Question:

Is civilization just another evolutionary impediment?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

If you've read the unabomber's manifesto, it seems that his motives for what he did were quite clear - he really thought that humanity should go back to being hunter gatherers, seeing as how civilization makes it easy for the average idiot to succeed.

As the first modern humans came into Europe, they weren't as evolved as they were 10,000 years later, and they evolved rather quickly as they lived in more harsh and demanding environments than any other animal has ever seen on earth. It would seem logical to go back to this stage of human evolution to me.

What are you thoughts?

 Tags:

   Report

3 ANSWERS


  1. I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

    I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

    I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.

    ..Martin L. King... Equal does not mean alike.. The Oxford English Dictionary defines civilization as "the action or process of civilizing or of being civilized; a developed or advanced state of human society." Such a definition is fraught with difficulties. For instance, how might we correctly identify a "developed or advanced state of human society"? Developed or advanced compared to what? The OED defines the verb "to civilize" in the following way: "to make civil; to bring out of a state of barbarism; to instruct in the arts of life; to enlighten; to refine and polish." Are we any closer to a working definition?

    Civilization is not an impediment but rather an organised attempt to help our growing population cope with a shrinking world.  It may have a long way before we are truely civil but either way something is going to give soon.  We will either learn to ration ourselves and not place ourselve above our fellow man or have a massive slaughter in which most people that can not survive will die.  We are about to evolve.  Food air and water are running in short supply.  Did you ever think that they would be selling water?


  2. Your non-electric world would support 1/100th of today's population; mostly the hunter-gatherers like you propose for a while..  There's enough deer in my neighhood for a two-day Bar-b-q, then we'd all forage for 4 and 5 and 6 year-old canned goods in our neglected pantries.    Soon, we'd be chopping down trees for heat, raiding markets for scarce food, and walking everywhere due to no gasoline.  Trucks, buses, planes would stop.

    Net result:  Survivalists win to set up warring clan classes, same as we have today, except the commodity of survival would be death instead of dollars.

  3. There are no goals in evolution, it is just a series of random events and mutations which determine how the animal becomes.

    Humans are no more 'evolved' than other animals they just fill a   different niche in the environment.

    Worrying how humans are going to evolve is the last of my problems since we will all be long gone before any change to the population would be noticeable.

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 3 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.
Unanswered Questions