did the mankind developed further?

utopio

2 years ago I thought the human beeing developed further. They needn't to make war anymore, they were grown up. But now I am asking if the mankind perhaps isn't more developed than 60 or 100 or 1000 years ago? Nothing changed, we only have more powerful and more destructive technology.

azezil

Society has changed a great deal in the last 100 years, however i find myself thinking of late that while we have developed in many areas such as equality, human rights etc., we have regressed in others, emotionally. I feel that the recent trend of accepting our emotions, 'listening to our bodies' has resulted in a socail regression. We are suposidly the most evolved species on our planet yet we are slave to our emotional whims!

How ever many problems societies of the past had, at least they behaved in a respectable manner.

Victor

I think we have moved on. More of the world's population is well fed, housed and democraticly governed than at any point in history.

Chaos-Engine

Originally posted by Victor
I think we have moved on. More of the world's population is well fed, housed and democraticly governed than at any point in history.

And to counter that point... More people die every minute today than did every hour one hundred years ago...

War on a Mass and devestating scale
More fear in the world today perhaps even more so than in 1962
A.I.D.S and HIV threaten the world's people more than anything ever has in the history of the world.
Global warming on a exponential path

Not to be pesamistic or anything

Ah well. One thing is true. We can change the world today alot easier than we could at any other time in history
All we need is the Will

Do we have that Will???

jd

Grammatically, obviously not..:)

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by Chaos-Engine

A.I.D.S and HIV threaten the world's people more than anything ever has in the history of the world.

This is simply not true . . . AIDS / HIV has acquired an almost political status in the worl, but it does not threaten our existence, like, for example the black death or the influenza pandemics of the past that wiped out vast populations in a very short period of time. . . . AIDS is also the most controllable illness to threaten populations, where the cure doesn't rest with multinational pharma companies . . . but with plain and simple education . . .

In answer to the post, I think most of us have come a long way . . . but I despair that the reason people die from wars etc today is as its always been . . . religion and religous divide !

bonkey

Originally posted by hallelujajordan
This is simply not true . . . AIDS / HIV has acquired an almost political status in the worl, but it does not threaten our existence, like, for example the black death or the influenza pandemics of the past that wiped out vast populations in a very short period of time.

Is there any evidence that these genuinely threatened our existence either, or are you simply offering an opinion here?

. . . AIDS is also the most controllable illness to threaten populations, where the cure doesn't rest with multinational pharma companies . . . but with plain and simple education . . .

Avoidance is not a cure, and should never be billed as one.

jc

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by bonkey
Is there any evidence that these genuinely threatened our existence either, or are you simply offering an opinion here?

jc

Lots of evidence . . . I'm not going to do a google search for you, but have a look for details on "The Black Death" or bubonic plague.

In 1347 the population of Europe was 75 Million
In 1352 it was 50 million . . .

That is in excess of 25 Million deaths in 5 years (One third of Europes population)

The Influenza Pandemic of 1918 : Estimates of between 20 - 40 million people killed globally in one year !

Diseases like these threatened mankinds existence in a way that AIDS / HIV never will !

Avoidance is not a cure, and should never be billed as one.

I fundamentally disagree . . . . If we have learned nothing else since the outbreak of AIDS in the early 80's we should have learned that avoidance is the only cure . . . the reason AIDS is as prevalent as it is today is because of a lack of education in the third world about how the disease is tansmitted. . . . There will come new antiviral combination therapies, but this is the real cure !

pickarooney

Just a random statistic to counter that - 25 of all south Africans now have HIV/AIDS and that number will only increase over time. The knock-on effect is disastrous, as not only are so many people on a death-sentence, but are largely unaware of this fact, and unaware of what causes its transmission. Even during the height of the plague's ravages in Europe, people were still having children, some of whom survived, others didn't. The tragic truth is that today's AIDS sufferers will inevitably propagate the disease through their children.

Saruman

I dont think you understood Bonkeys question there...

These examples and indeed all plagues were confined to Europe... There are a lot of places in the world that are not in fact called Europe. And back then, travel between other continents took a very long time.. so the world was never in any danger.. only we Europeans.. Not the world.

Aids does not seem like it has the potential to wipe out mankind since its easy to avoid.. however since more people seem to ingore the warnings every day and catch the thing.. eventually too many people might have it in the future so if no cure is developed, then we face the prospect of not being able to risk sex and have to go the scientific way to reproduce.. cloning and test tube babies and the like... so in that we Aids does threaten us.. but its not a global killer.. we wont all die from it.

It will take something man made, some super biological weapon to wipe out the world and even then it might not get everyone.. there are people living an Antarctica with very little contact to the outside... Also those in the ISS and there are always underground facilities that can be sealed... in short i dont think its going to be very easy for mankind to die of some disease.. natural or man made.

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by Saruman
I dont think you understood Bonkeys question there...

These examples and indeed all plagues were confined to Europe... There are a lot of places in the world that are not in fact called Europe. And back then, travel between other continents took a very long time.. so the world was never in any danger.. only we Europeans.. Not the world.

On the contrary . . . I understood Bonkey's question completely and the examples of previous 'plagues' I spoke of were not, as you say, confined to Europe. Indeed, the influenza pandemic of 1918 killed nearly 1 million Americans in 1 year ( compared to 1/2 million American AIDS deaths over a 15 year period) . . . . It also wiped out large populations in Asia, Africa, Brazil and the South Pacific. . . .

eventually too many people might have it in the future so if no cure is developed, then we face the prospect of not being able to risk sex and have to go the scientific way to reproduce.. cloning and test tube babies and the like... so in that we Aids does threaten us.. but its not a global killer.. we wont all die from it.

I don't think I've ever heard such tripe !
The incidence of AIDS / HIV in the Western World has been on the decline since about 1995, largely as a result of education and social factors. In the third world it has become a major problem because of a lack of eduction (and poilitical will, if the truth be known) and the solution is the same . . . . education . . . . The concept that AIDS / HIV will impact on our ability to reproduce is not based on fact and quite a ridiculous assertion !!

Getting back on topic, I originally questioned Chaos' assertion that . .

A.I.D.S and HIV threaten the world's people more than anything ever has in the history of the world.

. . and I can offer more data to support my argument. Every year, 54 million new tuberculosis infections appear, and TB STILL accounts for 5% of worldwide deaths . . . . Our failure to deal with TB in the third world will lead to the emergence of multiple-resistance (It already has) and the possibility of a real threat to the global community. The same cannot be said of AIDS !

For some reason, AIDS has captured the imagination (and the funding) of the western political community and has achieved a ranking far above its micorbiological capabilities. Bigger killers are being ignored and will return to threaten us in the future !

Clintons Cat

These examples and indeed all plagues were confined to Europe... There are a lot of places in the world that are not in fact called Europe. And back then, travel between other continents took a very long time.. so the world was never in any danger.. only we Europeans.. Not the world.

When the europeans got to north and south america,they took the carrier of some of the worst european plagues and poxes with them, the black rat,pretty much wiped out vast swathes of the indigineous population along the eastern seaboard of the united states,canada,central and south america

seamus

I'd like to think so. Technologically certainly, and technology tends to just develop faster and faster as new technologies beget new technologies.

I'd certainly like to think that we've developed further morally, but there are always things that knock me back. It seems as though tolerance is taking hold, but then I see the nazis like those at stormfront. I think that we've learned from WWII (death & destruction, nuclear weapons), but then see Bush on his crusade, and Israel/Palestine and their problems.

Overall, I think we've developed as a species, and become a little less self-centered than we used to be.

As for more people dying nowadays......well there's more people alive....and our statistical methods and willingness to compile such data has increased in the last hundred years.

bug

This is a bit of a wild theory but in my opinion evolution is taking a strange turn...in my opinion..some of mankind will become thinkers,some athletic,some fighters. I think that the less we use our bodies the more evolution will emphasise the ablity of the mind and carry it forward as a strenght of the species.

A friend of mine has told me that he believes the only difference between us and animals is that we are the only species who discuss things in order to resolve issues. If an animal wants something it takes it. Humans discovered bartering. We are the only species who prefere not to kill to get what we want...suposedly..If we don't adhere to this then in his opinion we are no more evolved than animals.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

bonkey

Agreed...not because Humanities is quiet, but because I would think it is more relevant there.....unless the Hum. mods disagree and move it back.

jc

pickarooney

AIDS on the increase in the US again.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_11625.html

CodeMonkey

hallelujajordan, the black death did kill millions of people but it never threatened the existence of man. Some people are immune to the black plague (and AIDS) because of a mutation called CCR5-delta 32. Am sure you'll find lots of info on this on google if you are bored.

Kell

Originally posted by bug
If an animal wants something it takes it. Humans discovered bartering.

An animal wants something as it needs it for survival, not for pampering or excessive gain. Wild animals are not, as far as I am aware, capable of greed or gorging themselves. When their full their full. I dont think obesity in any sense is prevailent in the wild animal community. Barring domestic animals of course. Wild animal bartering scenario-

Lion approaches herd of bison bearing mounds of fresh lush grass on it's back. Deposits grass in front of heard and nods emphatically at a particular bison indicating that it would like to eat it's leg, and rump etc. Bison nods emphatically that, yes, this is a fair trade- Not likely.

As regards the AIDS problem- the species of monkey where the disease actually came from have evolved an immunity to it. It stands to reason that third world countries that have the highest exposure to it will evolve to be immune to it faster than say first world counterparts. And what about westernisation of Indian tribes in the US, where diseases such as diabetes affects something like one in three people a disease that never afftected the Indian population before. Where mankind really needs to evolve is to drop self interest and start looking at the global picture not the paltry sums of money that gets sent in international government aid. More people need to look at the stars and not wonder whats beyond them, but to look at what we can do for eachother not for ourselves.

I really dont feel that we have evolved much as a species. We keep repeating the same mistakes over and over and over again looking for the cheap alternative (nuclear power being the classic example) rather than rolling back the curtains on the true potential locked inside our heads. We're still self driven, materialistic, greedy and completely money orientated.

Sort of a quote from the executive of the Federal Bank in the US on renewable energy:
"The earth is infinite in energy sources. It does not stand to reason that one should regard the earth as being finite in any way".
(Actual quote can be found in the Little Earth Book. damn good read too)

These are the muppet statements from the muppets who advise presidents etc what to invest in and what their policies on the environment should look like. They are also heavily funded by oil companies.

-No. I am not a tree hugging hippy. Just concerned about the welfare of the planet-

bug

Wild animal bartering scenario-Lion approaches herd of bison bearing mounds of fresh lush grass on it's back. Deposits grass in front of heard and nods emphatically at a particular bison indicating that it would like to eat it's leg, and rump etc. Bison nods emphatically that, yes, this is a fair trade- Not likely

reminds me of a Gary Larson cartoon. Sorry yes I do understand that there were flaws in my simple sentiment however I didn't believe I was submitting a paper on the issue:rolleyes:

Kell

Originally posted by bug
reminds me of a Gary Larson cartoon.

Me prefers the one of the cow playing knick knack on the farmers door. I didnt mean to publish a paper. Me must stop methinks;)

MiCr0

/me wanders back towards the topic at hand.....

if this becomes an aids discussion (and i've no problem with that) i'll split the thread