Human's Inevitable Downfall - Page 2

Competition isn't all bad. Sometimes it is good for people to want to do something first. They will work faster and find their information faster. Yes while they are working they should get people to aid in their help, but maybe somethings are better to be built in competition. It is when people compete to the means of killing others that stuff goes wrong.
competition leads to choice, which means there are no monopolies, which means there is no coruption.

I think I would agree to what you are saying but I don't understand the last? Competetion leads to choice, no monopolies?
Capitalism is highly competetive, it also porduces monopolies to the extent that government had to address them and our government is full of corruption?
I was taught a trade by my father and tested for contractor (master) licensing. The first job I bid on was an addition to the locale community center. My bid was low, in fact to low because they sent me a letter stating that I should revise my bid to see if I had failed to take something into account!
I had I wasn't seeking to profit, rather I sought to return to the community my appreciation for play grounds (baseball) etc and the time I had spent at it. But that is the way Capitalism does things? My starting a business doesn't mean I need to build it into a corporation, driving out competetion. Kind of an old-fashion ideal to provide a service to others instead of profitteerring.

That is why I said It isn't all bad. I agree that a lot of it is bad, especially with the greed and corruption. Yet the thought of competition is good. That is pre-corruption. When you and 100 other familes started new business lines and everyone could choose which they wanted.

That's cool that you want to do something for the community without trying to make money off of it. We need more people like that.

The human race will only destroy itself if our ability to destroy ourselves is greater then our ability to spread.
For most of history we've always expanded much much faster then we could kill ourselves. That's changed with the A-bomb but you'd still need to nuke every last corner of the world to get everything killed.

And with space expansion being feasible within the next few centuries I think we'll spread still further then we can nuke ourselves.

So where in space does humanity expand?
Don't tell me you bought into the propaganda?
We have more than enough nuclear weapons to virtuely destroy all existing life forms off the face of the earth. Although scientist believes that the cockroach has the best chance for survival.
Not to mean but to face fact, we need to find a better way of dealing with the problems we as humans face.

If history repeats itself, then how can Humanity develop. I think a big factor that differentiates humans from animals is our 'minds'. We are what our mind is, what our feelings are. I think its because of this, the idea of world peace seems so hard to attain. How can we expand as people when we all interpret every aspect of life differently, when we percieve things differently. Feelings support our beliefs and if our beliefs are different then conflict will exist. We all know how powerful love,hate,greed,anger etc is...wont this mean then that we'll always be in conflict with one another, if so how are we to be in harmony hence in world peace??? How do we as humanity shape our world to be a better place for the future? is it through our children, do we try to teach them to be more 'civilised' then we...but how can that work when the very culture we have built for them to live in is corrupt and superfiscial? When we are surrounded by war?

People say Religion is an answer, but how do you believe that when history shows so many conflicts have been simply because of religion - because of differences in our beliefs & faith...

Hope some of that makes sense, i am though a big supporter of world peace!!

"So where in space does humanity expand? "
1000 people on Mars for example. Its not as outlandish as it may seem. Sure right now it is out of the question. But in a few hundred years (or sooner if China begins to rival the US and stimulate space spending) this could be feasible.

"We have more than enough nuclear weapons to virtuely destroy all existing life forms off the face of the earth."
Perhaps so, but unlike our previous methods of killing people (pillaging and raiding) this one has very little incentive to blast EVERYTHING to hell. I can see nukes being responsible for many deaths, but I can't see anyone making enough AND having the motivation to blast everything.

"Not to mean but to face fact, we need to find a better way of dealing with the problems we as humans face."
Good luck! I doubt you'll find it though. Expansion has been humanities prime method for not dying out for most of history. Other things like medicine and good diplomacy help, but expansion is much more important in the sense that even if your tribe fails and die, the other tribe 100km from here is ok.

Immortal : I agree 100% !

Crimson, at what cost do we send this pitiful number of 1000 people (cost not defined just as $) to Mars with the necessary provisions to provide for their needs until what? They are resupplied or aren't we back to the Old Colonial Empire scam? About this savior 'technology', the space program benefits man how? The government spends how many billions just to build a space shuttle, let alone all the other cost of 'the Great Race into Space'. If the government had channeled those resources into alternate energy, we would be proliferated with a multitude of alternative energy forms which we could use. Rivalery with China or any other nation will only create greater waste not ways to solve the problem, unless we manage to wipe about 3/4 of the world population out of existence. Immoral or absolutely criminal?

"Crimson, at what cost do we send this pitiful number of 1000 people (cost not defined just as $) to Mars with the necessary provisions to provide for their needs until what?"
Who says they can't be self sufficient? Solar Panels, genetically modified easy to grow plants, plentiful water on Mars. The cost would be astronomical, but look at the progress we've had in the last century, there's reason to think getting into space will get even easier.

"Rivalery with China or any other nation will only create greater waste not ways to solve the problem, unless we manage to wipe about 3/4 of the world population out of existence."

There is no way to solve the problem permanently. I'm only stating how humans have dealt with it in the past, and how we're likely to continue dealing with it. World peace, moral conduct are nice, but humans are greedy and imperfect by nature. So there's little hope in that improving too much.
Expanding we can do however, we have done, and I think we will continue.

"Immoral or absolutely criminal?"
I don't know if its moral, but that's what I think will happen!

ya, just might be right, it is are destiny (fate) to self destruct. Might as well accept it and get it over with then may be some wil start it all over.

Why do we have to self destruct? I don't remember making that contract. I mean, if we can't escape the black hole then we might but knowing how greedy we are we will want to save our asses. Yet, I don't get why people think it is inevitable. Because no one will act upon it? Because no one will talk about it? If everyone already knows what is going to happen then what we really need is a leader. Maybe one day someone will get fed up with sitting there and think about how we are going to die, and maybe lead people to an attempt to stop this downfall. What we really need is a leader.

Humanity will eventually die out if time is infinite. Because odds are we can survive just about anything once we expand to space, but infinity is a long time, so eventually we'll die (if nothing else quantum mechanics say we'll die )

Crimson, not that I am against the exploration of space but rather I feel we are putting the cart before the horse. I said it once but I will state it again ' if we had used all the time & energy (resources) developing viable alternative energy as the space program, then we would have those resources! Yes, we may be able to create a self supporting colony on some distant planet or moon but let us develope the technology for our own use here on earth. Then if you want to colonize the moon, OK that is your choice. Stripping the earth resources upon which I want to live, to send you to the moon Is Not.

Dugbug, I think you are right but as long as 'people' value (respect) material wealth than their (children's) life, we will continue down the road to self-destruction. We would rather live the Lie than to seek the Life. Just an example, did you hear about all the Money raised to re=elect (?) Bush?
The first time I heard "homeland" I cringed, thinking that they had said the "fatherland". Just my initial responce, guess it was a Fruedian slip or one of those word-association things people used to do.

What does re-electing Bush have to do with Human downfall... ok, well besides that.

I don't know, I mean, if we can get another Jesus down here, someone that would die for what they believe in, or any major religious preacher for that matter then we might be able to get enough people together. But the one tricky/bad part is that I don't think he will come from an industrial nation (like GB or USA) so his voice might not be heard as well over here.

"someone that would die for what they believe in"
Hey we just have to convince Al Quaeda to be green!...