (not just religious, but also extreme forms of nationalism or near-religious believe in political/economical dogma). This remains a recipe for disaster, especially since it's unlikely that nuclear weapons will remain the pinnacle of 'big booms'. Theoretical physics holds promises of far more powerful ways of generating energy and with our current mindset, the first thing we will do is make a big fucking bomb out of it. So the odds of us destroying ourselves that way seems fairly likely if we keep up the current game. Like Einstein said:"We need a new way of thinking if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels".
Now if we somehow navigate this very narrow neck of cultural crisis then the future holds infinite promise: complete elimination of resource limitations, nano-technology, virtual realities, star-flight, redesigning of our biological matrix, man-machine symbiosis, immortality, artificial intelligence, post-humanism and many things we cannot even currently imagine. If we can get our act together, godhood is right within our reach. So to answer the question: if we survive the coming centuries reasonably intact, I don't think the question has an answer as the future humans will not 'think' in a way that is even conceivable to us. For all we know they are all hooked up as a group-mind to an infinitely fast quantum-computer living out every hedonistic fantasy at the speed of light. Who knows? The only thing we can be fairly certain about is that they will be nothing like us.
So...lets not go extinct please? It's a small journey from monkey-hood to star-flight and it would be terrible embarrassing to be the generation that 'dropped the ball.'
Science is simply a model of best fit of all the occurrences we observe, somewhat similar to how religion was looked at a millennia or more ago. I would take a gander that the next millennia will either replace or shift science into something unrecognisable to us today.
I would say that a millennia from now, the general populace will treat us (21st century beings) like how most of our secular society treat the past millennia. They will think our "model of best fit" was ridiculous just like how we think the past's "model of best fit" was irrational, they will think that as well.
First off, this thread is hilarious and ridiculous and funny, anyone who is trying to answer it i almost want to say why?
lol my problem is obviously with the question, because it implies that any of us know what's gonna happen in the next 1000 years. 1000 years ago was pre dark ages , wtf we will probably be far into space in the next 1000 years , but i can't even say that for certain cause humanity might just die!
In other words , hidden in the OP question is "what will happen in the future (From the us perspective)"
I would much rather see the users of teamliquid discuss what's gonna happen in the next 10 - 20 years, as i think that is the scale that TL could drop hella knowledge.
for now i'm just trying to get through tomorrow.
GL EVERYBODY
also i want to point out that our acceleration is going to decrease over the next periods, as we are at k/2 halfway to our saturation point (moores law only applied to the last 1000 years, while our acceleration was going up)
On October 22 2012 11:22 DeepElemBlues wrote: It's a little bit funny that most people simply name things that they don't like and then breezily predict that they will be reduced to a pathetic level that the poster would find personally amusing right now.
DeepElemBlues, this is the wisest thing you have ever said!
Interesting question, but not really. What happens in the future is beyond our control. Just think of how we think of cavemen now. Shrug a shoulder, and that's it.
I wish humans could just accept that we know nothing about "the big picture" and can't do anything more than living our lives in best possible way and explore the reality we live in.
But... we do know quite a lot about the big picture...?
With the "big picture" I mean "why is there a universe or anything for that matter in the first place". More of a philosphical question rather than a scientific.
I'm not talking about the explanation of how the universe was born from big bang, the planets, evolution, mankind etc. There are some questions that goes beyond science and I am perfectly fine with, most probably, never finding out the answer to them (if there is such a thing as a final/good answer).
But a lot of people in this world are not happy with that, and instead of being content of what we know about life, exploring and having constructive/fun/meaningful discussions on what more there can be to existence that we yet don't know about they treat fairy tales as facts.
It's one thing to be open minded about that their might be something to life/existence that is more than we will ever find out by scientific research but a whole different story to treat speculations as pure evidence/fact.
1,000 years from now, the world will look back upon our time and wonder how humans could possibly have misunderstood and hated each other as much as we currently do--all while we zap aliens with our laser guns.
Why hasn't this been posted yet ? http://pbfcomics.com/209/ I must have missed it it's been 7 pages, but as a safety...
I have 2 guesses
1) Just like we have a clear idea of what's been happening the past few centuries since it's been very well documented, people won't have a very much altered view of our present, the common guy will have a vague idea around which century appeared the computer, some medical innovations and I think it's about it...
2) Historians all get Historian flue and die in horrible pain, or ALIENS Call Of Duty is probably the most present media in term of number, and dvds, hard drive and other data storage could be conserved better than paper, also it's present in the common home (just like what we found from 1000 years ago and earlier) Anything else that's found won't tell them call of duty is just a video game, might even hint them as being an accurate representation of the time since a lot of the media is also about politics and conflicts.
If and I am saying a pretty BIG IF here, Humanity survives for 1000 more years we won't be on Earth anymore, I am pretty sure we will have mined/extracted everything and have an unlivable atmosphere. Though the humans will look back and hopefully learn from out greed and reliance on material objects and use their collective will to explore strange to worlds seek out new life and new civilizations and to boldly go where no man has gone before.
For people talking about future society looking down on us, I think this quote from Isaac Newton is appropriate: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
I don't see why people of the future or us today should look down upon any society before us. You may not agree with some of the actions or thoughts of the time, but you have the advantage of having their experiences and knowledge added to your own. If you were born during those time periods, you would not be magically different from those people.
They'll think of us as mindless meatbags and wouldn't have believed they descended/were created/merged/etc. from them if it weren't for the fact that ever since synthesis day every bit of information has been stored and is 100% accurate, and therefore know the past perfectly.
A comedian group will make a story about someone in the middle east, but this time it's not about Jezus/Bryan. It will have a famous scene which will be quoted and laughed at for generations to come with the title: "What have the Americans ever done for us"
Doubt we'll be pictured nicely, but then again there is some episodes in history which are pretty appalling. Every generation looks down upon the previous one, just like we look down upon the dark ages, hitler, etc, etc.
Given the average knowledge of medieval times today's population can boast, I fear in 1000 years they won't be thinking about us at all. They'll only think about themselves.
On October 21 2012 23:41 Hesmyrr wrote: Predicting 100 years into future is outrageously difficult, even guessing the societal changes that occur within 10 years would be quite an challenge to say the list. I'd say making statements pertaining to 1000 years after is downright impossible.
Okey Im sorry but I can not help but laugh at one dumb spelling mistake you made lol.
As for what people will think. I think they will probabbly just wonder why hair used to grow on us ^^
If you think you've got a good idea of what people will think and act like in 30 years, you're almost certainly mistaken. And if you think you've got even the vaguest idea of what people will think and act like in 1000 years, you're delusional. The fact of the matter is, no one has any clue, nor has anyone any reliable basis whatsoever on which to speculate about such a ridiculously long stretch of time. This is one of those questions that the only honest answer to is: "Hell if I know."
Like most futurists, we're all playing either "wouldn't it be cool if..." or "let's pretend [insert current trend] will still be relevant in X years."
They will look back and be amazed by Flash, Boxer and Jaedong and note that after the strong showing of Fruitdealer, there wasn't much to talk about other then the Chinese-French invasion of the second great Titicaca empire back in 2459.
On October 22 2012 07:08 Simberto wrote: People have tendency to mostly remember wars. Thus, the best thing you can hope for is to be remembered as "then nothing really interesting happened for 200 years"
Well, if you dig a bit in the recent history you will see alot, ALOT of wars, The Ruwanda genocide, the Cambodian genocide, the War in Sierra Leone's (and all of those other countries involved in the Blood Diamond thingie) the WWII, the WWI, the Russian Genocide agains't the Jews, the Irak and Afghanistán wars, the Russian invasion to Georgia, the Arab Spring and the Syrian revolution (with Facebook and youtube playing a big role in it), the Cold War, etc etc etc
And in a most peaceful way we have obviously the digital revolution, the decoding of the Human Genoma, all of those extra solar planets that are discovered in an almost daily basis, the Global warming, the contamination and destruction of our natural resources, the way the sub-saharan, saharan, and middle east countries use their subterranean water reserves and why they aren't thinking in the future when they end waterless, the actual global economic recession, the feeling of the Overpopulation even when it´s not a real worry, and how in ~20 years when we step in MOTHERFUCKING MARS.
The way i think they will see us is how we are in the edge of a real fucking big revolution in how we comunicate (just look at thins forum, when i can comunicate with you even when you are +1000 kms away from me in an almost instantaneous manner), how our new computers help us to understand the world that is around us and warn us about the challenges we face that make us fear about our future; Global warning, the water problems in Saharan, Sub-saharan Countries and middle east, the contamination and the several amount of species going extinct, and in thousand years for sure they will be astonished of how one single country managed to soak the 25% of all the earth resources.
Well that's how i think they will see us, still having wars between each other, Autoritarian goverments falling in horrid wars but still going forward at huge steps with the digital and genetic revolutions while there are efforts to help the 3world countries to develop and trying to avoid damaging the ecosystems even further.
srry if i made gramatical errors, english is not my first languaje and doing my best to speak it propelly
From a philosophical view it really doesn't matter. The people from the future might reflect on us from a totally practical perspective, if what I imagine 1000 years of development proves to be true. Society develops so much now, especially after the 1900s. Whatever technological advances we have achieved for 2000 years, 50 BC to 1950, does not even count for half of what we have achieved since then. To be honest, I shudder at the thought of what could be possible in as little as 5-10 years from now. Specifically, I've been following developments in genetics, transhumanism, and space missions. Those are the most interesting thing for me outside philosophy. Think about Mars and the Curiosity mission. How massive would it be if we find life there, something which I hope happens. By 3012, people or whatever living organisms then capable of reflecting on the past would think of our generation in the same way that we think of the time when Earth was just ball of rocks and magma waiting to cool - just a point in the infinite speck of time. I doubt that they will be even talking about our "civilization" nor our "intelligence".
We will be remembered as struggling, but a step away from enlightenment at the same time. If you look around us, you don't have to look hard like 10-20 years ago, by now it became obvious, things are going to converge soon. Go watch some TED videos, check the news, read some scientific articles and SF(!), talk to some people.
We have the potential to make everything 'futuristic/advanced', but our organization/management/politics are hideous - it's really really really bad. It might not seem like that, it's just that, they're much better than even just 50 years ago. If we could pool everything together and organize everything, it doesn't take a visionary to imagine what would happen. Let me tell you that we could make 90% things from SF movies possible for common people even now, or soon, from the technological point of view, and most of it wouldn't even cost much or be difficult to develop. It just takes a few people to jump-start it and get some exposure and in 1 year 15% of people will be using it, and next year a lot more. As for the mindset/politics/relations/way of thinking, we need to mature (it's a process, but globalization/internet is helping it), and then it'll start happening on it's own - unless, as I said, someone jump-starts things and catalyzes it to make it appear sooner, a grand leader/visionary (a damned lucky person at that) - both for technology and mindset.
I feel funny living in the current world with all the struggling, knowing this potential, everywhere I look I see what can be easily achieved in the future. Also, there's no way we're going to go extinct.
On October 23 2012 00:04 AUFKLARUNG wrote: From a philosophical view it really doesn't matter. The people from the future might reflect on us from a totally practical perspective, if what I imagine 1000 years of development proves to be true. Society develops so much now, especially after the 1900s. Whatever technological advances we have achieved for 2000 years, 50 BC to 1950, does not even count for half of what we have achieved since then. To be honest, I shudder at the thought of what could be possible in as little as 5-10 years from now. Specifically, I've been following developments in genetics, transhumanism, and space missions. Those are the most interesting thing for me outside philosophy. Think about Mars and the Curiosity mission. How massive would it be if we find life there, something which I hope happens. By 3012, people or whatever living organisms then capable of reflecting on the past would think of our generation in the same way that we think of the time when Earth was just ball of rocks and magma waiting to cool - just a point in the infinite speck of time. I doubt that they will be even talking about our "civilization" nor our "intelligence".
On October 23 2012 00:04 AUFKLARUNG wrote: From a philosophical view it really doesn't matter. The people from the future might reflect on us from a totally practical perspective, if what I imagine 1000 years of development proves to be true. Society develops so much now, especially after the 1900s. Whatever technological advances we have achieved for 2000 years, 50 BC to 1950, does not even count for half of what we have achieved since then. To be honest, I shudder at the thought of what could be possible in as little as 5-10 years from now. Specifically, I've been following developments in genetics, transhumanism, and space missions. Those are the most interesting thing for me outside philosophy. Think about Mars and the Curiosity mission. How massive would it be if we find life there, something which I hope happens. By 3012, people or whatever living organisms then capable of reflecting on the past would think of our generation in the same way that we think of the time when Earth was just ball of rocks and magma waiting to cool - just a point in the infinite speck of time. I doubt that they will be even talking about our "civilization" nor our "intelligence".
herp* mr.-know-it-all *derp
Honestly, how old are you?
His post contains a reasoned opinion, and it's relevant to the topic at hand. There's no need to vent your insecurities just because you think he's taking a "know-it-all" tone. And even if you just have to vent them, there are much more constructive ways than a goddamn "herp-derp" post. I mean hell.
On October 22 2012 06:22 DeepElemBlues wrote: I disagreed with is you saying that post wasn't bashing. I would also point out that Scientology is based on the word of L. Ron Hubbard, whereas mainstream religions are usually based or buttressed on the accounts of people who claimed to have witnessed various events (like the Gospels, or Siddhartha's travels teaching the dharma). So I would say that your comparison is slightly bashy in nature, given that it shows you basically hold all religions to the same low level of respect on their legitimacy regardless of circumstances.
Now that's much better However, I don't question legitimacy or accountability of the original creators, but merely point out the huge difference between what was intended in religion and what it ends up to be after some time. The example of Scientology was merely to show that time is not a factor, whether it's 60 years or 1700-ish years of evolution. I kind of think all religions are converging to a general set of good ideas, despite their very different roots. Hence, I agree with you pointing how different roots different religions have, yet I just think they converge to something quite common to many of them (self development, social productivity, morality, etc.).
That's why the ability for reform of the institution of the religion is so vital for a religion to be healthy. Let's keep Scientology as an example. Would it be possible for a Scientologist to go against official doctrine and try to change it, if that Scientologist and others thought that the organization was not being true to L. Ron Hubbard's "teachings"? No. Religions like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, to a much (much much) lesser degree Islam, all have traditions of reform from within and the creation and spread of new doctrines that claim to be closer to the "true" faith as taught by the founders of that religion. It keeps the religious institution from becoming so hidebound that it stifles the religion.
But that's just what I opened my first post here with. Listen to interviews of Scientologists, especially ones introducing the subject of background story (Xenu, and all the rest of the story invented by L Ron Hubbard). Those interviewees ('senior' Scientologists) deny it, saying they never heard of such nonsense (should you require links, i'd be happy to supply them), which apperaed to me as similar to Christianity (just to mention one example) denying that the world was created in 7 days (which was widely believed true during first 5 or more centuries of its existence and by original writers, of course), calling it now to be a metaphore, once science gave evidence about how planets are created (also look at : abraham living 700 years, the plagues of Egypt, red sea crossing by Moses, etc.) . That's why I compare those, saying those religions converge to a very similar (ultimately identical? time will show) set of ideas, despite much varied roots.
They'll think "Damn, wish they had paid a little more attention to Asteroid X-5000123...", as they huddle together in their underground bunker fending off the molemen and searching for a cure for the newest strain of the zombie virus.
On October 21 2012 23:05 marttorn wrote: I'm not sure if they'll remember us or think anything about us, particularly. There's nothing that makes our age stand out very much in the bigger picture of things. Aside from the massive technological leaps in the 20th century and before, I don't see anything that makes our relative time very noteworthy. There's important things happening all the time, of course, but I'm sure there were hugely important things going on in the 1010's that we don't remember, either.
You should add more content to the OP, by the way :o
Nothing, it will just be looked over with the wars. Death of Osama... etc. Recession.... but thats it.. unless another drastic thing occurs... but... till then. 1000 years from now, it would just be how we view humans 1000 years ago, primitive, but with computers.
As for my opinion, in 1000 years we'll have colonies on the moon, Mars, and probably several of the moons of Jupiter. Nation-states will still exist and will have autonomy over their territory on Earth, but everything in space will be (more or less) a global venture.
People will look down on us because it's human nature to imagine the people of the past as being brutish and stupid. Of course the people of 1000 years ago that we look down on today never made murder factories like the Nazis and stuff like that. Hopefully the people of the year 3012 won't have something even worse to point to to say, "see, the people of the 20th-21st centuries weren't as murderous as us!"
Also, robots will run on alcohol, and the mutants will not be allowed to leave their sewer home.
And no one will be racist, except against those damn aliens from Tau Omega VII. Damn lizards want to steal our asteroids, do they?!
On October 24 2012 01:46 DeepElemBlues wrote: As for my opinion, in 1000 years we'll have colonies on the moon, Mars, and probably several of the moons of Jupiter. Nation-states will still exist and will have autonomy over their territory on Earth, but everything in space will be (more or less) a global venture.
People will look down on us because it's human nature to imagine the people of the past as being brutish and stupid. Of course the people of 1000 years ago that we look down on today never made murder factories like the Nazis and stuff like that. Hopefully the people of the year 3012 won't have something even worse to point to to say, "see, the people of the 20th-21st centuries weren't as murderous as us!"
Also, robots will run on alcohol, and the mutants will not be allowed to leave their sewer home.
And no one will be racist, except against those damn aliens from Tau Omega VII. Damn lizards want to steal our asteroids, do they?!
If you want to go properly future tech I don't see why colonies on planets are necessary, its possible that at that time we could work completely in space, we grow crops in space and just use planets to mine from. Maybe use earth would just be one big nature reserve, who knows, or maybe an underclass or privileged elite will be the only ones living on earth (depending on whether its seen as preferable).
It's possible an ice age may force us off earth, or at least drastically halt progress, so who knows, maybe they will look back will envy at our time of 'bliss'.
Frankly its impossible to predict, and 1000 years isn't a long time in terms of human development, mindsets have lasted longer. What tends to change us as a society is shifts in technology or societal structure / beliefs (formally - religion), which is why we see such a huge shift in the current generation and how they think, they essentially live in a much bigger world where communicating with friends across the planet could be an every day occurrence, and news reaches us almost at the speed of light (or at least at the speed someone on scene can type).
There may well be another big shift in terms of development but you can't predict it, at least not something that could occur in 100+ years, try predicting the internet before computers, not going to happen. The only other thing that is possible, but hopefully not likely is society, or at least western society could collapse. It happened to the Romans and every other major society before us so there is no reason why it couldn't, and it wouldn't be a fast process either, whilst the central empire of the Romans collapsed relatively quickly, life continued for normal folk for a long time as the Barbarians weren't interested in destroying anything or maintaining anything so things just slowly withered.
So really I think its only safe to say that there will be change, whether radical increase in population, or drastic drop offs. Technological leaps, or crashes caused by unforeseen disasters. Things could also remain stable, a few ups and downs but a general upward trend over time. There's simply no way to predict it.
I think this time will be viewed as an emerging peace in the world western world that was since unprecedented. Think about it. During the Ancient times the Gauls, Germanic peoples and Romans went at it, during the early middle ages (aka dark ages) and feudal age lords were constantly fighting, during the renaissance there was much conflict and tension, particularly between Britain and Spain, and during the enlightenment there was a semi-global war waged in the Americas. Onto Napoleonic times, where warfare was waged across western Europe, and then we moved onto WW I and WW II. After WW II there were some proxy wars associated with tension in the western world (US and USSR), but now the EU is a stable political body, the US and EU are on good terms, and there appears to be a period of peace and tranquillity throughout the western world. I think this will be seen as a very peaceful time for the west indeed.
On October 23 2012 00:04 AUFKLARUNG wrote: From a philosophical view it really doesn't matter. The people from the future might reflect on us from a totally practical perspective, if what I imagine 1000 years of development proves to be true. Society develops so much now, especially after the 1900s. Whatever technological advances we have achieved for 2000 years, 50 BC to 1950, does not even count for half of what we have achieved since then. To be honest, I shudder at the thought of what could be possible in as little as 5-10 years from now. Specifically, I've been following developments in genetics, transhumanism, and space missions. Those are the most interesting thing for me outside philosophy. Think about Mars and the Curiosity mission. How massive would it be if we find life there, something which I hope happens. By 3012, people or whatever living organisms then capable of reflecting on the past would think of our generation in the same way that we think of the time when Earth was just ball of rocks and magma waiting to cool - just a point in the infinite speck of time. I doubt that they will be even talking about our "civilization" nor our "intelligence".
You are assuming that the amount of knowledge that we can achieve is limitless. Sooner or latter it will stagnate and it happening in the next 1000 is not that unlikely (or we could just end up killing each other).
I would say given how interconnected the world is today, how crowded it is with people, how fragile our systems of production and credit are, how quickly we can outstrip our resources, and how easily we can destroy ourselves, it's more imperative than ever to find a way to practice morality.
I would say it's the responsibility of rational and compassionate people to find ways to help people be more rational and compassionate. I would say broadsiding a person's worldview is a rather short-sighted way to guide them to rationality and compassion. You need to speak to people in a language they understand, and use symbols that hold meaning for them.
There's a lot of threads talking about how useless the arts are, and that they serve no purpose. And there's a lot of threads talking about how stupid religion is, and that it's ignorant and destructive. Say what you will, but art and religion are nothing if not ways to speak to people through powerful symbols. Even rationalist have their symbols.
The question is not whether art and religion are bad or good bad, but how to make the best use of them.
Regarding the OP, there are 4 things which, personally, I believe will still be true 1000 years from now:
(Please excuse my paraphrase.)
1. There will be change. 2. There will be suffering. 3. Suffering will exist where there is clinging to impermanent things. 4. Suffering will cease where clinging to to impermanent things ceases.
1. There will be change. 2. There will be suffering. 3. Suffering will exist where there is clinging to impermanent things. 4. Suffering will cease where clinging to to impermanent things ceases.
1. Life is impermanent 2. We are genetically coded to cling to (most importantly our) life (it's the most basic rule of instinct, one that can't be overridden - or else evolution stops and population dies, obviously, survival is crucial for life to exist)
combining 1 and 2 with your ideas (or whoever you cited) it seems that life implies suffering, which I don't agree with.
So either that implication is true or your 3rd point is invalid. Let's hope it is, or we're truly miserable.
2. We are genetically coded to cling to (most importantly our) life (it's the most basic rule of instinct, one that can't be overridden - or else evolution stops and population dies, obviously, survival is crucial for life to exist)
This is too general. The only thing needed is to survive long enough to procreate. Survival after that is optional.
On October 25 2012 01:01 Simberto wrote: 2. We are genetically coded to cling to (most importantly our) life (it's the most basic rule of instinct, one that can't be overridden - or else evolution stops and population dies, obviously, survival is crucial for life to exist)
This is too general. The only thing needed is to survive long enough to procreate. Survival after that is optional.
Yes, that's what I was talking about obviously, sorry if I was too vague with it : )
they will notice that we fucked up the planet by wasting resources.
Theyll wonder how stupid we were to go to starbucks, get a waxed carboard glass with another carboard ring no to burn the fingers and then throw it away after a single use.
I believe what people will think about us in the far future will be dependent on to what degree the future is utopian or dystopian. It also depends on what you believe matters in history. So I assume we are talking about history in the context of: culture, technology, and progressiveness.
If the future is utopian then they will look back and say that the end of the cold war and beginning of the age of information was the beginning of a golden age of technological advancement. Where, for the first time, we sought to fundamentally understand the world around us and succeeded. If the future is utopian then they may look back at our present and say that this is the period of time where we began to become humanist rather than purely nationalist.
If something awful (hah) happens and the future becomes dystopian one then in 1000 years we will probably be forgotten.
They will think of us as immoral barbarians like we think of the poeple 1k years ago. We still kill people, eat animals (and do other stuff with them), fight wars, have huge inequalities.