11-09-2019, 06:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2019, 06:53 PM by Eric the Green.)
(11-09-2019, 06:39 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote:That's good. Maybe I do not have you pegged. It does seem your reliance on Enlightenment-era rationality and space/AI tech is pretty strong though. Space colonization does not seem a viable solution to human pressures on the Earth's eco-system, for many reasons. Unless the light barrier is broken (in which case we are already being visited by ETs), it would take far too long (many generations) to travel to another planet, check it out, travel back, import super-advanced terraforming tools in many spaceships, again travelling for many generations each, with provisions that would last that long or be ongoing somehow; it just seems like something very few people would be willing or able to do. And it would not relieve pressure on Earth at all, because the people here would still grow and multiply and continue their current behavior no matter how many times we set sail for another planet and how many more planets we ruin.(11-05-2019, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Some of you virtual millennials need to take more time out and visit places in Nature, or just enjoy the air on a windy day in a local park. Get in touch with your own body more. Put down your phones and get out from behind your desktops and discover real life.
You seem to have an image of me which is very far from the real me. I don't have a smart phone nor any social media profile. I enjoy running and visiting the forest. There wouldn't be forests inside an asteroid, but there certainly could be gardens. Actually one of the reasons I support space colonisation is that spreading the population across the Cosmos would relieve our pressure on the Earth's ecosystem.
I don't even particularly identify with Millennials, though I appreciate the civic traits of rationality, positivity and togetherness. I however don't like their social media conformity nor their excessive reliance on technology and I think their trust in institutional solutions rather than personal righteousness is misplaced.
NO, the correct solution is for humans to change their behavior (attain greater righteousness as you put it), invent and rely on new eco-friendly tech, spread the wealth around better so poor people have fewer babies, etc. The Earth is our home; we need to take care of those beautiful forests and wildlife and treasure our home as the absolutely-unique place that it is, and until we do that, we are not qualified to go mess up some other planet. And the Galactic Federation will intercept our generations-long voyages and turn us back because we are not yet qualified to live in peace with our fellows and our greater self (Nature, God, etc.). We ARE Nature, we grew out of it, we are not isolated objects as Enlightenment Era rationality supposed. We need to ditch the old scientific and religious dogmas and move forward from the sixties and 1890s into the New Age in all our ways of thinking and being. Yes, I am a prophet Boomer
Quote:Hintergrund Wrote:Your "compass" has five dimensions, but you want to depict it in two. It doesn't work like that.
Also, why stay at five? I've seen political tests with eight different axes. Why not make it an n-dimensional space, in which any combination is possible.
They are not axes, they are directions. It's not and never was intended to be a Nolan Chart clone.
It's hard to know where to put you knowing only your stance on two issues. What's your view on economics? Gay marriage? The idea of a World State? What do you consider the purpose of government and society in general?
A five-pointed chart may have its purpose. Far be it from me to say what's the only way. Not everything has to be a clone of the most accepted version of something. Best wishes with it, and it may yield valuable insights. I like these sorts of explorations and maps.
Myself, I am a supporter of the the two axes and four directions model. It fits my philosophy circle, for one thing, and my astrology models, for another; as well as many other maps, circles and practices. I think all the issues can be resolved into those two axes and four quadrants/directions. But, your mileage may vary, and no one map is equal to the territory. The more ideas, the merrier I say.
I wonder though, and I may be wrong, but is inserting a nationalist sector a result of the temporary overemphasis today on the nationalism and America First promoted by an idiot demagogue who has taken over the big house, and whose silly and destructive ideas should never be given a moment's consideration?