A Philosophy for the Future

[Flannel Jesus]

And now the kicker.....

But unfortunately, 90% of the posters here are very dogmatic in sticking to what they are naturally programmed with, i.e. stuck with the past and the norm.
This is why they are dogmatic with philosophical realism, [the evolutionary default] i.e. reality is mind-independent and many get very nasty [will even kill oppositions] when faced with disagreements.

VA is actually saying here that his life is in danger from other posters here. Now to be fair, English is not his first language. He may not realize that his wording means that posters here are a threat to his life. He may simply have meant that realists in general are a threat to his life and the lives of other antirealists.

If you know VA's history, this means that VA is viewing realists like he has in the past viewed Muslims.

VA is actually saying here that his life is in danger from other posters here. Now to be fair, English is not his first language. He may not realize that his wording means that posters here are a threat to his life. He may simply have meant that realists in general are a threat to his life and the lives of other antirealists.

If you know VA's history, this means that VA is viewing realists like he has in the past viewed Muslims.

We've seen this bizarre pre-emptive paranoia before, haven't we? We're "objectivists" who kill those who disagree...

Except now, iwannaplato, it's an actually literal objectivist who is afraid of us, ironically

(Not of the ayn rand variety, of course, just of the objective morality variety - that's probably a misuse of the term, but at least it's less of a misuse than our previous accuser...)

[Skepdick]

We've seen this bizarre pre-emptive paranoia before, haven't we? We're "objectivists" who kill those who disagree...

Except now, iwannaplato, it's an actually literal objectivist who is afraid of us, ironically

So if morality is not objective, why are you using your words to stigmatize his "bizzare pre-emptive paranoia"? Are you afraid that his ideology will be responsible for tht next genocide?

Is that not an example of a "bizzare pre-emptive paranoia" itself?

People who speak without knowing why they speak are so confused.

[Ansiktsburk]

Most of humanity will stay as crocodiles and alligators, evolutionarily stagnant, sitting in a pool of mud for 10 thousand years to come, going nowhere, inspired by nothing, inspiring nothing.

Naah, most of the reason why people are ”stagnant” is because they are brought up in poor or daytime work habitats. They do not have the time to think too much about past and future. They might start to shake loose after 50 when kids move out. Now, if robots and stuff makes workdays shorter and chores less demanding normal people sure could grow visionary.

[Wizard22]

But also for Bezos gay marriage and transhumanism. For Musk - transhumanism where AI and humans are merged and we are all cyborgs.

You and Flash have similar arguments.

He believes, without evidence, that Musk and Bezos went to Epstein island to performs sexual crimes.

YOU then added donations to homosexual organizations. Both of you have very, very weak arguments. Are your claims true? Probably not. Massive corporations make donations in exchange for tax write-offs. That is likely Bezos' core motivation. What does he think about homosexuality personally? He's probably disgusted by the notion, like most normal people. What you are doing, and Flash, and most other Neo-Libs, is grifting off this Western nihilistic sickness, victim complexing.

It's more likely than not that his money will go directly into the pockets of his business associates and personal friends. That's the extent of your claims.


Now, furthermore, you and Flash both proved my point. You're stuck in the Past. At best, maybe you're stuck in the Present. But neither of you are looking Forward, into the Future.

As-if your claims, even if they were true, would admonish and blot-out their Accomplishments? Would they???

(No, you already know they would not)

[Wizard22]

Christendom was not forwards looking. Cathederals were monuements to the past and their ideologies were sets of ideas engineered to preserve the past in the present. Christianity surpressed new ideas, and looked forewards only to destruction and rapture. Generations suffered and died in poverty to provide those cathederals to a sytem of government hell bent on the supression of change and the control of the people.

To the peasants, carpenters, and stone-cutters working on the Cathedrals, it was very 'forward' for them at the time. They had no idea the full extent of what they were building or why. At that time, the Christian theologians and architects were looking toward the future. Was it devoted to the Past? That's arguable.

You can honor your ancestors, and in so doing, want to give your own children and grandchildren better lives. But you seem to be leaving out the second half. Those who enjoyed the Cathedrals, its beauty and grand design, concert halls, came well after the construction and funding.

People build bridges today, for people to travel over them tomorrow.

Christians think they are stable and crocodile like, yet they have failed to survive into the present as they wished.
THe 1960s was a dcade of foward looking optimism, yet plagued by several terrible wars fought against poor and weak nations ,which prevailed often against the aggression of the rich and powerful.
Then we had faith in science, food science and the space race. That has all gone pearshaped and the vision of hotels on the moon by 2001 never came to pass because it was an idiotic dream. Food became bastardised, and led to an epidemic of diabetes and obesity. Heart disease and brain health also implicated food adulteration. And we are gradually desotrying the world through tpollution and climate change.
But there are still optimists goaded on by the pessimisim of potential disaster.

Should past failures mean that we give up now? Stop dreaming? Stop trying?

Optimism is a solution here.

[Wizard22]

We're guranteed to go extinct one way or another I guess, might as well be here.

Why not go 'extinct' beyond the edge of our solar system instead?

Or how about, survive instead?

[Wizard22]

Space is hostile and dangerous. Everything we have evolved to need is right here on earth and space has nothing to offer us, except empty space.

Yes, that may be all "empty space" has to offer us, however, the trillions of planets suspended within that empty space are no doubt filled with infinite resources...

(e.g., minerals, metals, crystals, and exotic forms of stored energy, etc.)

...that our descendants could put to good use, sometime in the distant future.

And, of course, let's not forget about all of the slaves that humanity could possibly acquire after Wizard22's descendant's are successful in their conquest over any alien peoples.

You might be onto something here...

Space Harems...?! Aliens need love too?

[Iwannaplato]

We've seen this bizarre pre-emptive paranoia before, haven't we? We're "objectivists" who kill those who disagree...

Except now, iwannaplato, it's an actually literal objectivist who is afraid of us, ironically

For the most part I don't really fit either category - realist or objectivist - ironically enough. Though I walk like a duck on occasion. They are useful models. I'm not Muslim however. I haven't found a personal use yet for being one.

Oh, and nice catch. I didn't notice that connection between our dear collaborators.

[Wizard22]

In general, I agree with you on the above.
In the Ethical Theory section, the main theme all my posts are always focus on the moral progress of humanity in the future [next 50, 75, 100, 150 or > years].

At present, evolution wise all humans are more likely to be crocodilian-humans than being human-humans.
It was only relatively a short while ago, our ancestors were animals and thus the present Humans are being more animals than being more humans.
As such, it is the present default, as being more animal, all humans are programmed to focus their attention on the past rather than the future; this is most effective to facilitate survival and preservation of the species.

It is also a natural evolutionary default that a certain small % [say less than 1%] of humans are programmed [with mutations] to deviate from the norm to explore and think [philosophize] about of the greater threats in the future. It is this small % who unknowingly has to face greater risks of fatalities; this is so evident with the adventurous who deviated from the norms.

Since we are philosophizing in a Philosophy Forum, we should be thinking [into the future] and differently from the common vulgar people who are stuck with past.

But unfortunately, 90% of the posters here are very dogmatic in sticking to what they are naturally programmed with, i.e. stuck with the past and the norm.
This is why they are dogmatic with philosophical realism, [the evolutionary default] i.e. reality is mind-independent and many get very nasty [will even kill oppositions] when faced with disagreements.

I agree and I think it's important to take steps back sometimes, and remind others, about the 'bigger picture'. Since the tendency to stick one's head in the sand is strong, fixated on past grievances and obsessions (neuroticism), it helps others to have a leader to remind everybody that there is indeed a greater ideal which drives everybody forward.

There are ideals greater than oneself. I think people are innately attracted to these ideologies. These ideologies are considered 'dangerous' because the Future is dangerous, the Unknown is dangerous. People can fail catastrophically in such idealistic endeavors.

...that doesn't mean they're not worth attempting!

[Wizard22]

VA is actually saying here that his life is in danger from other posters here. Now to be fair, English is not his first language. He may not realize that his wording means that posters here are a threat to his life. He may simply have meant that realists in general are a threat to his life and the lives of other antirealists.

If you know VA's history, this means that VA is viewing realists like he has in the past viewed Muslims.

VA is actually saying here that his life is in danger from other posters here. Now to be fair, English is not his first language. He may not realize that his wording means that posters here are a threat to his life. He may simply have meant that realists in general are a threat to his life and the lives of other antirealists.

If you know VA's history, this means that VA is viewing realists like he has in the past viewed Muslims.

I did not get the impression that VA's life is in danger... could you clarify what you mean here??

[Wizard22]

Naah, most of the reason why people are ”stagnant” is because they are brought up in poor or daytime work habitats. They do not have the time to think too much about past and future. They might start to shake loose after 50 when kids move out. Now, if robots and stuff makes workdays shorter and chores less demanding normal people sure could grow visionary.

I have some doubts.

Free-Time has gone up drastically after the Industrial Revolution, with canned/preserved food and automobiles, postmodern people have more free-time than ever before. The problem, as I see it, is that much of this goes to waste. People chase mundane pleasures and pursuits. Humanity has set the bar low, when it comes to culture and entertainment.

Humanity is owed a higher standard. There's not much excuse anymore to be mired in the Past.

[Sculptor]

Christendom was not forwards looking. Cathederals were monuements to the past and their ideologies were sets of ideas engineered to preserve the past in the present. Christianity surpressed new ideas, and looked forewards only to destruction and rapture. Generations suffered and died in poverty to provide those cathederals to a sytem of government hell bent on the supression of change and the control of the people.

To the peasants, carpenters, and stone-cutters working on the Cathedrals, it was very 'forward' for them at the time. They had no idea the full extent of what they were building or why. At that time, the Christian theologians and architects were looking toward the future. Was it devoted to the Past? That's arguable.

To the worker who had a choice it was bread and water.
You have a absurd romantic streak in you.

You can honor your ancestors, and in so doing, want to give your own children and grandchildren better lives. But you seem to be leaving out the second half. Those who enjoyed the Cathedrals, its beauty and grand design, concert halls, came well after the construction and funding.

THere is no part of honour to the ancestors in a Cathedeal. That ideology was swept away by Christianity when people were no longer allowed to call themsleves after their fathers, and were forced to select "christian" names. No more Ragnarson, or Freyjadaughter. These traditions remain only in Iceland.
Catherderals and chruches make reasonable art galleries and coffee bars. Finally they have some use.

People build bridges today, for people to travel over them tomorrow.

I thoght you were arguing that people were NOT thinking of the future?

Christians think they are stable and crocodile like, yet they have failed to survive into the present as they wished.
THe 1960s was a decade of foward looking optimism, yet plagued by several terrible wars fought against poor and weak nations ,which prevailed often against the aggression of the rich and powerful.
Then we had faith in science, food science and the space race. That has all gone pearshaped and the vision of hotels on the moon by 2001 never came to pass because it was an idiotic dream. Food became bastardised, and led to an epidemic of diabetes and obesity. Heart disease and brain health also implicated food adulteration. And we are gradually desotrying the world through tpollution and climate change.
But there are still optimists goaded on by the pessimisim of potential disaster.

Should past failures mean that we give up now? Stop dreaming? Stop trying?

Optimism is a solution here.

No. honesty is the solution.
But you have not really stated a problem.

[Gary Childress]

Humanity is owed a higher standard.

I would like to think so. However, at this point, I've become more concerned with reaching what appears to be an inevitable end with a reasonably clear conscience (if that is even possible in this world). However, sometimes I wonder if that isn't also a complete waste of time and resources. If God (assuming there is one) meant for the universe to be a good place, he surely wouldn't have made flesh meat or made stars ticking supernovas. But, hey, I'm just one of the fish in the bowl. Who am I to judge the one who made this seemingly crappy fish bowl.