The Sixth Extinction is happening right now.

[trekkiedane]

"Many people are just beginning to understand the full extent of these problems in terms of land-clearing, degradation of rivers, pest species and overfishing," says Professor Kingsford. "Climate change is a very important issue but by no means the only threat to biodiversity. The biggest problem seems to be that the policy challenges are just not being taken up by governments. Conservation policies are just seen as a problem for the economy."

My emphasis

We better get used to eating jellyfish and locusts I suppose...

How do we change our ways?

Is the "'one person - one vote'-capitalism"-system really up to it? - we don't really have any working alternatives at the moment, so how do you propose we change our ways for the better of us all? -Do we need a 'rule of scientists' -or should we just take it lying down and let the rich survive in their bunkers? -or is there a solution that would satisfy all?

Your thoughts please!

 

[Ward Fowler]

I guess it's all a matter of your point of view. You can believe we are either a positive or a negative force on our planet. We happened to evolve opposable thumbs and large brains. After that we went through stagnant period where our "betters" told us what was good for us. That was a period of feudalism. After the enlightenment democracy started to come to the fore. Since then we have developed astounding technologies to make our lives prosperous and convenient. So no, we aren't better off with the "rule" of any one group (even government funded scientists) to help society survive. In the developed world we are all comparatively rich thanks to capitalism, bunkers or no. Do you want a select group to tell you how to live because they claim to be smarter than you? That's not democracy, which is what helped us move out of mud huts.

 

[trekkiedane]

But the point is that instead of, say, subsidising car manufacturers and car culture there might be a better way of investing the money and we (the voters) aren't knowledgeable enough -nor willing, perhaps- to find this way on our own.

 

[Ward Fowler]

So, in other words, the masses are too ignorant to know what's good for them. That's a dangerous, anti-democratic way of thinking. We should all be educated and exposed to the realities of our world and then make informed decisions. That's far different than a technocratic class telling us what we must do.

 

[Awesome Possum]

We had a good run, sure a bunch of giant reptiles did better, but we had some fun.

 

[Ward Fowler]

sure a bunch of giant reptiles did better

Unless they mastered agriculture, developed an industrial society, and sent their own species into space, I don't think so.

 

[trekkiedane]

So, in other words, the masses are too ignorant to know what's good for them. That's a dangerous, anti-democratic way of thinking. We should all be educated and exposed to the realities of our world and then make informed decisions. That's far different than a technocratic class telling us what we must do.

Indeed it is, but we've had more-or-less mandatory schooling and education for many, many generations yet stupidities like 'intelligent design' still keep popping up. This kind of ignorance of fact can only be due to subpar performance in the educational systems and might eventually endanger ALL of us unless we actually do something.

My question remains: What do you think we should do to change our ways?

 

[Small White Car]

So, in other words, the masses are too ignorant to know what's good for them. That's a dangerous, anti-democratic way of thinking.

Well, it's true. Why do you think people cut down the rain forests? Because their jerks? No, they do it to feed their families. The individual will do what's best for the individual. If that choice is good for the species, then it's a coincidence.

Unless they mastered agriculture, developed an industrial society, and sent their own species into space, I don't think so.

What does any of that matter? The dinosaurs were far more successful than we have been, up to this point.

 

[Ward Fowler]

^Survival as a species is important. Decisions involving self-interest are what has gotten us to this point. No coincidence involved, only natural selection and little bit of luck.

The dinosaurs were never able to appreciate and understand the universe that they lived in. We are on the cusp on unlocking its secrets. In my opinion, that makes us more successful.

 

[sidious618]

Remember the three part storyline on The X-Files about the sixth extinction? Those were some great episodes.

 

[Arrqh]

Unless they mastered agriculture, developed an industrial society, and sent their own species into space, I don't think so.

What does any of that matter? The dinosaurs were far more successful than we have been, up to this point.

Indeed. It's really easy for us to say how awesome we are if we define awesomeness based on the things we've done while ignoring all the things that we did poorly!

 

[trekkiedane]

SWC, I'm not in total disagreement with your post: your comment to WF I agree with; and BTW: I'm not at all convinced that 'democracy' is such a good thing! -It's merely the best way to govern that we have yet been able to devise. Maybe -in order to work- 'democracy' needs a different definition than the ones we currently apply!

Whether the dinos did better than us is also a matter of definition: in our sense of the word they didn't have language and therefore weren't able to give their experiences forth to the following generations. We are... and that might even be the reason for our (possible eventual) downfall -even if it is our greatest achievement.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I'm not at all convinced that 'democracy' is such a good thing! -It's merely the best way to govern that we have yet been able to devise.

I'm curious as to what you think would be a better form of governance.

 

[sidious618]

I'm not at all convinced that 'democracy' is such a good thing! -It's merely the best way to govern that we have yet been able to devise.

I'm curious as to what you think would be a better form of governance.

Read the bolded part.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I did. I also read the part that wasn't bolded. Hence the question.

 

[trekkiedane]

Remember the three part storyline on The X-Files about the sixth extinction? Those were some great episodes.

I luved it too

I'm not at all convinced that 'democracy' is such a good thing! -It's merely the best way to govern that we have yet been able to devise.

I'm curious as to what you think would be a better form of governance.

I don't have one.

I merely see a lot of problems with the one currently considered the best.

 

[sidious618]

I did. I also read the part that wasn't bolded. Hence the question.

Then I guess you didn't understand the bolded part. The poster is saying that they think a better form of government than democracy will arise but we just haven't figured out what it is yet.

 

[Small White Car]

I'm not at all convinced that 'democracy' is such a good thing! -It's merely the best way to govern that we have yet been able to devise.

I'm curious as to what you think would be a better form of governance.

The "best" form of government is incompatible with human beings.

Ants and bees have the best one. An iron-clad class system where the individual is irrelevant and only lives to serve their society. That's the 'best' government and it creates the 'best' society.

It's also the worst system for the individual and is thus unsuitable for humans who care about that sort of thing.

That's the problem with trying to find the 'best' of something. It's usually really good at one thing and really bad at other things. This is why democracy is our best choice even though it's not the best overall. It's the best compromise between all the extremes. But a 'compromise' means it's not the 'best' at any single aspect.

But that's ok. It's better to live with compromises than to pump up some factors at the expense of others.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I did. I also read the part that wasn't bolded. Hence the question.

Then I guess you didn't understand the bolded part. The poster is saying that they think a better form of government than democracy will arise but we just haven't figured out what it is yet.

If that was implied, I certainly didn't see it. Especially considering his comment above.

 

[Ward Fowler]

The "best" form of government is incompatible with human beings.

Ants and bees have the best one. An iron-clad class system where the individual is irrelevant and only lives to serve their society. That's the 'best' government and it creates the 'best' society.

I disagree with this. Humanity tried it. It was called feudalism and it was only good for the tiniest fraction of the species.

But that's ok. It's better to live with compromises than to pump up some factors at the expense of others.

I agree with this whole-heartedly.