Honestly mate, you are onto something. It depends what you mean tho. Because our bodies are designed for certain things and technology can throw that off. For example modern processed foods have higher levels of sugar than 'natural' foods which can cause health problems. And screens can throw off our bodies hormones and affect sleep which is something I would consider not natural amounts of our eye on lights. So I would like to know whaat you think of examples like these even tho I am not totally saying your wrong.
I'm not sure really, maybe this theory isn't perfect and there are a few flaws in it. I came up with this explanation below but I'm no expert so maybe I'm just talking out of my ass. I just hate to sound like a pompous pseudo-intellectual know-it-all who thinks he's an expert just cos he has a vague understanding of this kind of stuff, and who can never admit when he's wrong, lol.
But it seems to me anyway that (like any organism) everything we do, we do because it would benefit us, whether it will benefit us in the long term or in the short term. The long term benefits are health and the short term benefits are pleasure.
For animals in the wild, pleasurable short term benefits are usually also healthy things that would benefit them in the long term, eg. eating sugary food. A small amount of naturally occurring sugary food (eg. fruits) would be beneficial for animals and they'd never usually have the risk of eating too much of it, so it would be advantageous for them to crave it so that they'll definitely eat it whenever they have the opportunity. So because of that, if they were given an unlimited amount of it, then it would be natural for them to eat so much of it that it would be very unhealthy.
Humans have an unlimited amount of sugary food, however we're unique in that we're aware that eating too much of it is unhealthy. So we choose not to eat it because it would be beneficial to us in the long term. But because animals are unaware and more guided by their instincts, it would be unnatural for them to choose not to eat it if they had the choice. But then people who eat sugary food despite knowing that it's unhealthy are still doing it because it's beneficial, it's just that they're choosing the short term pleasure benefits over the long term health benefits. Same thing for the screens, people are choosing the short term pleasure benefits over the long term health benefits.
If anything probably we would advance to to have a shorter digestive track. Since we eat more crap than ever we really dont need to take in all the nutrients from out food.
I mean the whole short term vs long term thing makes sense. But we have trade offs there that we never would have had in nature. In the end tho, whether or not your theory is right totally depends on what natural means.
Yeah, it could be wrong or at least would need to be modified to be correct. Plus either way I'm sure others would've already come up with this idea long before me. Still though this kind of stuff is fun to think about.
Some people in the scientific community think that somehow the human body will evolve into a horribly disfigured body in a 1000 years or so due to technology. I dont think this is the case, it's too soon of a time to have that massive of a change in biology. What people fail to realize is that humans by and large have remained the same level of intellect for the last few thousands of years it's just that learning institutions have become more prevalent. The problem with technology is the simple fact no matter what ailment you may have technolgy can fix it to some degree. This in later generations lead to more mutations that would straight up kill us more than a hundred years ago. Humans of the future will likely look like humans of today and the past. Though the possibility on only having one race in the future is optimistic about the human condition at best... or the worst form of pessimism.
And have kids when she in fact doesn't want them? That guy is a piece of scum. Just because a dude with a dick would be a dick and take advantage of a mentally disabled woman, does not mean said mentally disabled woman should be castrated!
Modern civilisation and advanced technology are as natural as wild animals
← View full post
Honestly mate, you are onto something. It depends what you mean tho. Because our bodies are designed for certain things and technology can throw that off. For example modern processed foods have higher levels of sugar than 'natural' foods which can cause health problems. And screens can throw off our bodies hormones and affect sleep which is something I would consider not natural amounts of our eye on lights. So I would like to know whaat you think of examples like these even tho I am not totally saying your wrong.
--
JellyBeanBandit
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
LloydAsher
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I'm not sure really, maybe this theory isn't perfect and there are a few flaws in it. I came up with this explanation below but I'm no expert so maybe I'm just talking out of my ass. I just hate to sound like a pompous pseudo-intellectual know-it-all who thinks he's an expert just cos he has a vague understanding of this kind of stuff, and who can never admit when he's wrong, lol.
But it seems to me anyway that (like any organism) everything we do, we do because it would benefit us, whether it will benefit us in the long term or in the short term. The long term benefits are health and the short term benefits are pleasure.
For animals in the wild, pleasurable short term benefits are usually also healthy things that would benefit them in the long term, eg. eating sugary food. A small amount of naturally occurring sugary food (eg. fruits) would be beneficial for animals and they'd never usually have the risk of eating too much of it, so it would be advantageous for them to crave it so that they'll definitely eat it whenever they have the opportunity. So because of that, if they were given an unlimited amount of it, then it would be natural for them to eat so much of it that it would be very unhealthy.
Humans have an unlimited amount of sugary food, however we're unique in that we're aware that eating too much of it is unhealthy. So we choose not to eat it because it would be beneficial to us in the long term. But because animals are unaware and more guided by their instincts, it would be unnatural for them to choose not to eat it if they had the choice. But then people who eat sugary food despite knowing that it's unhealthy are still doing it because it's beneficial, it's just that they're choosing the short term pleasure benefits over the long term health benefits. Same thing for the screens, people are choosing the short term pleasure benefits over the long term health benefits.
--
LloydAsher
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If anything probably we would advance to to have a shorter digestive track. Since we eat more crap than ever we really dont need to take in all the nutrients from out food.
I mean the whole short term vs long term thing makes sense. But we have trade offs there that we never would have had in nature. In the end tho, whether or not your theory is right totally depends on what natural means.
--
JellyBeanBandit
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yeah, it could be wrong or at least would need to be modified to be correct. Plus either way I'm sure others would've already come up with this idea long before me. Still though this kind of stuff is fun to think about.
Some people in the scientific community think that somehow the human body will evolve into a horribly disfigured body in a 1000 years or so due to technology. I dont think this is the case, it's too soon of a time to have that massive of a change in biology. What people fail to realize is that humans by and large have remained the same level of intellect for the last few thousands of years it's just that learning institutions have become more prevalent. The problem with technology is the simple fact no matter what ailment you may have technolgy can fix it to some degree. This in later generations lead to more mutations that would straight up kill us more than a hundred years ago. Humans of the future will likely look like humans of today and the past. Though the possibility on only having one race in the future is optimistic about the human condition at best... or the worst form of pessimism.
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yeah its weird to think about it like that. We are interfering with natural selection.
--
LloydAsher
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Eugenics wasnt far from the unfortunate truth. Eugenics would go further if it was done slowly over time rather than wholesale genocide.
Such as maybe just sterilizing the very mentally ill (snip snip).
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Nahh dude we should not to that. Its not fair if people want to have kids. I think they deserve that right.
--
LloydAsher
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Someone might take advantage of a mentally disabled female though!
--
Doesnormalmatter
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
And have kids when she in fact doesn't want them? That guy is a piece of scum. Just because a dude with a dick would be a dick and take advantage of a mentally disabled woman, does not mean said mentally disabled woman should be castrated!