It's both capable and willing, the problem is that not everyone agrees with the solutions being used. And so they say "we're doing it wrong" instead of "I think we're doing it wrong."
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
125 points (88.8% liked)
Asklemmy
47698 readers
682 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Human civilizations have only been around for a couple thousand years. That's nothing.
edit: by this I mean to say that it's too soon to make sweeping generalizations about what human social organizations can or cannot do. A commenter downstream rightly points out that "civilization" isn't a well-defined term in this context, although I was thinking of it as a shorthand term for the various human political, commercial, cultural, etc. organizations of a given era. My contention is that because recorded history is only a couple of thousand years old, we do not have enough information about what the various components of "civilization" are capable of, especially when they are overlapping, interacting, and meeting a novel challenge.
btw I tried reading this book but got bored halfway through, and I watched the first episode and wasn't that impressed either. I read the wikipedia summary and it's got some neat ideas, though.
Human civilizations have only been around for a couple thousand years.
At least four thousand, but I agree with the rest of your comment.
load more comments
(8 replies)
I disagree. "No longer" implies we were ever capable
Good catch, and I agree.
No problem is ever solved no solution has ever been without further problems.
This is indicative of an ever expanding problem-solution matrix of entropy, meaning we're neither solving issues nor creating problems, we're just creating more complex landscapes to navigate.
This is why Buddhist monks and high tech computerized supply chains can both legitimately be said to have the answers we need, even though they're from radically different ends of this entropy.
It's also why they're both wrong and lying to themselves.
We are both the problem and the solution.
We can but the solver won't come from the mainstream, it'll come from the edge. One of those insane weirdos that everybody knows is badwrong.
So be kind to weirdos.
The normies you can safely pound to paste tho.
Yeah, I'd agree, and why I hope AGI is a thing soon, so the AI(s) can take over managing us.
We are capable if we stop being selfish and go vegan