Are you worried about the future of society?

[dedo]

I voted yes.

However, even though I am worried about the future of society, I don’t think a lot about it.

Rather, I think more about how I can make a difference somewhere.

The reason I am concerned about the future is as much scientific as religious. My main concern is explained in this paper:

www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/LarsErikCederman.ModelingSizeOfWars.pdf

The paper explains a foreign policy discovery called “Richardson’s Law” that shows that interstate war casualties follow the same statistical distribution as earthquakes.

This means that there may be some unknown factor analogous to tension in the Earth’s crust that builds up over time and is released in wars. Thus, the world could be like a reactor that is over heating.

Nevertheless, it is possible that the distribution has another explanation. It is also possible to diffuse that kind of system, and it has been done successfully in other human systems.

Thus, I try to remain hopeful and just look for a way that I can make a contribution. That is because I believe that every person who makes life better for another person (or animal) is part of the solution, instead of part of the problem

 

[glendab]

Hello Dedo.

I voted yes.

However, even though I am worried about the future of society, I don’t think a lot about it.

Rather, I think more about how I can make a difference somewhere.

The reason I am concerned about the future is as much scientific as religious. My main concern is explained in this paper:

www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/LarsErikCederman.ModelingSizeOfWars.pdf

The paper explains a foreign policy discovery called “Richardson’s Law” that shows that interstate war casualties follow the same statistical distribution as earthquakes.

This means that there may be some unknown factor analogous to tension in the Earth’s crust that builds up over time and is released in wars. Thus, the world could be like a reactor that is over heating.

Nevertheless, it is possible that the distribution has another explanation. It is also possible to diffuse that kind of system, and it has been done successfully in other human systems.

Thus, I try to remain hopeful and just look for a way that I can make a contribution. That is because I believe that every person who makes life better for another person (or animal) is part of the solution, instead of part of the problem

Pray more and don’t worry. As for “Richardson’s Law,” sounds like hooey to me. Keep makin’ those contributions - you may be the only Bible some people read.

Glenda

 

[ThinkingSapien]

There are concerns that some one can identify in the past tense. There are also concerns that can be identified from the past and there are likely to be concerns in the future. I think there will always be things for which people have concerns. That’s part of life.

I’m not particularly worried about what the concerns will be in the far future. There’s plenty of things with which to busy myself in the present time and more immediate future. Some trivial, some not so much. But what things will be like years from now isn’t something that keeps me up at night.

 

[kozlosap]

ABC, in the guise of the Pill, worked and continues to work overtime to reduce women to men’s sex toys. In turn, it has given rise to serial fornication, shacking up, a significant drop in marriages, people getting married later and later in life, and undoubtedly has contributed to the number of “no fault” divorces

 

[JimG]

The next global problem for humanity is looming, and it will have to do with declining populations. It is already a serious problem in many places. Fertility rates are rapidly dropping below replacement levels. Marriage is becoming less favored, with many marrying later or not at all. And when they do marry, many are having fewer or no children. This is having long term and hard to reverse social and economic consequences, all of them bad.

For an overview of the problem, read Jonathan Last’s book “What to Expect When No One’s Expecting.” We are in for a long lasting era of slow growth caused by demographic implosion, unsustainable social welfare programs, and economic stagnation.

It is a looming problem, but not getting much attention yet, simply because it goes against the theology of most of those in the political and economic establishment, who view human beings as pollutants rather than producers, as simple consumers rather than renewable resources. They are not accustomed to seeing human beings as essential economic resources, which they are. Consequently we may be far into the crisis before anyone acknowledges it the way they acknowledge global warming, for example.

It seems like a simple problem to solve. Just encourage people to have more children. Many governments are already trying that, without success. Depopulation, once begun, seems to have a momentum of its own.

In a few decades, we will look back at the arguments over immigration as rather silly. Every nation will want to keep the people it has, and to reverse the decline in fertility rates. They won’t want to be sending their citizens elsewhere. And every nation will be looking for all the immigrants it can get, because national fertility rates will otherwise lead to national extinction.

 

[DaveBj]

Some wisdom in a poem that I first read when I was much younger. I wish I could credit the author, but my searches have drawn blanks. Anyway . . .

My granddad, viewing earth’s worn cogs,
Said, ‘Things are going to the dogs’

His grandad, in a house of logs,
Said, ‘Things are going to the dogs’

His grandad, from the Irish bogs,
Said ‘Things are going to the dogs’

His grandad, dressed in caveman’s togs,
Said, ‘Things are going to the dogs.’

Well, here’s one thing I’d like to state:
The dogs have had a good long wait.

 

[kozlosap]

I voted yes.

However, even though I am worried about the future of society, I don’t think a lot about it.

Rather, I think more about how I can make a difference somewhere.

The reason I am concerned about the future is as much scientific as religious. My main concern is explained in this paper:

www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/LarsErikCederman.ModelingSizeOfWars.pdf

The paper explains a foreign policy discovery called “Richardson’s Law” that shows that interstate war casualties follow the same statistical distribution as earthquakes.

This means that there may be some unknown factor analogous to tension in the Earth’s crust that builds up over time and is released in wars. Thus, the world could be like a reactor that is over heating.

Nevertheless, it is possible that the distribution has another explanation. It is also possible to diffuse that kind of system, and it has been done successfully in other human systems.

Thus, I try to remain hopeful and just look for a way that I can make a contribution. That is because I believe that every person who makes life better for another person (or animal) is part of the solution, instead of part of the problem

Your last paragraph is awesome! If only we all had that philosophy, instead of the more prevalent “us against them” one.

 

[glendab]

Hello Kozlosap.

ABC, in the guise of the Pill, worked and continues to work overtime to reduce women to men’s sex toys. In turn, it has given rise to serial fornication, shacking up, a significant drop in marriages, people getting married later and later in life, and undoubtedly has contributed to the number of “no fault” divorces

Your sharing made me recall a commercial on t.v. for a particular perfume that had a voluptuous blonde dancing around in high heels and an apron over a very tight fitting dress while sporting a iron skillet in her hand and she was dancing around to the music of “I can bring home the bacon, fry it up in the pan, and never, never let you forget you’re a man!” and then the name of the perfume was sung which I won’t name for obvious reasons, but the message to my teen aged mind was clear: in order to be a “good” wife I was expected to fulfill this image, work a full time job, take care hubby’s dinner and be “available” for my hubby’s wishes and wants and desires and be eager like the gal in the commercial to do so! I’d still be dancing around in my apron in the darkness of sin if Jesus Christ hadn’t shown up in my life. I was very fortunate to have had children because my sisters who fell further into that morass of lies and ills gave up those children to live up to the image of the model of “virtue” this particular commercial suggested. Many women were sold on it and many still are. We used to laugh at this particular commercial at my high school among my peers and we’d imitate it right down to the spin around with our history texts held up in the air in place of our iron skillets laughing. If I’d only known what pain and sorrow accompanied the package that came with the image, I’d have not laughed at all and neither would have any of my friends but strangely if you’d told us at that time that that is where we were headed, we’d have laughed at you and said “Oh no! Not us! We’re too smart for that!” Yeah. Sad but true.

Glenda

 

[JackVk]

The most irritating myth that Catholics believe these days (which is also divorced from Catholic teaching) is belief in moral golden ages. People were no less sinful 50, 500, or 5000 years ago than they are today. The 1950s, which we perceive as the idyllic era of “traditional family values”, were full of spousal abuse, racism, and the threat of nuclear war. And the Middle Ages? Corrupt priests, glutton kings, and drunken, lecherous knights.

And the future won’t be a moral golden age either. Atheist Steven Pinker tried to argue this in his book The Better Angels of Our Nature. This is also an asinine belief. We may have smaller, closer world with a larger range of ideas. But the more things change, the more they stay the same. People will still have vitriol, lust, anger, stupidity, and greed, and they will until the end of time.

Nihil novi sub sole.

 

[glendab]

Hello Jack.

The most irritating myth that Catholics believe these days (which is also divorced from Catholic teaching) is belief in moral golden ages. People were no less sinful 50, 500, or 5000 years ago than they are today. The 1950s, which we perceive as the idyllic era of “traditional family values”, were full of spousal abuse, racism, and the threat of nuclear war. And the Middle Ages? Corrupt priests, glutton kings, and drunken, lecherous knights.

And the future won’t be a moral golden age either. Atheist Steven Pinker tried to argue this in his book The Better Angels of Our Nature. This is also an asinine belief. We may have smaller, closer world with a larger range of ideas. But the more things change, the more they stay the same. People will still have vitriol, lust, anger, stupidity, and greed, and they will until the end of time.

Nihil novi sub sole.

A true skeptic. Love it. Keep up the good work.

Glenda

 

[DaveBj]

The most irritating myth that Catholics believe these days (which is also divorced from Catholic teaching) is belief in moral golden ages. People were no less sinful 50, 500, or 5000 years ago than they are today. The 1950s, which we perceive as the idyllic era of “traditional family values”, were full of spousal abuse, racism, and the threat of nuclear war. And the Middle Ages? Corrupt priests, glutton kings, and drunken, lecherous knights.

And the future won’t be a moral golden age either. Atheist Steven Pinker tried to argue this in his book The Better Angels of Our Nature. This is also an asinine belief. We may have smaller, closer world with a larger range of ideas. But the more things change, the more they stay the same. People will still have vitriol, lust, anger, stupidity, and greed, and they will until the end of time.

Nihil novi sub sole.

I was a child in the 1950s. I didn’t experience what you mention, but I do know that you are correct. I certainly did not live thru the Middle Ages, but I have read enough histories (some written by Catholics) to believe that you are correct here as well. The more things change . . . as long as humans are sinners . . .

 

[JimG]

It seems to me that most of us have lived through a relative golden age. Most of us missed World War I and World War II. We did not get caught up in the Soviet and Chinese genocides. We did not live through the bombing of European cities which left thousands of dead and wounded during World War II.

There were 40 million killed in Europe during WW-II, half of whom were civilians. As the war dragged on, the Nazi regime drafted boys as young as 13 to fight the last desperate battles. We did not fight to the death on small Japanese islands in the Pacific. But others did.

The wars of the 20th century were far more brutal than anything wrought during the Middle Ages. Most of us alive today have large escaped those horrors. Yes, there have been wars since then, on a smaller scale. I fear though, that we have now become so soft we would simply crumble under an onslaught similar to what Europe suffered in the 1930’s and 1940’s. We are totally unprepared.

 

[frobert]

The next global problem for humanity is looming, and it will have to do with declining populations. It is already a serious problem in many places. Fertility rates are rapidly dropping below replacement levels. Marriage is becoming less favored, with many marrying later or not at all. And when they do marry, many are having fewer or no children. This is having long term and hard to reverse social and economic consequences, all of them bad.

For an overview of the problem, read Jonathan Last’s book “What to Expect When No One’s Expecting.” We are in for a long lasting era of slow growth caused by demographic implosion, unsustainable social welfare programs, and economic stagnation.

It is a looming problem, but not getting much attention yet, simply because it goes against the theology of most of those in the political and economic establishment, who view human beings as pollutants rather than producers, as simple consumers rather than renewable resources. They are not accustomed to seeing human beings as essential economic resources, which they are. Consequently we may be far into the crisis before anyone acknowledges it the way they acknowledge global warming, for example.

It seems like a simple problem to solve. Just encourage people to have more children. Many governments are already trying that, without success. Depopulation, once begun, seems to have a momentum of its own.

In a few decades, we will look back at the arguments over immigration as rather silly. Every nation will want to keep the people it has, and to reverse the decline in fertility rates. They won’t want to be sending their citizens elsewhere. And every nation will be looking for all the immigrants it can get, because national fertility rates will otherwise lead to national extinction.

I think Jonathan is right about economic stagnation but not for the reasons he thinks. It is impossible to have infinite growth in a finite world. We already have economic stagnation. and reached or have passed the tipping points that limit further growth. Promises that can’t be keep won’t be keep whether it is for social welfare or corporate welfare. Depopulation may be a good thing in the time of dwindling and constrained resources. The problems are well understood by many people its just that the things that need to be done to mitigate the crash are too painful for most people to contemplate, so they won’t get done. I believe the best thing to do in preparation is to pay down debts and simplify our lives which is not really a bad thing to do.

 

[JimG]

I think Jonathan is right about economic stagnation but not for the reasons he thinks. It is impossible to have infinite growth in a finite world. We already have economic stagnation. and reached or have passed the tipping points that limit further growth. Promises that can’t be keep won’t tbe keep whether it is for social welfare or corporate welfare. Depopulation may be a good thing in the time of dwindling and constrained resources. The problems are well understood by many people its just that the things that need to be done to mitigate the crash are too painful for most people to contemplate, so they won’t get done. I believe the best thing to do in preparation is to pay down debts and simplify our lives which is not really a bad thing to do.

I don’t think that depopulation will be good at all. The most valuable renewable resource–the one that we keep denigrating and throwing away–is human beings. Human beings are the engine of production and progress. In a declining population, innovation slows down and stagnation sets in.

I agree that it is important to pay down debts. But governments are not doing that, and will not do that until forced to do so, by which time it may be too late. There are depopulated towns all over the USA which show what happens when the populations leaves. The town dies. For a more statistical analysis I recommend the book “What To Expect When No One’s Expecting.”

 

[Ridgerunner]

Abortion has been on a steady decline for decades, it’s certainly not getting worse:

In an aging population, in which abortifacients called “morning after pills” are available for free and on demand, that’s what one would expect. But it doesn’t tell us anything about the prevalence of abortions, quite.