I already read that response, and it is a fair point. But again, you can't prove OP wrong. Or me and the fact that I partially agree. So I totally understand you critiuqe. OP is making an unfounded prediction that now is the time in human history when we reach this plateu in resolving issues stemming from human nature. I happen to think he is right, but I'm sure a lot of generations have thought the same thing, so there is no doubt that a bias is going on. But at the end of the day, I agree with OP on the time frame, but I have some confusion in terms of the specific issues reffered to. But there is no evidence either way, it is merely speculation.
I just don't get why anyone would believe anything if there's no evidence or reasoning behind it, and it doesn't benefit someone in some way. Can you explain?
Well I was raised christian and said Fuck that because there was no evidence, so I know what you are talking about. But I don't think their is no reasoning behind the theory, even though there is no hard evidence. Some reasoning may be :
- laws and legislation have been passed in the US at leadt that mostly make it fair to women by many objective means. The only sexism left is intangible. Same thing with racism, the concrete legislation is in place, so mostly tge racism we see is more intangible.
-Also remember that some will get better and some will get worse, but the same problems will remain in some capacity. So while things like homosexuality may become more normalized with time, I see political conflict, anxiety and depression as things that are likely to rise in the future.
A) True but it is much harder, it goes back to the idea of technically possible, but not feasible.
B)That is being hopeful, but reality is not always hopeful. And to say the quakitu of life is generally improving, is also an opinion. Some people would beg to differ. And with at least some evidence to the contrary, it is not outlandish to disagree. Although you may agree, I would not.
A) What makes you think it's not feasible? It's certainly happened before. And different types of societal reformation often go hand-in-hand.
B) "To say the quality of life is improving is an opinion." Well... no, not really. Decreasing rates of infant mortality, longer average life spans, increasing literacy levels, decreasing rates of violence, and the spread of new technology are all arguably objective, measurable means of determining an increase in quality of life. You could argue that's not objective, but I could also argue that *nothing* is.
A: what makes me convinced it will never be fully solved, is the fact that there is some desire in human nature that causes people to commit such things. So for example, if we take rape. Laws make it illegal with strict punishment and women try to be careful what situations they get themselves into. So everything that can realistically be done to prevent it, has been done, but it still happens because some guys will always want sex enough to resort to that. The desire fueling the crime will never go away.
B) Hence the phrase "some evidence" to the contrary, there is some both ways. But some of the things you listed don't apply very well to quality of life. Infant mortality and life span are both indirect indicators. We use them because quality of life is a difficult thing to directly measure. But just because people live longer of less die as infants, doesn't mean people are enjoying their life more overall. Wity technological improvements in medicine and treatment, I would expect these to go up. But that does not nessecarily mean life quality is higher while they are alive, just that more people get more chance to be alive. But in terms of literacy and violence, and I'm sure their are others, you point is valid. It is no doubt that there is some evidence to suggest quality of life is on its way up. But some evidence contradicts that notion, such as depression, anxiety disorders, suicide and obesity which I personally know makes people's lives miserable and is on the rise in america.
Please keep in mind that I'm sure if we each went digging, we could each find more indirect evidence to support our side, but It can never be definitively measured because quality of life is too subjective.
Is it normal to think no major problem in this world can be fixed?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I already read that response, and it is a fair point. But again, you can't prove OP wrong. Or me and the fact that I partially agree. So I totally understand you critiuqe. OP is making an unfounded prediction that now is the time in human history when we reach this plateu in resolving issues stemming from human nature. I happen to think he is right, but I'm sure a lot of generations have thought the same thing, so there is no doubt that a bias is going on. But at the end of the day, I agree with OP on the time frame, but I have some confusion in terms of the specific issues reffered to. But there is no evidence either way, it is merely speculation.
--
palehorse
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I just don't get why anyone would believe anything if there's no evidence or reasoning behind it, and it doesn't benefit someone in some way. Can you explain?
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well I was raised christian and said Fuck that because there was no evidence, so I know what you are talking about. But I don't think their is no reasoning behind the theory, even though there is no hard evidence. Some reasoning may be :
- laws and legislation have been passed in the US at leadt that mostly make it fair to women by many objective means. The only sexism left is intangible. Same thing with racism, the concrete legislation is in place, so mostly tge racism we see is more intangible.
-Also remember that some will get better and some will get worse, but the same problems will remain in some capacity. So while things like homosexuality may become more normalized with time, I see political conflict, anxiety and depression as things that are likely to rise in the future.
--
palehorse
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
A) It's not like everything is in the US, and society can reform on social and institutional levels, not just legislative ones.
B) Yeah, but those things are also, hopefully, fixable with time. Generally, quality of life has been improving.
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
A) True but it is much harder, it goes back to the idea of technically possible, but not feasible.
B)That is being hopeful, but reality is not always hopeful. And to say the quakitu of life is generally improving, is also an opinion. Some people would beg to differ. And with at least some evidence to the contrary, it is not outlandish to disagree. Although you may agree, I would not.
--
palehorse
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
A) What makes you think it's not feasible? It's certainly happened before. And different types of societal reformation often go hand-in-hand.
B) "To say the quality of life is improving is an opinion." Well... no, not really. Decreasing rates of infant mortality, longer average life spans, increasing literacy levels, decreasing rates of violence, and the spread of new technology are all arguably objective, measurable means of determining an increase in quality of life. You could argue that's not objective, but I could also argue that *nothing* is.
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
A: what makes me convinced it will never be fully solved, is the fact that there is some desire in human nature that causes people to commit such things. So for example, if we take rape. Laws make it illegal with strict punishment and women try to be careful what situations they get themselves into. So everything that can realistically be done to prevent it, has been done, but it still happens because some guys will always want sex enough to resort to that. The desire fueling the crime will never go away.
B) Hence the phrase "some evidence" to the contrary, there is some both ways. But some of the things you listed don't apply very well to quality of life. Infant mortality and life span are both indirect indicators. We use them because quality of life is a difficult thing to directly measure. But just because people live longer of less die as infants, doesn't mean people are enjoying their life more overall. Wity technological improvements in medicine and treatment, I would expect these to go up. But that does not nessecarily mean life quality is higher while they are alive, just that more people get more chance to be alive. But in terms of literacy and violence, and I'm sure their are others, you point is valid. It is no doubt that there is some evidence to suggest quality of life is on its way up. But some evidence contradicts that notion, such as depression, anxiety disorders, suicide and obesity which I personally know makes people's lives miserable and is on the rise in america.
Please keep in mind that I'm sure if we each went digging, we could each find more indirect evidence to support our side, but It can never be definitively measured because quality of life is too subjective.