What is it about our species that causes us to doubt ourselves to the point that we fear our own achievements.
In the last two hundred years we have made gigantic advances in science that have improved the lives of billions yet with every advance has grown more doubt.
Our harnessing of energy and its use to enhance the lives of people has led to a hugely irrational fear of catastrophic global warming. Our increased knowledge and experience of food science enabling us to produce food for an increasing population, including many that were used to going without fuels fears of Frankenstein foods from GMO's. Vaccines that have saved the lives of tens of millions are portrayed as an existential threat. Our fantastic advances in computer technology lead to apocalyptic visions of murderous robots threatening the human race with extinction.
What is it that makes many people blind to the massive benefits that science and technology has brought us from our conquest of disease to our design of devices to save the drudgery of manual labour?
Why are we so inventive yet such apallingly bad pessimists?
Yes.
People lives in the mountain are more happier and healthier than people lives in the city. More people makes them upset anyway.
@Barry, great question. Why do we act in our own best and worst interests as a species? The discovery of the interrelationship of energy and mass has both advanced us as a species and brought us to the brink of extinction. With all humility, I think I have found the fundamental reason for this dichotomous (schizophrenic?) behavior. In tracing the origins of vertebrate evolution back to the unicellular state, and how life began, I realized that the differential in free energy within and outside of the cell (negative v positive entropy) created an ambiguity. By circumventing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, life has struck a Faustian bargain with Nature. The paradox is that this is the driver for all of life, which remains unresolved. Instead of coming to grips with this innate, foundational issue, we and all other organisms practice deceits (see Robert Trivers "The Folly of Fools: The Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life"). And in us, because of our highly evolved brains, that ambiguity/deceit leads to resolutions that can be contrary to our best interests. The realization of how this conundrum has come about, along with so many unresolved dichotomies- good-evil, gene-phenotype, life-death, health-disease- would be timely as the planet is under assault climatically, politically, migrationally. Finding other 'Earths' to inhabit as an exit strategy is the epitome of deceit, and it will not resolve the internal, inchoate problem that we face.
According to the second law of thermodynamics, heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder bodies, which means that bodies with higher energy tend to decrease its energy until get the most stable situation.
There is only one exception: human
There are some researches that helping people makes them happy. Maybe we fallow the nature rules to be more stable (happy).
@Hatice Zehra Akbaş, regarding your comment "Maybe we fallow the nature rules to be more stable (happy)", yes, if we understand how our physiology meshes with physics we would be a lot better off, perhaps even 'happy'. But first we have to realize that we are 'deceiving' ourselves.....
@John S Torday
I believe that there is a connection physics and life science. We just do not know how. And I believe that if we can find it and use it, we could make the life better.
Our physiology is a direct result of gravity, the electromagnetic spectrum, resonance and of course, because everything else is, the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Our physical shape and method of perambulation is determined by gravity, not only the gravity that acts directly on us from the planet we are standing on but because of the gravitational effects of the planetary system we live on. Without the moon's gravitational effect we would not be here, since it played an essential part in the evolution of life on Earth.
The electromagnetic spectrum allows us to process information delivered in particular by light waves (seeing) Electromagnetism also facilitates thought in our brains and movement in our limbs.
We are as much a product of physics as chemistry and biology and perhaps that should give us food for thought. Are we just a little too keen on categorising things?
Barray,
''Are humans really their own worst enemy?''
Maybe in the future our worst ennemy might be an asteroid or the aging sun but right now we are the top predator and control the planet except: ourself. We have not learn how to live harmoniously with ourself and the planet and live under a capitalistic predatory economic system. Why is it so? It is not possible for small societies at the scale of a few hundred individual to be totally inequal but the bigger societies become and the more unequal they become. Technology means control. Not only control of nature but of large number of humans by a few for a few. The old tale of the Garden of Eden were describing the same picture.
Are Human Beings Their Own Worst Enemy?
Human beings are funny things.
Since the very beginnings of human life, our species has continually evolved, not just physically, but mentally; developing a constant need for innovation and technological advancement. Beginning with the discovery of static electricity in the Greek world, human beings have always had a fascination with the idea of electricity, and the ways in which it can assist our daily lives. Therefore, over time, we have developed a desperate need for this power and it has become a constant necessity within our lives; so much so, that the idea of living even one day without electricity becomes terrifying. Of course, this demand for electricity and fuel has many consequences and is taxing upon our earth. Slowly but surely, the vital fossil fuels that our earth provides us will become extinct and our precious, rich planet has now become a ticking time bomb which will eventually go off, leaving our world in an empty powerless state. For the many thousands of years which have now become our history, our ancestors relied on their basic human instincts to survive, using their physical and mental strength to overcome the problems which faced them. Are we going to be able to overcome the problem which now overshadows our lives or has our insistent need to rely on computers to solve our
problems for us made us redundant to work this out for ourselves? Without the power of electricity that we have become so dependent on, our desire to design and create will continue yet this thirst will never be quenched, prevented by our lack of resources to achieve these inventions. Is there a way that humans can stop this time bomb from going off, or is it too late for our species to save itself from the inevitable end we ourselves have caused? Only we can decide the fate of our planet; and it’s what we do now to change it that will save us from ourselves.
see more on http://evansreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Are-Human-Beings-Their-Own-Worst-Enemy.pdf
Certainly yes! Almost all the great scientific discoveries have always been used destructively in all wars. The Internet was conceived and invented for military purposes. The best surgeons of emergency room are the veteran physicians of some war. Currently we can not equally distribute the wealth we produce (see my question: https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_to_create_wealth_and_distribute_it_equally_to_all). So approximately 28,000 people die of hunger every day.
Remi
In the process of entropy, moving from order to disorder heat dissipates. This can be observed in the universe in the CMB.
The mistake that most people make when applying the 2nd law is that it only apllies in closed systems. The Earth and human evolution are open systems.
While thermodynamics applies in human affairs it is of secondary influence to other forces operating in an open system.
Remi
How does entropy work in open systems? That would make life on Earth impossible.
"On the other hand, he knew very well that a magical change had taken place in medicine during the last twenty-five years. When he was studying at the university he had fancied that medicine would soon be overtaken by the fate of alchemy and metaphysics; but now when he was reading at night the science of medicine touched him and excited his wonder, and even enthusiasm. What unexpected brilliance, what a revolution! Thanks to the antiseptic system operations were performed such as the great Pirogov had considered impossible even in spe. Ordinary Zemstvo doctors were venturing to perform the resection of the kneecap; of abdominal operations only one per cent. was fatal; while stone was considered such a trifle that they did not even write about it. A radical cure for syphilis had been discovered. And the theory of heredity, hypnotism, the discoveries of Pasteur and of Koch, hygiene based on statistics, and the work of Zemstvo doctors!
Psychiatry with its modern classification of mental diseases, methods of diagnosis, and treatment, was a perfect Elborus in comparison with what had been in the past. They no longer poured cold water on the heads of lunatics nor put strait-waistcoats upon them; they treated them with humanity, and even, so it was stated in the papers, got up balls and entertainments for them. Andrey Yefimitch knew that with modern tastes and views such an abomination as Ward No. 6 was possible only a hundred and fifty miles from a railway in a little town where the mayor and all the town council were half-illiterate tradesmen who looked upon the doctor as an oracle who must be believed without any criticism even if he had poured molten lead into their mouths; in any other place the public and the newspapers would long ago have torn this little Bastille to pieces.
"But, after all, what of it?" Andrey Yefimitch would ask himself, opening his eyes. "There is the antiseptic system, there is Koch, there is Pasteur, but the essential reality is not altered a bit; ill-health and mortality are still the same. They get up balls and entertainments for the mad, but still they don't let them go free; so it's all nonsense and vanity, and there is no difference in reality between the best Vienna clinic and my hospital." But depression and a feeling akin to envy prevented him from feeling indifferent; it must have been owing to exhaustion. His heavy head sank on to the book, he put his hands under his face to make it softer, and thought: "I serve in a pernicious institution and receive a salary from people whom I am deceiving. I am not honest, but then, I of myself am nothing, I am only part of an inevitable social evil: all local officials are pernicious and receive their salary for doing nothing. . . . And so for my dishonesty it is not I who am to blame, but the times.... If I had been born two hundred years later I should have been different."
Genius A.P.Chekhov and genius K.Shakhnazarov "Ward number 6" Placeman Khobotov, porter Nikita, a fremeny-postmaster, provincial officiary are as the main arbiters of the fates. To genius S.Zweig, "A doctor should never try to cure the incurable", which means social evils in the frame of "essential reality"; true intelligentsia has always been "a slave of honour", conscience of the nation, and a hostage of the biggest lie.
http://www.eldritchpress.org/ac/w6-01.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfkowxiZ2KY
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Stefan_Zweig
6 Ways You Are Your Own Worst Enemy
1. Your expectation of constant contentment.
Nothing in life is constant. There is neither absolute happiness nor absolute sadness. There are only the changes in our moods that continuously oscillate between these two extremes.
The key is to focus on the good. May you live each moment of your life consciously, and realize that all the happiness you seek is present if you are prepared to notice it. If you are willing to appreciate that this moment is far better than it could have been, you will enjoy it more for what it truly is. (Angel and I discuss this in more detail in the Happiness and Growth chapters of 1,000 Little Things Happy, Successful People Do Differently.)
2. Your obsession with examining personal failures.
Every morning when you wake up, think of three things that are going well in your life at the moment. As you fall asleep every night, fill your mind with an appreciation for all the small things that went well during the day. Examine your successes.
Give the power of your thinking to the positive influences in your life, and they will grow stronger and more influential every day. Remind yourself often of what works well and why, and you’ll naturally find ways to make lots of other things work well too. The most efficient way to enjoy more success in life is not to obsess yourself with what hasn’t worked in the past, but instead to extend and expand upon the success you already know.
3. Your urge to surrender to the draw of comfort.
The most common and destructive addiction in the world is the draw of comfort. Why pursue growth when you already have 400 television channels and a recliner? Just pass the chip dip and lose yourself in a trance. WRONG! That’s not living – that’s existing. Living is about learning and growing through excitement and discomfort.
Life is filled with questions, many of which don’t have an obvious or immediate answer. It’s your willingness to ask these questions, and your courage to march confidently into the unknown in search of the answers, that gives life it’s meaning.
In the end, you can spend your life feeling sorry for yourself, cowering in the comfort of your routines, wondering why there are so many problems out in the real world, or you can be thankful that you are strong enough to endure them. It just depends on your mindset. The obvious first step, though, is convincing yourself to step out of your comfort zone. (Read The Road Less Traveled.)
4. Your self-limiting beliefs.
You do not suffer from your beliefs. You suffer from your disbeliefs. If you have no hope inside of you, it’s not because there is no hope, it’s because you don’t believe there is. Since the mind drives the body, it’s the way you think that eventually makes the dreams you dream possible or impossible. Your reality is simply a reflection of your thoughts and the way you routinely contemplate what you know to be true. All too often you literally do not know any better than good enough. Sometimes you have to try to do what you think you can’t do, so you realize that you actually CAN.
It all starts on the inside. You control your thoughts. The only person who can hold you down is YOU.
5. Your resistance to being vulnerable.
Love is vulnerability. Happiness is vulnerability. The risk of being vulnerable is the price of opening yourself to beauty and opportunity.
6. Your expectations of how things are supposed to be.
There’s this fantasy in your head about how you think things are supposed to be. This fantasy blinds you from reality and prevents you from appreciating the genuine goodness that exists in your life.
The solution? Simple: Drop the needless expectations. Appreciate what is. Hope for the best, but expect less.
http://www.marcandangel.com/2013/05/07/6-ways-you-are-your-own-worst-enemy/
We live in the earth together. We could not go anywhere yet. I just accept we live a closed system as hypothesis. Actually I haven't researched any scientific evidence our universe is open or closed.
The pictures maybe make more understandable the second law of thermodynamics.
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=entrophy&nfpr=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI_PDsuPTSAhXGCywKHf6_DFMQ_AUIBigB&biw=1440&bih=770#q=entrophy&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CTMD-zp5m4FHIjgKUQELPLYsGhNKYG4UaNy_1_1IZVu9MgFMDYeTHB9FBNzcRq8TTQYkt3j_1HwD5SZKY0HVFnpqAhuWSoSCQpRAQs8tiwaEc67zw-Y_1PM6KhIJE0pgbhRo3L8Rq3qxQUaiekIqEgn8hlW70yAUwBGA7Z7ODTrueyoSCdh5McH0UE3NEc67zw-Y_1PM6KhIJxGrxNNBiS3cR1XMqW9SNuPEqEgmP8fAPlJkpjRHvnbCndPrhUSoSCQdUWemoCG5ZEeuGC7XErUuL&*
Remi
I think you have missed the point. Dissipation of heat from an open system is reversible while in a closed system it can only dissipate to equilibrium
The universe is a closed system within which are lots of 'hot spots' which we call stars. These are open systems from which heat is flowing outwards. Unless cosmic expansion is reversible, as yet unknown, the universe will eventually become uniformly cold in what is known as universal heat death. This is a quaint metaphor but suitable in this instance.
Until then countless more stars will form and untill all the nuclear fuel within them is extinguished will continue to generate heat.
No energy of any form can enter or leave a closed system whereas there are many sources of external heat that can enter an open system. If that were not the case there would be no life on Earth or anywhere else in the universe.
On another thread contributors describe life as defying the 2nd law. Life of course on the face of it is order out of chaos, the reverse of what should happen. It is not a reverse of the 2nd law because the 2nd law does not apply to open systems.
Yes, I agree with this statement . Human activity brings closer the end of nature
Remi
The Earth both radiates and absorbs heat. That is why it is an open system. The universe does not have anywhere to get heat from or to dissipate it to. That is why it is a closed system à la Ludwig Bolzmann's imaginary box full of molecules.*
Entropy in an open system can be increased to a higher maximum. In a closed system it can only reach the stable state of thermodynamic equilibrium.
This has been known since Hermann von Helmholtz predicted it in 1856.
Perhaps you have a different interpretation of open and closed
* Poincaré was much more imaginative!
Aleš
"inverted black hole as seen from outside"
I love human imagination! Multiverse hypotheses are the apogee of it.
Can a 'white hole' be stable? I imagine, a black hole has a positive mass and therefore an attracting gravitation which stabilizes it. So, a white hole must have a negative mass (also hypothetical of course) which generates a repulsive gravitational force. But if our 'white hole' is not an elementary particle it must blow up itself due to negative gravitation.
Or is something wrong in my thoughts?
Coming back to the original question: Yes, humans are really their own worst enemy, due to nationalism, egoism, capitalism - yes, also capitalism, it enforces the other negative behavior...
Thanks also for mentioning the second law of thermodynamics. Maybe some of you will be interested in my post about the hypothetical connection between the second law of thermodynamics and human warlike behavior (https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can_the_rapidly_increasing_risk_of_an_outbreak_of_a_World_War_III_be_considered_as_an_effect_of_the_second_law_of_thermodynamics)
Best Regards
Andreas
Andreas
"Are Human errors an 'instrument' of thermodynamics to ensure that the second law is satisfied?"
A fascinating question! As biological organisms we make poor examples of the 2nd Law. Evolution has led to an increase in complexity in life forms and the behaviour of them, culminating in our ability to imagine such things. Our behaviour however certainly represents what Paul Davies described as the degree of disorder in a system.
I suppose the question returns to open and closed systems. Is humanity a closed system or an open one? Philosophically difficult indeed! Is human behaviour somehow pre-deternined by evolution or do we truly have free will as something seperate to our physical existence?
There is certainly no shortage of disorder and chaos.
Remi
This is a discussion board not a platform for personal catharsis. Neither is it a journal or other podium for 'expert posturing' Your discourse appears as disordered as your political thoughts.
Whatever makes you think that physics is an exclusive domain for 'experts'? The level of physics discussed here is no more than that learned at 5th form and is certainly not post-graduate or doctoral.
The audience on this thread is anyone who wishes to join it with whatever views they may have. I am more than happy with 'dilletantes and tinkerers', they have contributed as much to science over the centuries than have most doctoral scholars.
If you find it so offensive dealing with Walter Mitty you are more than welcome to go and discuss your brand of physics anywhere else.
As for the future of journals and how they are run you might want to look at the attached articles.
Remi
Your position is absurd. It is ridiculous in the exterme to state that because someone is not a 'physicist' that they may not comment on physics. Have you considered that you are not a politician yet that did not stop you pontificating about politics. You are certainly not a philosopher but that does not seem to constrain you from butting in on philosophical debate.
I am not 'posturing as an expert'. Physics is taught at school and at the levels discussed here by 15 year olds.
Who gives you authority to dismiss what you disresepectfully call 'polytechnic professors'? At which esteemed institution are you a member of the professoriat?
I am highly amused by the quote from Lincoln, a hypocrite and warmongering dictator. I am not surprised you are unaware of that, after all you are not a historian.
If you are so offended by the comments on this thread then leave it. You have contributed nothing of any value so you will not be missed.
Musk is stoic about setbacks but all too conscious of nightmare scenarios. His views reflect a dictum from Atlas Shrugged: “Man has the power to act as his own destroyer—and that is the way he has acted through most of his history.” As he told me, “we are the first species capable of self-annihilation.”...
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/elon-musk-billion-dollar-crusade-to-stop-ai-space-x
Remi
"I do not subscribe to egalitarianism belief"
Who cares?
"I have nothing more to say to the polytechnic professor"
Well thank the Lord for that!
Ljubomir
Elon Musk like many others spends too much time on nightmare scenarios and although his boundless imagination is an inspiration in may other ways both he and Stephen Hawking really ought to know better.
Disasters are an obsession with many, largely because of the irresponsible press. If is not global warming or GM foods its North Korea and Iran. The reality is we are not facing any existential threats, we just act as if we are.
Far too many people are still without adequate food and clean water but far more have access to it than did 50 years ago. Every day the press warn us about 'carcinogens' but cancer deaths (not associated with smoking) have been falling for decades.
It is a really a boring time for the doom merchants, no wonder they spend so much time dreaming up yet another scare.
In spite of the coarse invective in which it is couched the above comment contains an important point. We are facing a serious crisis with anti-biotic resistance and this is in large part caused by human failings. The discovery & invention of anti-biotics was one of the crowning glories of medical research and saved the lives of countless millions and continues to do so today.
Infections represent a major health threat now that many strains of pathogen have developed resistance to all but the most potent anti-biotics. They are not however an existential threat in terms of humanity as a species. The greatest mortality in any pandemic was that of the so-called Spanish Flu outbreak in 1918. It is possible that it killed as many as 100 million people worldwide and in terms of potency was more deadly than the Black Death.
Statistically of course, even though it was correctly described as a pandemic against a world population of 1.8 billion in 1918 the, colossal though it was death toll was a small fraction of the overall population*.
In my extensive studies of epidemiology and also iatrogenic transmission of disease it is clear that no epidemic is capable of species extinction. Even the Black Death and the Spanish Flu could not have killed the whole human population. Epidemics do not work like that. A major pandemic will involve either a highly virulent and deadly strain affecting a small fraction of the population or a milder infection affecting a large fraction. There has never been any outbreak in human history where entire populations were infected and that cannot happen because of our genetic variation and adaptive immunity.
While anti-biotic resistance should not be downplayed it does not represent an existential threat to humanity. That is the stuff of post-apocalyptic movies and tabloid newspapers. Most new diseases are by far viral in nature and anti-biotics do not work on them directly, being only useful in concomitant bacterial and protist infections.
Incidentally anti-biotics would have done nothing to prevent the flu of 1918. That was viral and most of those infected died of pneumonia.
* I attach some statistics from one of my epidemiology lectures.
See the answers to a question recently posed by Veerendra K Rai which turn out to connect to this Q/A thread. His question is:
Who will decide limits to automation? Should there be limits to automation? Who decides the limits- scientists, corporates or states?
James
Yes indeed. This is a question that is being repeated more and more and the degree of anxiety in it seems to be increasing.
It looks like there is no control or limit on automation, there is certainly no historical precedent.
Extremely interesting discussion with the eternal questions, "Who is to blame and what to do?"To Einstein,"The physical world is real." That is supposed to be the fundamental hypothesis. What does "hypothesis" mean here? For me, a hypothesis is a statement, whose truth must be assumed for the moment, but whose meaning must be raised above all ambiguity. The above statement appears to me, however, to be, in itself, meaningless, as if one said: "The physical world is cock-a-doodle-do." It appears to me that the "real" is an intrinsically empty, meaningless category (pigeon hole), whose monstrous importance lies only in the fact that I can do certain things in it and not certain others". Is intelligence either adaptation or "a drama of ideas" in the absurd world of spiritual stagnation, narrow-mindedness, platitude and falsehood, which deprives a lot of people of choice and will? "Our entire much-praised technological progress, and civilization generally, could be compared to an axe in the hand of pathological criminal"(Einstein). A.Chekhov, "Ward № 6": "Andrey Yefimovich loved intelligence and honesty intensely , but he had no strength of will, nor belief in his right to organize an intelligent and honest life about him...Life is a vexatious trap...He is in the trap from which there is no escape...What is most vexatious of all is to have to die in this "immoral institution". There is no way out. Some people live with social circumstances, others try to resist either in the open rebellion or in the form of chin fest (kitchen conversations), for not very intelligent persons it's the time of financial and career flourishing: the end justifies the means. Actually, times of crisis must draw the civilization closer together, not divide it through protectionism, competitive devaluation, expulsions of immigrants, and violence. "There is always safety in numbers".
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein
I completely agree! Whether there are representations the forebrain that eras lysosomal reactions to rational behaviour is something neurobiology should pursue!
It is not what technology brought to us or what science solves many problems, what create fear on humans, but the threat looming or the impossibility of making an ordinary living from traditional employment. Since not all people create their own jobs or businesses and make a living, establish a family and raise children but from good paying employment after receiving proper education. All young people pay high tuition fees and attend universities and colleges hoping they will be hired by some companies and make a living. If companies instead put machines in place hoping to reduce cost of human employment (that comes with all benefits) and make more profits with more efficiency, the essence and necessity of formal education will be tampered and pushes society off truck to miss its grand purpose, and economic calamities and thereby social tragedies will follow. Businesses will flourish only when there is a flourishing consumer, and a flourishing consumer exists when there is abundance of employment of good paying. Socio-economies are social ecosystems where members have to be treated each other as partners of necessity for continued mutual existence, but if only one alone tries to be the lone winner, then all will be natural losers. Looking the history of the human society, it is by its own actions that several civilizations buried and disappeared, not by natural calamity or meteorite. This is due to the emergence of irrational men/women in the frontiers of society and hoodwink society and ultimately create unimaginable horror and destruction in every dimension. Science and innovation create things to solve problems that challenge humans, but irrational people use them to advance only themselves and create problems.
Dear @James Doran, do visit my thread that covers the issue of automation and jobs! It is a thread with about 500 responses and many resources.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Can_we_consider_automation_as_the_enemy_of_employment
How can a "gentleman from the birth" survive and be a human being in the society of "rabbits and boa constrictors"(F.Iskander), "in the conditions of insanitariness and poverty, where it's senseless to treat the sick"(Chekhov) and where "Nikita beats them terribly with all his might"(Chekhov)? Only through the faith in God! "Bible and Literature of the 20-th century" by Father Alexander Men(an innocent murder victim, killed in 1990, 9 September): "To Apostle Paul,"God is not far from every of us". Christ is "a combination of two images: "The Saviour of the Fiery Eye" and "The Saviour of Zvenigorod" by Andrey Rublyov"(S.S.Averintsev). To Bulgakov, "Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees! Woe unto you, brood of snakes!"
http://krotov.info/library/13_m/myen/00054.html
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8C,_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80_%D0%92%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%87%D0%B8%D0%BD
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%81_%D0%AF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BE
Consider:
[A] passage also from the same address of Metellus in my opinion deserves constant reading, not less (by Heaven !) than the writings of the greatest philosophers. His words are these: "The immortal gods have mighty power, but they are not expected to be more indulgent than our parents. But parents, if their children persist in wrong-doing, disinherit them. What different application of justice then are we to look for from the immortal gods, unless we put an end to our evil ways? Those alone may fairly claim the favour of the gods who are not their own worst enemies. The immortal gods ought to support, not supply, virtue.
FROM BOOK I OF “ATTIC NIGHTS” BY AULUS GELLIUS in the translation published in Vol. I of the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1927 (revised 1946)
Aulus Gellius (c. 125 – after 180 AD) was a Latin author and grammarian, who was probably born and certainly brought up in Rome. He was educated in Athens , (from Wikipedia)
"Who are the lunatics? The onse who see horror in the heart of their fellow humans and search for peace at any price? Or the ones who pretend they don't see what's going around them? The world belongs either to lunatics or to hypocrites. There are no other races on the earth. You must choose which one to belong to". Carlos Ruls Zafon. To Reverend Paisios Athonite, "In our time the prophecy of Reverend Antonius the Great has come true, "The time will come and people will go mad.The other people will call the rational people lunatics, because these lunatics won't do the evil, that the other people (hypocrites) will do".
("Sretensky Monastery", 2015, p.52)
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/hypocrites
Toward the end of civilization!
Article Dozy-chaos end of the human civilization, Journal of Ultra S...
Yes! There are many examples from the history of mankind. There are examples which are unfolding every day-in-and-day-out. Human beings are being killed and massacred by human beings. I think good negotiation followed with give and take policy may bring down chaos to some extent.
For a religious, the devil was and still the worst enemy. While for a atheist, the ignorant is the worst enemy.
They would be their worst enemies when they do not appreciate and respect to God with sincerity. This is a latent risk of all time.
@All, consider that in the formation of life there is an inherent ambiguity due to the differential between the entropy (free energy) within and outside (environment) of the organism. Without acknowledging that inherent deceit, life perpetuates deceptions (see Trivers, The Folly of Fools) to compensate. Humans are the most culpable of all organisms because we have the ability to conceive of that deceit, yet we choose to perpetuate myths and self-deception. We are at a watershed in human history that behooves us to recognize this fundamental relationship in order to understand how and why we have evolved. There is a precedent for such a basic recalibration in the recognition of the Sun as the center of the Solar System, moving the earth from the astral center of life.....if only we were to recognize that we humans are not the center of the biological constellation of organisms we would be better citizens and stewards of our shared environment.
There is a tendency to ignore bad events and "hide in the closet" playing computer games, bingo / watching movies, etc and let the world evolve by itself. Most people don't want to take part in the running of world affairs. They are strangers to me!
Fyodor Dostoyevsky "The House of the Dead"... "Even if someone were to prove to me that the truth lay outside Christ, I should choose to remain with Christ, rather than with the truth". In his genius work there are a lot of terrible sinners, but the most repulsive criminal is A-v. This criminal had wanted to get money for his false denuciation. Penal servitude couldn't lead him to remorse and repentance. It turned him to a snitch and scoundrel, resulted in the nadir of wickedness. Greed had been bancrupted his convinctions.He is like Judas Iscariot, who is the most terrible sinner, the most terrifying criminal in "Divine comedy" by Dante.Who rules the world?
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoyevsky
"
who is going to save us at the time of trying? it's THAT time of the year !
As inspired my @Michael, I would say that we need to take destiny into our own hands, but not ignore the events. That is what is happening now in Serbia about last presidential elections. Protests are happening every day all over the country.
For broader problems, borders are irrelevant! We should take part in most of the important events that influence our lives. Otherwise, we tend to be our own enemies!
Interesting question . But I don't think science could solve each problem.
Some problems need to be solved from it selves, whole others doesn't have solution.
Regards
Barry's final question is: "Why are we so inventive yet such apallingly bad pessimists?".
How about: because we are clever enough to discover and consider our own past and past behavior and then to extrapolate into a hazardous looking future?
A perhaps deeper question is: how/why have we evolved to be that clever?
In this context the results and discussions of Edward O. Wilson (eg his book "The Social Conquest of Earth") seem to me insightful and persuasive.
@James Doran, earlier in this thread I alluded to the 'ambiguity' in the origins of life caused by circumventing the Second Law of Thermodynamics. That condition leads inevitably to problem solving as the way to iteratively resolve ambiguity. We evolved from unicellular organisms that existed between the First Principles of Physiology (determinism) and homeostasis (Free Will) (see attached). So being inventive is in our DNA, but without recognizing the origin of this motivation, we inadvertently act either for or against our better interests based on chance. However, I think that if we were to understand this Faustian pact we have made with Nature, we could stack the deck in our favor and act in a more positive way.
All, just to mention that there is a rising concept that we are now in the era of the Anthropocene, i.e. man-made life. This is a dangerous precedent because it justiifies human behavior, independent of its fundamental origins. Without knowledge of how and why we have evolved we may transgress our evolutionary trajectory, putting our existence as a species at risk. Artificial Intelligence is artificial.
Are humans really their own worst enemy?
Personally I think humans can be their best friends as well as their worst enemies - because as depicted in scripture Jeremiah 17:9 -> "The (human) heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" However, I believe we have the choice to make ourselves a friend or enemy to others as well as to choose a friend / enemy or defuse an enemy to become a friend.
Dear Barry Turner
Yes. Humans are their own worst enemy. The reason is extreme irrationality and the failure to recognize this and (relatedly) the failure to put things in anything close to a proper perspective. One thing I always like to point out is how humans, in the way we often talk about those of our species, appear to take credit individually for all "we" have discovered and invented (things, we, as a species, with specialization, division of labor, communication, and culture have done as a large group, over a lot of time). Almost no one seems to appreciate the minuscule part MOST of us have IN ANYTHING. Again: We are the way we are as a species because of specialization, division of labor, communication, and culture; we do not each discover/invent/understand/ or engender any great accomplishment ourselves personally; RATHER, I would estimate: our individual abilities are quite commensurate with that of any ape. It is this just-mentioned perspective which is one most basic reality and we typically defy that. Basically, we defy Reality (and I point out another way we do that, below).
Given these great characteristics of irrationality "we" have (and other grave irrationalities, related and unrelated to that described above), we have people thinking we can invent our way out of any problem (at any time, at our convenience). We have respected people proposing we can migrate to another planet (when the closest one possibly compatible with our life is about 100,000 light years away). One could mention countless, likely fatal, irrationalities. Some of these lead us to have no concern for over-population, when scientifically it is nearly certain that alone will rather soon lead to the demise of the species. I STILL often REFER BACK TO THAT ESSENTIAL, MOST OUTRAGEOUS PERSPECTIVE PEOPLE TAKE (described in the beginning of the first paragraph, above) -- a way of seeing ourselves (or at least some others) as greater than "we" are..
Many people also (ironically) basically consider themselves babies and believe God (the father) will save us if/as needed. This irrationality of considering yourself a baby and accepting that is another grave (FATAL) irrationality. This too may be related to the absence of any sensible concern about population per se and irrational hopes we can/will get anything we might need at any time.
Do not neglect our relation to nature. Our bad doings to nature and environment speak about the fact that we are our enemies...
The following thread is somehow related to this one.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_to_strengthen_our_connection_to_nature
All, at the risk of repeating myself (for those who have previously read my comments), the sooner we recognize that 'ambiguity' is the basis for our existence, the better off we will be. When life formed on Earth it did so by defying the Second Law of Thermodynamics. That formed an interior environment within cells of our own making, distinct from the external environment. That ambiguity is the driver for evolution of all life,including our own. As sentient, thinking species, we have dealt with that ambiguity by practicing religions and creating art, music and literature that deceive us by allowing us to cope with the underlying ambiguity. I think that that's why we are so inventive, i.e. problem solving, and at the same time act against our best interests- it's due to the lack of understanding of our own fundamental nature. My insight to this has come from many years of scientific experimentation, so I have founded these ideas on direct observation of my own and that of others. I hope this doesn't sound too hubristic......I share these ideas with you in the spirit of information. I have attached a pertinent paper of mine fyi. Do with it as you please.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change